at the white house to honour the half a million american lives lost to covid—19. the pandemic is still claiming two thousand americans every day. flags on federal buildings are to be flown at half mast as a mark of respect. protestors have ta ken to the streets in unprecedented numbers across myanmar, against the military coup. the military rulers have warned that they will not allow the country to descend into chaos and anarchy. eu diplomats say they'll impose sanctions against myanmar, which could involve targeting businesses owned by the army. nasa has released remarkable images of its space rover perseverence landing on mars. it shows the final minutes of last week's tense descent with clouds of dust and grit being blown around,

now on bbc news, hardtalk. welcome to hardtalk. i'm stephen sackur. a battle is brewing for the soul of the us republican party. in part, it's about donald trump. will the party continue to tie its fate to his ego? and it's also about the nature of right—wing politics. how blurred are the lines between some republicans and the peddlers of race, hate and extremist conspiracists? my guest is elizabeth neumann. a former counterterror official inside the trump administration now intent on purging the republican party of the enablers of extremism. can she succeed 7

elizabeth neumann, in virginia, welcome to hardtalk. thank you for having me. let me ask you this as an opener, how much soul—searching have you done in recent months? because of the best part of three years you are a top counterterror official inside the trump administration when it seems for much of that time, you saw donald trump as a man who was fanning the flames of extremism and terrorism. well, i'd say that i was doing a lot of soul searching and praying for much of the last five years. the 2016 election prompted many of us to try to understand what we were seeing,

what was happening with the rise of trump. the decision to go in was not an easy one. i turned it down twice. before somebody called a few days before inauguration and expressed concern that there weren't many people willing to come in and work in this administration that had much of a security background. and then three years of a lot of difficulty, a lot of chaos, a lot of backstabbing, a lot of decisions that were unethical immoral and at times, illegal that were being made by the president and his team. and trying to figure out how you push back against that from the inside. and certainly the time and space, once out of government to be able to take a step back and look at everything that had changed in the last four years. it is definitely a time for introspection and trying to understand what has happened in our country.

i mean, i talk to a lot of public officials around the world, some of whom say "you know what, i held my nose, i took a position in government even though i had grave doubts about the policies being pursued by the leadership. but i did it all in pursuit of public service, doing the public good." i understand that as justification but are you prepared to say to me that your decisions over that three year period inside the trump administration, now that you look back at it weren't misguided, mistaken and wrong? no, i don't think that my decisions were misguided or mistaken. i have thought a lot about knowing what i know now what i have gone back and made the same decision to move my family from texas up to washington, dc and to go through the challenges of the last three years? the answer is yes. because i believe i was able to help push back against some things that could have happened, that thankfully did not.

and i was able to provide top cover to a number of civil servants, people within government that are there regardless of who the president is. they are the heart and soul of our government. 90% of our government are civil servants that don't change across presidencies. and it was really important to make sure that they could continue to do the work that they needed to do to keep our country safe. so i don't regret the decision to come in. but it is not something i would like to do over. right. you are able to push back, i was able to achieve certain things. i'm just trying to figure out what you were able to achieve. because one of your key points i think, as a top official in counter terror was trying to persuade the president to label the threat posed by right—wing extremists, the white supremacist groups inside america as domestic terror. but he consistently refused to do that. and we saw him from charlottesville when he suggested that there were fine people on both sides.

after a rally of white supremacist, he said that. when he dealt with the qanon issue by saying that they were people who loved their country. you say you got, you achieved some things that you pushed back, i'm struggling to see what you achieved at all. that's totally fair. because there was a lot that was horrible about the last four years. a couple of examples, during my tenure as assistant secretary for counterterrorism we built a programme for prevention. and in the uk you all have efforts under way for countering violent extremism for over a decade. but in the united states we've just been piloting and trying trying different things with varying levels of success. and we were able to go to deep and study what was working, what was in, come up with a plan for a path forward and take it to congress. and we were able to build bipartisan support for prevention capability

in our country, increasing the budget over 1200% over a two—year period. watching government budgeting terms increase in the united states that's like, unheard of. we were able to make progress at the level that we could control. what we couldn't do was get the president and his white house to take the threat seriously. so within the department of homeland security, i would arguably say and other parts of the government may be the doj, at the national counterterrorism centre, there were efforts to try to confront domestic terrorism. but we ran into roadblocks in terms of everything that we needed to do. but thankfully, the biden administration is picking up where we couldn't make progress. and they are starting to make the progress that is needed. right. isn't the assault on the capital ofjanuary six, 2021 proof that in your, period from early 2017 through to your resignation in the spring of 2020, proof that you as a counterterror achieve focused on the internal threat

in the united states failed miserably. because we now appreciate that during that time all sorts of groups, you could call them the proud boys, the oath keepers, you could refer to qanon, whatever. all of these groups were clearly organising, they were strengthening, gaining a bigger membership. and the efforts that you made to control them and keep a lid on them failed. see, i would respectfully disagree with that. i do think that president trump inflamed what was growing before he got on scene and has exponentially grown since he got on there. but i don't personally feel accountable for not being able to control the president. the president was irresponsible. that's why i spoke out and said, "look, we have been trying to raise the alarm about the growing threat of these groups." not only was the president derelict in his duty and confess fronting this that he's actually aiding and abetting the enemy by making them stronger. by inflaming them with his

grievance filled rhetoric and quite frankly, monetising it and campaigning on it. i don't personally feel that i failed. i feel that my team and i did as best we could given the constraints that we had. but there is no doubt that january six represents a failure for the united states in being able to confront this threat. but honestly, if you take donald trump out of the picture, if he had not claimed that the election was stolen even he could have still lost the election but not claimed it was stolen. you wouldn't have january six. he is the linchpin behind what happened onjanuary six. now, you take him out, we still have a threat. we still have a huge problem on our hands. we still have a lot of angry people who are believing that the election was stolen. and out of that come to the conclusion, a small percentage,

come to a conclusion that violence is then justified. that's a problem. and we need to address that and confront that. and part of the reasons that i have chosen to become more politically active, which is kind of rare for a security person. you don't tend to like to get into the politics or be outspoken. but there is such a cross—section here between the security problem and the politics at the moment that i felt it was important to not only speak out during the election but also to speak out after the election and help educate, especially those in the republican party that your rhetoric matters. the way that you are viewing the election matters. it is having a direct impact on the people of the united states and how they are framing the election. and i am not suggesting that anybody that voted for trump is a violent extremist. it's nothing that obvious, it's when you have such a large pool of people who are believing what we call "the big lie", some small percentage of them may determine that violence is justified.

but when you're taking a pool of 7a million people or i think the latest poll shows that of those that voted for him around 5a million still believe that the election was stolen. 5a million, a small percentage is still hundreds of thousands of people. in that spirit of education. educate me. how worried should we as observers of the united states and you, how worried should we all be about the continued presence of these groups? proud boys, one group we know of, oath keepers is another. they haven't gone awayjust because donald trump is now sitting in mar—a—lago in florida. how worried should we be about their capacity to ferment terror and violence in the united states today? i think we will be in a state of a heightened threat for quite some time. it's kind of this weird factor with the pandemic, the pandemic gives people time and space to be online, to ferment grievance among one another. in some ways become

more radicalised. but at the same time it reduces the opportunities for you to carry out an attack because there are so few mass gatherings. so as we reopen and as you presumably have more mass gatherings as the weather gets warmer, it will create create opportunities, targets for an attack. but maybe help us reduce the radicalisation as people start to feel like they're getting back to their normal lives. it's kind of this mixed bag, i do expect to see more attacks this year than we did last year. but at the same time, maybe the pandemic waning allows us to help bring people, deradicalise or off ramp them. so you are worried about fewer threat actors that we have to worry about today.

we understand that. but you haven't mentioned that seems to be really rather important is conservative christian evangelism. let me get a little personal with you. would you describe yourself as a christian evangelist conservative? i grew up in a conservative, as a conservative evangelical christian. the label evangelical has been so politcised that i choose to not use that. i would consider myself a very serious christian. your own twitter profile calls you, self—described as christ follower. is a bit of a signal as you as you where you are in terms of the spiritual, cultural landscape in the united states. in that context, i want to put this quote to you a sociologist at indiana university andrew whitehead, he says you kind of understand what happened on january the 6th at the us capitol without wrestling about the idea of christian nationalism. white evangelical movements have long tolerated far right extremism. this is well before donald trump. "they provide the political and theological underpinnings of this movement.

and it has allowed anarchy to reign." do you agree with that? i do in part. but i think it's really important to his framing is correct. christian nationalism. it is really a cultural movement that certain christians have bought into. i would say the underpinnings of which are heresy. meaning it's not actually biblical, what they believe. i think many have gotten caught up into it. is taking patriotism and making it an idol. it's taking love of country and making that more important than your faith. and the important piece here is you think 0k so you have some people that really love their country, what's wrong with that? what's wrong with that is that they subscribe to this ideology that the bible teaches that america is a christian nation. and if we lose our sense of biblical values, if we embrace, for example, gay marriage, that's a big dealfor them. then we will cease to

receive gods blessing. and therefore will become basically, beyond decline, a failed nation and the world as they have experienced it will forever be change. right. i'm interested in you, if i may. in you because you are a christian evangelical. and you know that your movement at its fringes has been used by, you call them christian nationalist, by people who have very maligned intent toward the united states system of government. using the sort of banner of christianity. my question to you is, what are you going to do about it? as a leading voice in the conservative christian movement right now are you going to agitate against these fellow christians and are you maybe ask some difficult questions of your own christian movement? well, i strongly denounced

the christian nationalism that picture i was painting, if that wasn't clear. but i have been. i wrote an op—ed in the fall during the election to explain my own journey of coming to realise some of these principles had kind of, bled into conservative politics. and you just kind of assume that the true. and then you kind of, compare it again and say wait a second, that's not actually what the bible teaches. i've been trying to get the word out as much as one can in a very diverse media, echo chamber. sorry to interrupt. i'll tell you how far you could go. not so long ago on our show we had a fascinating interview with pastor rob schenck who used to be one of the leaders of the anti—abortion extremists, anti—abortion extremists within evangelical circles.

he did some stuff that today he has, he says he is very ashamed of. and he now as a pastor or advocates for example, for much stricter gun control. and he takes on those elements within his own evangelical movement who are great defenders of the second amendment. are you prepared to break with people that perhaps to many fellow christians, our movement is being manipulated and abused was not i think i have been. i think ithinki i think i have been. that's what i was writing about back in the fall and i continue to try and speak out and educate people that, what we saw during the campaign and quite fairly good, what we seen for decades is not an accurate picture of what the bible teaches. and therefore, if you're a christian, you need to step away from your politics, go back to what the bible says and reorient your life around that. not what the politicians are telling you or not

what your conservative political agenda thanks is appropriate. quite frankly, religion, the christian religion was co—opted for the sake of political power. and there've been any number of authors have done such an excellentjob of tracing the roots of this back to the 50s. it's been kind of fascinating for me to discover this in the last few months. it does make me quite passionate to try and make sure that people see that. and hopefully disconnect or deconstruct, to make sure that their faith is grounded in what the bible teaches and not necessarily the culture they grew up in. right. that's a big task, if i may say so. but an even bigger task perhaps for you, you say you're a public official who is moved into them much more political arena. and you've done that with a message to fellow republicans that they need accountability.

a new level of accountability in the party. and what your message seems to be is that all those who aided and abetted and continue to support donald trump right through even his second impeachment trial, they must be held to account. and they must in some way or other be purged from the party. if one looks at the reality of the republican party today, still a vast majority of republican voters say they are sympathetic to donald trump and approve of him. you've got all of the senators bar seven republican senators who actually voted to acquit donald trump. your effort to change the party and to get it to renounce trump and the trump movement is failing. yes. i don't know that any of us took this on because we thought it was going to be an easy fight. we took it on because it was the right thing to do. right. but you've got to have a strategy that gives you a chance of success. and right now you don't appear to have one. for example, i'm confused as to whether your message

is we offer an alternate vision for the republican party which republicans can and will sign onto in time. or whether you're actually toying with creating a new centre—right party and encouraging republicans to leave what may be a fundamentally broken party. which is it? well, there are a couple of different activities under way. but the one i am most directly involved in is the republican accountability projects will top that has a very narrow focus of elections. we are raising money to provide support to those members of congress that did the right thing and voted to impeach we know that trump has promised to try to primary them in their next election. so we are raising money. we have ads out thanking those members that did the right thing. and likewise are going to hold accountable those were the most egregious and participating in the big lie, that led to january six.

and those that even afterjanuary six insurrection occurred continue to vote and advocate for basically overthrowing the election. so we are going to hold those members accountable. and make sure that... you are talking about the vast majority of both elected republican officials and voters. you are basically calling for a purge of the party which would destroy the party. i don't know that i buy that everybody is as trumpian as trump likes to think that they are. i think the party is broken down into three camp and there is no doubt that the camp i'm in is the most small. it's about 25% of us that previously or currently identify with the republican party that want to see something completely different, go back to principled conservatism. there is the trumpian side which is not nearly as big

but the true believers, what you would call maga. make america great again. and then the bulk of them are kind of what mcconnell represents. which is, i'm afraid of the trumpian base and i don't know what to do so i'm kind of walking this line, not very well of trying not to anger trump but trying to separate from him. there is a loyalty for many and there in that lump in the middle that you described, for many there is a loyalty issue. one very brief question, where do you get your funding from for these ads would call for accountability and a purge of those who are aiding and abetting donald trump? who is financing you? because many people inside your own party think it big democrat donors who are financing you. there are some other projects like the lincoln project which we are not associated with that did have a strong democratic donor base. that's not the case for us. believe it or not, quite a lot of republicans that are willing

to support the positions that were advocating for her. we also allow for small donations and we seen quite a lot of those in the last few months because of the impeachment process and the news that that generated. final question then. it's a big one and may be a difficult want to answer. a donald trump is not going away. we know he's going to be the star turn of the upcoming conservative cpac conference. we know he wants to determine, define and shape the party not over the last next two years but even over the next four years. we even think he might want to run again. if he does and if he continues to have this influence and as you say, fanned the flames of extremism, do you fair for greater violence, greater extremism and civil strife in the united states over the next four years? yes. he has proven that his rhetoric leads to violence. not just january the 6th, but there is any number of studies out there, abc news found over 50 people in the last four years that were indicted or prosecuted for criminal attacks

on people of colour, immigrants, basically anybody that's a minority. and they cited the reason for their attack, trump. you have the el paso attacker who is probably the most famous for that. in his manifesto using some of trump's campaign language about an hispanic invasion. this man, his rhetoric leads to violence. it didn'tjust happen onjanuary six. it was just so symbolically obvious on january six. sure, if he's going to stay on the main stage and you don't have responsible elected republicans stand up we're not doing this anymore, we should expect to see more violence. which is extremely sad. and part of the reason why i feel like we still have to keep fighting. even if it's a losing fight, it's the right thing to do. elizabeth neumann, thank you very much indeed forjoining me on hardtalk. thank you for having me.

hello there. northern and western parts of the uk saw some of the best of the sunshine on monday. have a look at this picture from one of our weather watchers in cumbria. beautiful blue skies overhead. but i think on tuesday, it's going to look very different because this slice of sunshine is being replaced by a bank of cloud pushing in from the west. and that cloud is going to bring a lot of rain across parts of northern ireland, wales, northwest england, some rain maybe into the far southwest of england. but the wettest weather of all is likely to be found across scotland, where there is a met office amber

warning in force across parts of the southern uplands and the southern grampians. we could well see up to 120 mm of rain in the very wettest places falling on already sodden ground, so the very real risk of flooding and disruption. it's going to be a windy day wherever you are, but particularly gusty for western areas. gusts of 60, maybe 70 mph for exposed parts of northern ireland and scotland. very mild, ten to 1a degrees, maybe up to 15 towards the southeast where we should stay dry with a little bit of sunshine. through tuesday night and into wednesday, our stripe of cloud and rain just keeps on coming, moving very slowly southeastwards. it is going to be a very, very mild night indeed. those are the minimum temperatures. cardiff and plymouth may be no lower than 12 degrees. we head on into wednesday, the winds a little bit lighter, still fairly blustery out there, and ourfrontal system will still be bringing rain across some western areas. but to the southeast of that weather front, we will be tapping into some very mild air indeed. given any lengthy spells of sunshine,

temperatures will shoot up to around 16 or 17 degrees across parts of east anglia and the southeast. a band of cloud and rain still affecting the southwest into wales, northern england, parts of southern scotland, sunshine and showers to the northwest of that. but as i mentioned, the temperatures, 17 degrees possible in london, but it is another mild day wherever you are. as we move out of wednesday into thursday, this frontal system will clear eastwards and high pressure will start to build in from the south. we may see weather fronts just grazing the far northwest, bringing a little bit of rain, but for most of us, it's going to be dry to end the week. there'll be some spells of sunshine, still fairly mild by day but rather chilly at night.

this is bbc news with the latest headlines for viewers in the uk and around the world. i'm mike embley. out of this world. the moment perversance lands on mars. the intrepid rover sends back unprecedented video, and the first sound from the planet. washington cathedral bells toll 500 times and president biden holds a candle—lit ceremony at the white house to honour the half a million american lives lost to covid—19. new data shows a single dose of pfizer's covid jab cuts deaths and serious illness in the uk by more than 75 per cent among over 805. and donald trump is ordered to hand over his tax returns to prosecutors in new york.