announcer: from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." charlie: we begin this evening with politics and an open letter to state democrats, governor jerry brown of california endorsed hillary clinton for president ahead of this state primary. donald trump held a news conference to address his pledge donations to veterans groups. >> i have raised a tremendous amount of money, almost $6 billion and more money will come in, i believe, over the next little while. i have raised almost $6 million. all of the money has been paid

out and i will give it to you in a second. in fact i brought a list in case , that question was asked. the money has been paid out. i have been thanked by so many veterans groups throughout the united states. one gentleman called me up recently crying that out of a blue he got a check for $100,000. i have been thanked by semi -- so many groups, great veterans groups. arele are picketing, they sent by hillary clinton and they are picketing that the money was not sent. i do not think it is anyone's business if i want to send money to the vets but i have to say this, i raised close to $6 million. it will be over that amount. when it is all said and done. as of this moment it is $5.6 million. charlie: his comments were a response to a twitter announcement.

he said that there will be an impressive contender. meanwhile a new poll by , associated press in center for public affairs research found that republican and democratic voters feel a significant disconnect with their political parties. joining me here in new york is frank luntz and gerald seib, and jonathan martin, the national political correspondent at "the new york times." let me begin with this question. trumps performance at this press conference, what did he achieve? gerald: he achieved an attack on the press. which particularly for a republican candidate, is never a bad idea. he managed to take the oxygen out of the room one more time. it was remarkable that the press conference and the controversy that he was addressing might

have been a problem for some other politician. the one thing that happens every time he gets out of the box like this is he takes the attention away from everybody else on the whole day was spent discussing and parsing donald trump and the veterans' question. that has worked for him. maybe at some point it will not work but right now it works for him. charlie: are all the questions answered? >> not really. that was not the point. the point was to be -- take offense at the fact that the questions had been raised at all. that was the posture that was taken. i think some of the journalists who were there and others beyond the room were somewhat agog, because isn't that the point of journalism, to ask questions and demand answers? jonathan: he wants to make it about the media instead of his contributions or lack thereof to veterans groups. whatever the story of the day is his posture is to create a fresh

dust-up to cover the previous one and he is very talented at that. i will point out that this press conference took place three days after donald trump at a rally in san diego complaining about the federal judge who was presiding over the lawsuit that has been filed against trump university. at that rally, mr. trump invoked his ethnicity saying i believe , he is a mexican. this judge is an american, a federal judge but it is , remarkable that the nominee for president of the republican party can mention in a casual manner the ethnicity of a federal judge in that kind of a way and at a press conference , three days later he makes it all about veterans groups or about the press themselves, we all move on from that comment. it does capture the degree to which trump is able to create some new story and put the rest the previous one. charlie: is the press at fault? >> the press has to be

aggressive in holding him accountable for the things he has said. you cannot just move on from the last controversy. we cannot be so consumed by his attacks on the press itself to stop ourselves from holding him accountable for some of the things here -- he is saying. charlie: why were they not send early? jonathan: the washington post has done a great job on this question about his giving to veterans groups. unfortunately at these press , conferences we get so caught up in other issues that he's able to steer the conversation. >> the roots of these are simple. reporters started calling up veterans organizations and saying, have you seen the money yet? it is not a grand conspiracy here at all. charlie: why was the money not sent? >> that is one of the questions that has not been answered. let's just say it has taken a

while. as jonathan suggests that became not the point anymore, as of today. >> he is holding press conferences. is hillary clinton? how often does the media get to her? and this is one of the smart things that trump has done which we have not seen in a candidate which is he gives the press access to him. he does more interviews in a week than hillary clinton does in a month. he opens himself up. i agree with you because you're trying to hold him accountable but the fact is at least he gives access and once again this is the trump show. the average voter gets to see this exchange and what is happening, is they are deciding that the fact that he lets the press at him, that is what builds his credibility. if you watch what is happening even though he has a 35% favorability rating, more and more people are considering voting for him because he seems authentic. he seems genuine. charlie: he seems to have an attitude.

>> it is a aggressive attitude but the public is looking for that. we did a survey in the swing states and we have identified none of the above, it is an 11% component of the electorate, and i believe they will determine the election. they are not responding to issues. they are responding to attributes. and the one attribute they want more than anything else is a candidate that is honest and trustworthy. they believe that trump is not. they believe clinton is not but the fact that trump allows people to get at him and goes back and forth with them, that creates an essence of authenticity that hillary clinton does not have. charlie: i assume it is also a sense of transparency. >> which is what voters are looking for. i have never said publicly that i thought trump had the chance to win. i now believe, and it will frighten many of your viewers, he genuinely does because her campaign is as an authentic as anything i have seen and trump,

he will have to get people who do not like him. but those people are going to give him a chance that they would not give hillary clinton and the clinton people have to wake up right now. charlie: both to jerry and jonathan, do you think what frank just said is increasingly becoming part of the conventional wisdom that trump can win this thing? or not? >> yeah. we have looked at states were that could be a reality. pennsylvania and north carolina, ohio, states where he has the chance to turn what had been a blue state into a red state in a way that another more conventional republican did not. is it going to happen? is it possible? people are realizing it is possible. charlie: you and a colleague are looking at four states. jonathan: there is no question that our reporting and the data we see reflects a competitive race and mr. trump is going to

be more formidable than folks at -- had a thought a few months ago. structurally, the map works against any republican nominee whether it is trump or anyone else. democrats have an advantage on the map. since 1992, democrats have one 242 electoral votes. throw outms he can the old map, but that is a daunting place to start for any republican nominee. hillary clinton has not secured the nomination yet of her own party. once that happens the polling will presumably look different just as it did in 2008 after the obama and clinton race came to an end and democrats came home. have gathereds around trump the democrats have

, not around hillary. charlie: and will the is the question. jonathan: more were hesitant about supporting obama who had backed her in the primary. it sure seems possible and there is no question there is bad blood right now in this democratic primary. the sanders folks are uneasy about hillary clinton and her campaign and the broader establishment but you will see a four to five months sustained democratic campaign warning those bernie people the alternative is trump and that is their most compelling weapon. charlie: and supreme court appointments and all of that. it is a change -- election goingge , back to 1980. i should say 2008 and 1980 so twice in the last 45 years. the sanders people, donald trump is their second choice. charlie: is that if you or a -- is that a significant factor?

>> let's say it is 10% of the vote. ralph nader got 1% of the vote in and that flipped florida for 2000, bush over gore. johnson,kes is gary these numbers are so small, these differences between trump and clinton and we have had this , in this country that no one wins by 20 points as they did 20 or 30 years ago. i do think it is significant. these sanders people want to shake up washington and wall street and hillary clinton is not in a position to get that type of voter. charlie: let me raise one question. this notion that bill kristol said over the weekend that there could be a third-party candidate. do you guys see that as likely, do you know who he is talking about and does he know what he is talking about? >> it is likely something will happen. we have a third party candidate. gary johnson on the libertarian ticket. it does not take much to tip the balance. it is hard to start from scratch

right now and launch a meaningful independent presidential campaign. that is a tough thing. the green party is on balance and the libertarian party is on balance. this might be the place where these none of the above voters migrate. it is such a stranger that this is possible. >> it is possible they could find someone to run third party. it is too late to be on the texas ballot pending litigation that will be filed. and we are getting close to the line in north carolina so whoever would run would have to gather signatures pretty quickly to get on some of these ballots. if you are a republican who is looking for someone who is not named trump or clinton you have an option. gary johnson and bill well were governors in the 1990's, republican governors. even if you do not think they will be president that is some -- somewhere you can go if you are a republican to cast a protest vote of some kind. as frank pointed out, if the

johnson-well ticket got 7% that is a significant number given how close this election could well be. >> mike bloomberg could have been that candidate, and i think he made a miscalculation. in the polling that we did he would have taken equal or more votes away from trump. charlie: he would have kept anyone from getting to 70. frank: he started in the upper 20's. that makes him a viable candidate. he had the money and the message and he had the background and the experience. he could have done it. charlie: he could have been in the debate if he had 20%. >> exactly, and that would have made it a very different race. and he chose not to do it. charlie: is bill kristol talking about mitt romney or not, does anyone know who he is talking about? frank: it is not going to be romney. i have done some reporting with his people and they indicate he is still very reluctant. his mind could be swayed but

there is not a lot of time left here. they are up against the wall here on a lot of the state ballots. charlie: who is it? other than gary johnson. and bill well. frank: or someone like bill sask, the senator from nebraska. smart, tough, very quick on his feet and the ability to express , frustration with the current system but that is not mitt , romney. charlie: [indiscernible] >> he is a popular and successful governor. the endorsement was a bit tepid. they said we should be for hillary clinton because he has the best chance of beating donald trump but i like that sanders guy. in the california contest that may be enough.

endorsements tend not to matter much, but this guy probably does make a difference. >> and the timing is right at a moment where they spent a lot of time and they seem to be creeping up in the polls. it does help hillary a bit. you cannot say jerry brown is part of the clinton establishment. he has had his differences with the clinton family over the years. >> what does it say that bernie sanders cannot win the nomination, no shot and yet he is pulling closer to hillary clinton with the election over? charlie: that is a very good question. unhappiness with her? >> it is more than unhappiness. it is genuine discontent. donald trump is unable to close the deal. which is why these debates are going to the most incredible television i have to buy the , pay-per-view rights. you and i together should get

global pay-per-view because there will be billions of people tuning in to see a trump-clinton fight. >> i am all for the hype but let's see what the numbers look like this summer after the democrats come home up for hillary first. >> it is a bit of a free throw for some of these democratic voters. they can vote for bernie, they can make a statement, they know it will not matter in the end because hillary will get the nation, but nothing is lost. charlie: everyone is trying to explain 2016, including you, gerry. this leads to a basic conclusion. the recession that started in 2007, and the recession of 2008 and 2009 scared and scared the electorate more deeply and more permanently than has been recognized before. yes the economic statistics say , there has been a recovery and

a relatively nice one at that, but many americans have never really recovered and perhaps never will. the experience has altered their attitude about the political and economic systems and their leaders, and left them willing to consider risky alternatives. tell me more, but i think that is exactly what frank is telling him. gerald: there is that line that says the economic recovery is underway. there have been six years of economic growth, and there have been 74 straight months of job creation. the line that says we think the country's off on the wrong track has been going down. the line in the polling that says we think the economy will get better, it keeps going down. there is this gap between what the economy is supposed to look like and what people actually feel. that is explained in part by the fact they think that what 2007 through 2009 showed a system that did not work for them and they have not forgotten that. the numbers say things like gdp

growth do not change that view. , >> 49% of americans think their best days are behind it. when did you ever know americans to be that pessimistic? two thirds believe the problems we face will get worse over the next 10 years rather than getting better. charlie: trump was right to frame it in terms of making america great again? frank: incredibly, yes. because he captured the emotion and passion, he is their voice. he is the vessel by which they communicate and that is why they will ignore all these weaknesses. charlie: they forgave what he said about john mccain, even on veterans day. frank: nothing seems to kill him up to this point. >> we will see what happens with the broader electorate, first. his numbers are terrible, he has the worst unfavorable numbers of any major party nominee in american history. it is not like he has not been hurt. he has been hurt. he just has not been hurt with a

slice of the republican electorate. frank: why is hillary clinton not destroying him? >> she has bad numbers, also. her primary is going on and democrats have not come home yet. it is pretty straightforward. frank: that is why the none of the above, that 11% determinate. charlie: you assume that democrats will come home because they will look at the alternative and they will say even though i am not thrilled by her i am less thrilled by the possibility of donald trump winning. >> the alternative, it is the old joe biden saying. do not compare me to the almighty, compare me to the alternative. that will be the hillary message for the next five months. yes my bernie folks, you do not love me. perhaps i am part of the establishment but the alternative is donald trump and that will be their message. look at the polling data versus 2008 when you had more people who were backing hillary clinton who said i would never vote for obama. now you have the bernie folks

who will say the same about hillary clinton. it does seem like we have to wait until the summer to feel what is going to happen in this race based upon what the democrats do after their primary. charlie: it seems like you are saying hillary clinton will be ok. they may not like her but when push comes to shove democrats will come home. jonathan: she still has a narrow advantage based on the electoral college which favors democrats and, frankly, the fact that donald trump's numbers are terrible. hers are not much better but they are better while her primary is going on. it is not wise to make the sweeping analyses about the race until after her primary is over. frank: i am unwilling to make the analysis. i don't think we should be comparing this to any other election because it is not like any other election. the voters have a different mindset than they did in 2008.

and every time we have made an assumption on both sides, democrats and republicans, so many media people, so many pundits have got it wrong that stopme point you actually making projections, you stop comparing it to the past, and you let the voters speak for themselves. charlie: often when you look at presidential elections, some will say it is a debate on the future, some will say it depends who wins the debate and some say it depends on who is the most optimistic candidate. some will say it depends on who it is a referendum on. help me understand what this election will be about. jonathan: i am just about out of the projection business. charlie: i was asking for an understanding, not a projection. jonathan: i will give you that. a strange dynamics suggests itself. the question of how many people want to vote against hillary

clinton stacked up against how many people want to vote against donald trump is not the way this race will be decided. you have negatives like we have never seen before as we have been discussing. the big question, how much of the democratic party consolidation will happen? and we will have a fair reading of that in a few weeks and that will give us a baseline. >> there is going to be a record number of people voting against the other guy this year and that is the giant joker in the deck, i think. charlie: thank you. it is a pleasure to have you. we will be right back. stay with us. ♪ charlie: samantha bee is here.

she served as the correspondent on "the daily show" with jon stewart. this year, she became the host of her own series, "full frontal with samantha bee." she is also the cocreator and executive producer of the sitcom that employs her husband, jason jones. i am pleased to have you at the table for the first time. samantha: i am so excited to be here. charlie: i love the idea.

samantha: we definitely wanted the show to feel audacious. we wanted it to have that spirit. and one of my best friends who i comedy with for a long time came up with the title. she floated it to meet via text and as soon as you did, i knew it was the title. it is about being open and being audacious. having a point of view that is obvious. being naked in a way, just not literally, figuratively. charlie: late night has changed in a way. you have gone from carson to to leno and fallon and what others are doing and you are doing and oliver is doing. it feels different. perhaps it is just of our time.

samantha: there is a diversity of style within a certain kind of format. people have their own, people have their own unique take on that. that is for sure. charlie: you are the only one today with a late-night show. chelsea has a show that is more samanthachelsea has a show that is more: on demand. charlie: why is that? samantha: i do not know. i wish i could answer that question. i wish that people turned to me with that question. charlie: what should you be the authority on? samantha: all i can speak to is what i am doing. i seized the opportunity. charlie: this is about your attitude or your agenda. does it come out differently since you are who you are?

samantha: i absolutely think so. i have the most wonderful show writer, we have this mind meld that happens. i think the show is unique because we have our own point of view. charlie: you see the same things as sources of comedy? samantha: we do. we have a great, healthy symbiotic relationship. , we seize upon things differently. it is not a huge effort for us to distill the news in a different way. we are just different people we , are a different gender. i don't attribute it at all to that, but when we read the people we read it through a different lens. does everybody on the jon stewart show think that

someday they will have their own show? samantha: i do not think i thought that. so many have. i do not think that everybody thinks that. toward the end, i love jon, it was a grind, you could feel the weight of all those years. it is not like you would think it is pure glory. charlie: it is also said that he was very nurturing, the first guy in and last guy out, was very much dedicated to the nuts and bolts of the show. samantha: completely dedicated to it. every moment of the show passed through his editorial voice. he was very much in the nuts and bolts of the show for a good reason. i totally get that. he was nurturing. he always encouraged me to dig deeper into my own point of view and that was important. dig deep into your uniqueness and find ways to push the humor that are unexpected. charlie: where do comics and comedians and comic actors come from?

samantha: there is no question, there is no chance in hell that anyone who knows me from high school or college with think you are a natural born comedian, you will stand on the stage and stand in front of millions of people and just shout. i was a quiet and subversively humorous person. that is a natural instinct. i am also an only child. we spend much time entertaining ourselves. charlie: so the imagination grows. in the sense of being comfortable with yourself. samantha: there is no one else to entertain. there are no friends, you stare out your attic window and you read your heavy books and listen to your disco records. charlie: it is one day a week how hard can that be? time do we taped

the show, 6:00 on monday. charlie: colbert is five nights a week. design,: it is all by we only wanted to do a show once a week. charlie: is it different because you are doing it one day away? samantha: it is a full-time experience. charlie: it is harder because you have one time each week to make it happen. where we can be a little bit not as good as we were yesterday and perhaps tomorrow, better. samantha: there is a little bit of immediacy about following the new cycle closely. we have to sit back from the daily news and focus more on -- it is more of an analysis of the week that has passed and what we think is coming in the future. it is actually freeing. we thought it will be a hindrance when we were first putting the show together and we found out we have nothing to do with the scheduling of the show so, when we learned we were

scheduled for mondays, we thought this is a tragedy, how are we going to -- how can you do a show at the beginning of the week question nothing -- at the beginning of the week? it gives you the freedom to sit back and watch the patterns, watch the stories that are emerging in a more long-term way so it has what we thought was a huge handicap is an asset. as the week progresses, you can see the turn of events. we do not have to do hot takes, we can sit back and reject stories that are not fruitful, stories that have emerged and disappear quickly. you can see those and those are helpful. doing the show once a week gives me the freedom to do field pieces. i do like to shoot out in the world. that is the difference, more and more field pieces. is it sketch comedy, no, it is field pieces. it is going outside and reporting back on a humorous

story. samantha: yes, i love doing that. i did that for john, i doing it differently for myself. when i was doing it for jon, it was an incredible training ground. but i do not need to strictly adhere to the format. there is a pretty routine format to those stories that we all came to know really well. we do not have to do that anymore. i do not have to pretend that i am a reporter anymore, so that character is now -- i do not i am past that character. i do not have to do that so that is freeing. i am myself. we can play with the form in ways that we did not have the freedom to do before because we did not have time to exploit -- explore those things in the past and now we have time to let stories percolate. i do not have to pretend to have a point of view that i do not have anymore. charlie: are you playing to camera with a point of view or are you best or feel more comfortable playing off of

someone? part of the greatness of different kinds of people is they can react to someone. i can imagine you and jason reacting to each other in a funny way. samantha: i love both of those. i love both of those aspects of performance, i love speaking to the camera or the audience. but i love doing fieldwork mostly for selfish reasons. i do feel like when i sit down with a person and i spend a little time percolating in a story, i learn something, and i love to be out in the world learning something for myself. if it translate into a great story or a story we want to tell on the show, that is great. charlie: that is the reason i like "60 minutes." it gives me a chance to report. samantha: i love to meet people, even if i do not agree with them. charlie: and to see people in their own environment.

this is you comparing the presidential candidates to characters in "back to the future." here it is. >> hours before dropping out ted , was still throwing punches like a born-again tyler durden. >> if anyone has seen the movie 2" --to the future scott, it makes sense. you have the repulsive billionaire, the greasy loser, the woman whose life was almost ruined by her terrible taste in men, and the minor character who has zero impact and the elderly lunatic who hangs out with teenagers and screws things up for anyone else. >> the government of libya. quick, bernie, jump back in

the car and go back to the 1950's when we did not have to appeal to black voters. charlie: did you love it? samantha: that was really fun to do. charlie: it is a great year to be in comedy. it is the gift that keeps on giving. samantha: either a gift from jesus or a gift from satan. we keep trying to figure out who it is from. charlie: the characters are interesting and they are drawn out in an interesting way. these are not a button down people. we all know so much that is not button down. samantha: we could not have asked for more. were pitching the show, and have all the documents about how you wanted to look, we can never anticipated. charlie: the story of bernie sanders is every bit as interesting as the story of donald trump.

continues to, throughout california he is creeping up on them. it is a surprise every day. ♪ charlie: your taping next

monday? samantha: we will take next monday. charlie: what is happening in the bowels of "full frontal"?

samantha: we have some ideas of what will make a good show on monday. we did have a day off yesterday, a long weekend. we have a slow ramp up. wednesday is the day normally in our work week. and listen, we have done 13 shows i can't say we have the , pattern down completely. we have written, which is great. tomorrow is the day we hunker down, and think about what we want. there is a few threads in the air and a few story ideas. wednesday is the day we start to dig into those stories a little more deeply. i already know what the field will be for monday. which is timed perfectly. we actually met with gary johnson. it will be a libertarian day in the field.

samantha: i hope we're not giving anything away. it is perfect. the timing could not be better and that is a fluke. charlie: and then there is peter thiel and gawker. samantha: i am looking forward to it. charlie: you were the executive producer of "the detour." samantha: we bring two different things to the table. he is a very big picture person and really great at the overall arc, and arc to an episode. i am very surgical. i like to come in and poke holes in his story lines. this is not, no, for this reason, i the person who comes am in and slashes and burns. a woman would never say this.

he is kind of a great birdseye view person and i am more surgical. the two halves of the whole work well together. creating "the detour" was a fun thing. charlie: do you have special skills writing? samantha: i think mindset, as i recall my earlier years in theater school, as i reflect because i did not go to theater school at one point, i was always really good at making a performance that was a pastiche of a bunch of different things. that was a strength i had and that continues. i think that making shows i would want to watch is definitely something. charlie: do people watch "the daily show" and say, i know her. what comes away from comedy is insight into who she is and her mindset.

samantha: you can know me more from "full frontal." the passion and the attitude is totally authentic to who i am. some people interpret it as anger or fury, or slash and burn which is not a reflection of who i am as a person. i am a really low-key person but i do achieve total catharsis. during that 21 minutes to get it right and to get it on air. it is just meaning and point of view. we are so about point of view in the show and about stating our point of view so firmly and forcefully. we just wanted to make a show that was vigorous and visceral and satisfying. we wanted to make a show that we wanted to watch, and i think we have done that. charlie: it seems to me that is

a mistake people make. they are not trying to satisfy themselves. they're saying, who is the audience? they try to satisfy someone other than you. samantha: when you work in television there are a lot of masters. there are a lot of people wrestling for control of your end product. lots and lots of the voices. advantage, our network has just given us the power and control. they understood that this is not the type of show they ever made before. and so they trusted us to bring in a product that was strong and had that point of view. charlie: did you pitch it to them or did they come to you and say we would love to have a show idea from you? there was a conversion. we've been working with them for

months and months. when jon left they were picking up the detour and jon announced he was leaving. charlie: surprised? samantha: we knew that it was coming. so surprised, slash, not surprised. it is not like he was going to do it forever. who would want to do it forever? so we knew that the end was coming. we were not surprised and surprised at the same time. it was not like an ambush. he gave us lots of warning. we know it would happen, we just did not know when. though, it was still shocking on some level. right around that time we have been hoping to have "the detour" got picked up. we were still leaving. that was helpful, and then tbs

came to us with this idea to do a show with me and they floated it in a very casual way. charlie: 30 minutes once a week. samantha: they were open to having us do whatever we wanted it to be. they loved the voice, they liked the performers, we had such a good working relationship, it felt like a natural fit. my name was coming up in the news. it felt like the right thing for them to float the idea and i seized the opportunity, i clutched the opportunity and held it so tightly to my heart just like a diamond. charlie: and then set out to create a show. samantha: and then created a show. charlie: that is a great thing, to start from the beginning. samantha: it was a completely blank slate. so we could imprint ourselves on that. it is always a conversation. i think it was hard for us to define our show.

it is hard to, you cannot just say, it will be a show and everyone think i am serious and i will stand there and i will, my body is going to do -- we always knew what the show would feel like, but i cannot say that we knew exactly what it would look like. i do know we wanted to do a once a week show for sure. charlie: can you imagine extending it to five days a week? samantha: i think that would completely change the show. that would ruin it. that would ruin my life. i am big into quality of life. i like my life. this is perfectly enough work. charlie: maintaining quality of life is a good thing. do you have kids? samantha: i have three. so i need to spend time with them. it would prevent me from doing fieldwork. and it is important to me. it has been the biggest part of the show. charlie: the toughest thing for me doing the morning show

for cbs, i love doing it and great people with me and behind the scenes, it attaches you, live for two hours. samantha: i think we would rather, our show is literally 21 minutes, we have 21 minutes to fill and we never have enough time. we do not have enough time. we write the show really fast -- fat and then we pare it down, we are stripping away pieces. it is a painful process but it is an excellent process to whittle away good jokes and kill your babies as it were as you are going. that to us, is more satisfying than having to fill time with something we do not know. i would much rather, i think we are lucky to be in the position where we can craft things smaller. something smaller that is precious to us. charlie: i do not think of canadians necessarily as funny people. samantha: i appreciate that.

charlie: so many great comedians come out of canada. maybe for some reason those things come together. samantha: there are great comedians in canada that do not have a lot of opportunities to shine or to come here. there are untold riches. charlie: did you always want to come here or you were going where the work was? since i decided not to become an attorney which i think we are all grateful for, the legal community, no question. charlie: you made the right decision. samantha: i do hate paperwork. charlie: and meetings. samantha: so i -- beyond that i only wanted to be a working actor. and i wanted to make a living doing something i loved. as it happened, i actually

transitioned away from being an actor entirely and do my own work which has been, i now see is the ultimate gift. doing your own, creating your own thing, you cannot go back from that. charlie: but you still are an actor. samantha: i do not want to. i like to do my own thing now. charlie: you can write your own movie. samantha: i guess i could. i'm not in it. i do play jason's mother. which is entirely awful, not a great idea. but it does not interest me in the same way it used to. i have found something i like doing better. and next, i become a rock pianist. because i'm also interested in doing that. i do not play the piano. charlie: how do you see the show changing and evolving? samantha: i like doing what we are doing.

we will eventually work our way through the presidential election and next year, we will have a president in place who we know who we will have for four years and that will change. it will evolve naturally. we do not have an agenda for ourselves. we enjoy doing what we are doing. we are so new at it, we would like to enjoy it for a little while. charlie: every article i read about you and i read lots of articles when i decided to do this show, they all asked this question, did she want and should she have been considered for "the daily show"? samantha: i am so happy doing this, i am so happy to -- in the moment, i don't have any regrets. it did not feel realistic to me, to be honest and then tbs was there, really wanting me to do a

show. and nobody -- who can resist someone who really wants you? that is an awfully delicious, very compelling. charlie: people who do not appreciate that really need that lesson. when you want to make someone happy, explain to them how much you want them. how happy they make you. samantha: to have been courted by tbs in the way that they courted me, it really was unique, it really felt like a special thing. charlie: i did not care, i did not want it or need it, i did not care about it. samantha: if tbs had been there it would have been another conversation. i cannot speak to what was going on in their minds. i so prefer to do my own thing, i so prefer it, it is so much better for me. i would not be able to do the

show, i do not believe i would be able to do the show i wanted to do because the operation is immense. it is a behemoth. i do not think it would have worked for me to blow apart that institution and do it exactly my way. you do not want to fit in someone else's mold. the shows i like have a strong presence and they have a strong show runner and they create a world for you. they are not wishy-washy. i need to feel the presence of a strong creator in the show. those are the shows i like. charlie: how about the staff? samantha: they are so great. we did a great job hiring. sometimes i look around at my staff, i am so lucky. we are a small operation. it is not a big-time -- it is kind of big-time. we are still small compared to other shows. maybe we have 65 people on staff. something like that. we have a lot of researchers, a

lot of producers and field people, people who build our craft. you cannot do it all by herself, it is but i truly feel 18. like i constantly talk about the team we have built because i am thankful for them. there is not one person who is superfluous in our staff. everyone is working. charlie: do you want to in the end maybe have a sharper edge than anyone out there? samantha: i would not say that is consciously -- charlie: is it a reality? samantha: i think that is happening, absolutely. it is not conscious. we do not come to work and say, how can we be more sharp? charlie: how can we find ourselves in the most precise way? that is what the goal is but it has become, sharper and more of

an edge than almost anybody out there. because you have been true to yourself. samantha: i think we have a real edge to us. it comes out really naturally. there is a flow to that. we do not build the show, by comparison to any other show. we cannot do it that way. we just have our heads down and our eyes forward, always looking for it in the purest, clearest way to what would amuse and thrill us to do on the show. we do not care what anyone else is doing. i do not really read anything. i have only read a couple. charlie: you should read it, it is good. samantha: i have read a couple of reviews. two or three maybe. i try to stay out of it. "the new york times" i read it because we get it delivered and the entertainment section was on the outside.

charlie: you had the role that you had on "the daily show," people were interested. when you were on, we loved you, we wanted to see more of you. i think it is the truth. and all of a sudden you're are getting a show. so people who wanted to find out more of you are finding more about you. that is what happens. samantha: it is great. i try to stay out of it. it is easy for me to stay out of it. i am really i have three kids. disciplined about not reading about myself. i have three kids. when i leave work and go home i am off duty. full-scale parenting. charlie: are you a sports fan at all? samantha i am not a sports fan. : charlie: is jason? samantha: he is more of a football person. we will watch the olympics. charlie: thank you for coming. great to have you. samantha: this was so much fun. i love it. i want to live here.

charlie: we would be happy. samantha: i will be fine. charlie: samantha bee, "full frontal," thank you for joining us. see you next time. ♪ mark: i'm mark crumpton.

let's begin with a check of your first word news. the los angeles police chief says the shooting of two men at ucla was a murder suicide. authorities say there is no continuing threat and the campus is safe. the shooting occurred at a small office in the engineering building. the chief says a gun was found along with what might be a suicide note. islamic extremists stormed a hotel in somalia today, killing at least six people. police say two members of parliament are among the dead. the group al-shabaab claimed responsibility. officials say the attack on a popular hotel continues at this hour. several militants are still