they didn't like showoffs. they didn't admire braggarts or bullies. they didn't respect mean-spiritedness or folks who were always looking for shortcuts in life. valued moret they traits like honesty and hard work. humility,courtesy, responsibility, helping each other out. that is what they believed in.

true things. things that last. the things we try to teach our kids. it is every american who believes we can change this country for the better. so many of you who have never been involved in politics, who picked up phones and hit the streets, and used the internet in amazing new ways that i didn't understand that may change happen. you are the best organizers on the planet and i am so proud of all the change that you made possible. time and again, you've me up, and i hope i picked you up to. , i ask you to do for hillary clinton what you did for me. i ask you to carry her the same

way you carried me, because you are who i was talking about 12 years ago when i talked about hope. it has been you fueled my dogged faith in our future even when the odds were great, even when the road is long. hope in the face of difficulty, hope in the face of uncertainty, the audacity of hope. hope.a, vindicated that now i'm ready to pass the baton and do my part as a private citizen. so this year, in this election, i'm asking you to join me, to reject cynicism and fear, and to summon what is best in us. elect hillary clinton as the next president of the united states and show the world we still believe in the promise of this great nation. [applause]

>> thank you for this incredible journey. let's keep it going. god bless you. god bless the united states of america. ♪ from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." charlie: welcome to the program. we are at the democratic national convention in philadelphia. day one was elizabeth warren. tuesday night, president clinton. tonight, day three, michael bloomberg, joe biden, tim kaine, and president obama. we continue our coverage of the democratic national convention in philadelphia. former president bill clinton spoke on tuesday. today were president obama, vice president joe biden, and former

new york city mayor michael bloomberg. donald trump created a controversy earlier today. he urged russia to hack into hillary clinton's missing e-mails. the comments sparked outrage in the clinton campaign which accused him of inciting espionage. joining me is jim, a central member of the team in 2008 as well. i am pleased to have him here. i particularly left out tim kaine so we could start with him. tell me about him and his selection. we are taking this at 8:00, before he speaks. what is he going to say? what is his mission? tell me about him, the selection, and what he's going to say to these democrats in this hall. jim: kaine was a finalist in 2008 for obama. we appointed him dnc chair.

he's been a leader at every level. that is all politics. the great thing i love about tim kaine is he is the single best human being i know. charlie: the single best human being? jim: he is a better human being than everyone except for my wife. charlie: good. a better human being than bill clinton, barack obama, hillary clinton? jim: i love all those people, but when tim kaine got named, i teared up. the vice presidential pick shouldn't be about politics. it should be about someone who can step in to be president of the united states. charlie: why do you say that? jim: i don't with tim kaine every single day in the white house. he asks about your family, your life. he has deep philosophical questions that most politicians don't. he's a former missionary, speaks spanish. he has more depth than most

players at the national political stage and every time you are with him, you are proud. charlie: was he the front runner from the beginning? jim: i think so. i think he was a wise choice. virginia is one of the swing states in the country. everyone likes him. he's done deals with republicans at every level. really has respect from them. in terms of what you will be employing, how are campaigns run in 2016 different from 2012, which was different from 2008? in: you've seen an explosion how people are talking to voters. over 80% of swing voters only get information from social media. the average american swing voter thinks about politics four minutes a week.

what their friends and family say to them on social media, in the backyard, next-door neighbor, that is incredibly important. charlie: they listen to people they know and trust. jim: absolutely. you have all this stuff coming at you. the way you process that through the internet, social media, what your friends and family say. that is why you've seen light years of evolution in the war between the two parties on social media. the big advantage for democrats is we have better data than they do. charlie: what does that mean? jim: we have really sophisticated models of the electorate that tell you three or four things. are you going to vote for hillary clinton? are you an actual swing voter? 10% are right there in the middle and determine the election. jim: and we are now the most

partisan country in the world. david cameron in the u k, in spain, in those countries, a third of the voters swing back and forth. here, it is less than 10%. that is a very big deal. it is why i think in the battleground states trump is going to have a problem. if you look at the elections republicans have won, in the past cycles, they've had huge field operations. trump has nothing on the ground. that is a real problem. charlie: let's talk about swing states. clearly florida, clearly ohio, clearly pennsylvania? jim: i don't think so. won sixania, we've now consecutive elections. we didn't spend a dime there in 2012 and we won by 4.5 points. i think we will have to spend some time here and it is great

to have the convention here. i was out walking around and i got registered to vote 17 times, which i think is perfect field. i'm very proud of them for running a field operation. charlie: robbie was here. he's the chairman of what heavens in the operational aspect. jim: absolutely. charlie: so, swing states. florida, ohio, north carolina? jim: i think so. we lost north carolina by 1.3% in 2012. it is demographically moving toward the democrats. if you look at colorado, north carolina, virginia, those are states democrats had carried for 30 years until obama. charlie: virginia, tim kaine will play a role. jim: a big role. we did studies when they were picking paul ryan in 2012.

1% in pick gives you a their home state. charlie: unless it is lyndon johnson. jim: for sarah palin. not a big deal on the national ticket. but it is about energy, people looking at the ticket and saying, can these people lead? charlie: what other state is a swing state? jim: nevada. we talked about colorado. republicans are going to try very hard in wisconsin, in iowa. i think iowa is a swing state in this election. wisconsin has gone democratic six consecutive elections but never by more than five points. trump's theory is the midwestern eerie. -- midwestern theory. he talks about trade. charlie: he things that will appeal to the rest of them. jim: the problem with that is he has to win states they haven't won in 25 years.

if i was him, i would go fight in virginia, colorado, and other places. he staked his campaign in the midwest. that is very hard. there's no backup plan. charlie: what does your polling him,bout how latinos view the idea of being called immigrants, classified, using terms like racists, killers, which he did in the beginning and continued to do, building a wall to keep people out, is that resonating with the latino community so that they are looking at that rather than economic issues? jim: demographically, the latino vote is probably the most important vote in the entire electorate. after the obama campaign's, we still didn't get -- we still didn't get to a reasonable turnout of latino numbers compared to african-americans,

asians, and whites. i think she can do better. bush got 44% and 46% of the latino vote. mitt romney got 27%. donald trump is in the teens. he has to get 40% of latino voters in florida and nevada to have a shot at winning. he's nowhere even near that. that is why i thought the pick of pence, the governor of indiana, was weird. it didn't move with women, with latino voters. charlie: who would you have picked on the republican side? jim: marco rubio. charlie: he would have influenced florida. jim: absolutely. and a latino, young, visionary. i don't think there's a chance in hell marco rubio would take that job, but my backup land would be susana martinez. she said she wouldn't even be considered. this is the third election in a

row where republicans have chosen a right-wing evangelical conservative because they keep getting base problems. is, the 10% of swing voters out there. barack obama won florida by 0.9%. we lost north carolina by one point. these coalitions really matter. i don't think trump moved that at all. charlie: barack obama really wants to get into this. jim: he does. he thinks this is an incredibly important moment for the country. i was in the white house on day one with him, walked into the worst economy in 50 years, all these challenges, and now we just can't turn it over to the recklessness of donald trump. charlie: what is your pulling on trump? jim: the electorate wants to know more about both candidates.

charlie: both candidates are unpopular at this point. jim: the two most unpopular nominees of their parties in the history -- charlie: in the history of american politics. jim: but that is about america. we are a partisan country. we are split down the middle. what is more surprising is, you didn't hear donald trump address swing voters. every 10 days or two weeks, when iran obama's campaign, bill clinton would call me at 2:00 in the morning. he would say the wisest things. all presidential elections are always about the future. if you win that referendum, you win this election. both candidates have got to explain their vision. charlie: last night, bill clinton talked about change at every moment. he tried to show that she had been a change agent, not only to humanize her, but to say that

notwithstanding the fact that she's been around politics a long time, change was on the agenda. jim: he had to humanize her. only a husband can do that. double when your husband is one of the best orators of a generation. remember, he still is the economic gold standard. charlie: the gold standard for swing voters. jim: on the economy, absolutely. they look at him and say, that guy did it. charlie: do you think republicans like paul ryan and mitt romney are going to go to that for donald trump? jim: i think there is serious risk for them. we have a very close senate that could go one or two seats. 29 house seats that barack obama won in 2012, republicans old now. charlie: possible, but unlikely

that democrats can retake the house, but they can lower the margin. jim: but we can take the senate back. i think today we would take the senate back. you are not seeing any of those people campaign with donald trump. when he was in ohio, you would have thought rob portman was going to move to mexico. charlie: there's always this question, he's doing reasonably well. nobody's campaigning for him. he's doing it on twitter. he's very competitive in the swing states. jim: any republican gets 45%. any democrat gets 45%. then we fight over the other 10%. i've always said this election is going to be three stages. the first stage where nobody thought he could win, we are past that. the second stage of, this race is going to be tied into the fall and every one of my democratic friends is going to lose their mind. in the third stage, when you

come back to the battleground states, when he can't get enough latino votes, can't get enough women votes, i think hillary clinton is going to beat him substantially. charlie: what percentage of women will he get? jim: it depends on which state you are talking about. i think he's going to have a historically low white woman number of republican voters. charlie: for viewers at home, almost at the end of the democratic convention, the campaign continues, but then it really kicks off labor day, then you have the debates. what should viewers be looking at in terms of big issues, significant moments in the campaign? i'll give you one, the debate. that is easy. jim: the debates are a big moment. in 2012, barack obama lost the first debate worse than any president had lost the first debate. i had members of congress

saying, can we still win this election? it is very smart guy who is president of the united states once said to me, presidential politics is an x-ray of your soul. the voters are going to get a sense of these candidates, who they are as people, can they answer the bill clinton question, and if that happens, hillary clinton will win. charlie: thanks very much. back in a moment. ♪

with thewe continue editor of the wall street journal editorial page and the editor of the new york times editorial page. welcome. as you see the democrats, this convention, and how it is going -- >> i think it is all right for them. i don't think there's been a lot of breakthrough moments. michelle obama had the strongest speech by far. bill clinton's speech was fascinating. devotelt they needed to that. he by this great speech maker to that task as opposed to reaching out to the voters that bill clinton did so well at getting, the middle class working class white voters in some of these

states that donald trump is going for. i thought that was a lost opportunity. charlie: did he accomplish is objective of unifying -- humanizing her? the two elements they worry about, trust, and being on the wrong side of change. paul: she's been in public light for 25 years. as far as change goes, i don't know that somebody who's been in public light that long, that you can make the case that you are the change agent. i don't think she can out bid trump as the change agent. there strategy has to be, make trump unacceptable and her as the safe choice. charlie: referendum on donald trump. paul: that's right. if it is a referendum on her, the country has clearly said they don't want like her and they don't like where things are. charlie: barack obama is

reasonably popular now. he's over 50%. yet you are saying and pulls show this, there's a huge wrong track all as well. he's popular, but the way the country is going is not popular. paul: i don't know the answer. one idea that has gone out is that he is out of the frame now politically. he's not running himself. if you look at what the public theys of the candidates, don't like the two candidates. charlie: the deputy campaign manager just said that. he said we've got the two most unpopular candidates in the history of american politics as respective nominees of their parties. point?l clinton make the everybody agrees that michelle obama made one of the great

convention speeches. >> that speech was the high point of the convention so far. bill clinton was in a bit of a box. he was trying not to play the very restrained performance. he felt like he couldn't play that traditional role and was trying to play a new role we've never seen a man play before, much less a former president, trying to figure out how to not steal the spotlight while serving as the endorser of the character and values of his spouse. i do agree, even the term change maker felt a little strained to need. protesting a little too much. all that stuff was so transparently, obviously staged. i'm going to be curious to see how it plays. she has a real challenge. to the extent she's arguing for change, there's some criticism

of the previous administration for not having accomplished enough and how she walks that line is going to be interesting to see. charlie: what about bernie sanders and elizabeth warren? >> they very lay contained, i think, the sanders insurgency. there was some drama around that on day one which has faded substantially. there's so many interesting historical echoes here and so much stuff, the arc of the clinton's experience, the fact that jerry brown was up there just now, delivering his endorsement of hillary clinton. jerry brown was the bernie sanders of 1992 who came to the convention. charlie: i'm old enough to remember that. [laughter] paul: i covered that convention.

charlie: when you look at donald trump's candidacy, considering all that is said, you see a pathway to victory for him? paul: i do. i don't think he's a favorite. ofrlie: the editorial page "the wall street journal" has not always liked him. paul: i think we are equally unenthusiastic about both candidates. charlie: what is the path to victory? paul: to hold enough of the suburban voters to get the states that romney got. charlie: does the temperament and tone appeal to suburban voters? paul: it doesn't. that is a real problem. the counties of philadelphia, ohio, where you have college-educated men and women who typically vote republican, you've got to get enough of those to win. then he can add to the working class white voters who are

economically hurting and he's got to break through in ohio, maybe pennsylvania, maybe wisconsin, probably not wisconsin, but iowa, perhaps michigan, and then get florida, north carolina, not going to be easy. it is a narrow path, but i can see a path. charlie: can you? james: it is mathematically possible. one thing i think this whole campaign season has taught us is we should be humbled about making predictions. charlie: we are taping this at 8:00. we don't know what barack obama or michael bloomberg will say. we do not know what tim kaine is going to say. if national security is a big issue, does that favor donald trump or the democrats because hillary clinton has some sense of being within the councils of government? although there is libya, one of the big critics of libya now is

barack obama -- go ahead. james: we heard in cleveland last week, a fairly over-the-top criminal indictment that chris christie presented of foreign policy under hillary clinton, but he painted a devastating portrait of failure. if mr. trump is able to deliver that message, he might turn it against her. we've got this extraordinary spectacle today of donald trump inviting russia basically into the campaign to undermine hillary clinton. charlie: can you imagine that? inviting the russians to hack. paul: i think it was a mistake. , think the campaign recognized there was a statement by mike pence saying if it is the russians, you can bet the u.s. government will come down very hard on them. they understood that it was not right, but i think trump

probably felt in his own mind, this is the way he thinks, he loves the new cycle, i'm going to cut in on the democratic story and reraise the e-mail point. charlie: he thought that wrongly because it didn't play well for him. paul: it hasn't played well. we will see if it matters to his supporters. expose those did e-mails to potential hacking. charlie: at the same time, there's no evidence that her server was hacked. paul: correct. but it is likely, probable, that somebody did have access. charlie: did he say likely, profitable -- probable? paul: he said it is entirely possible that that was exposed. so we have no evidence that it actually is. james: it is amazing though, it

used to be up to the last cycle, the rule that the other candidate would go dark during the opponents convention. policy, iour point on think both candidates are hostage to that. there are more -- if there are more terror events, i think that is going to play into the trump narrative that the world is out of control, growing disorder, and terrorism have expanded on their watch. if it is calm between now and then, i think that will play more to clinton. james: well said. they are both hostage to events. charlie: do you think terrorist events would play to trump's advantage in a political sense? james: we are in this interesting kind of matchup where the republicans are the

party of darkness and the democrats are the party of optimism. charlie: you don't want to be there, do you, the party of darkness? james: if things continue, the terrible attacks and evidence that the world is falling apart, donald trump is positioning himself as the one person can fix that. charlie: the law and order guy, the whole theme was law in order. james: right. ixonlie: reminds us of nex in 1968. james: the statistics may not bear out that argument. charlie: does the notion of the unpredictability of donald trump, does that play into that kind of commercials that lyndon johnson used, the 3:00 in the morning call, that you can't trust his finger on the nuclear button? paul: i expect to see echoes of that in some of the speeches.

, as the campaign unfolds, i think that is going to be one of the arguments the clinton campaign makes. we will see to what extent trump plays into that. most of this convention has been repeating trump statement after trump statement that is outrageous or a lot of people will think is outrageous, but it hasn't seemed to hurt so far. it has been cumulative over the course of the primaries, but it hasn't disqualified him yet. i think they will try to do that in the fall. charlie: hillary clinton has acknowledged she has issues about trust, popularity, and donald trump has the issues we've been talking about. donald trump would like to believe that he is, has kept in to a movement that is not about republican and democrat. it is a movement that has to do

with the establishment in america. he likes to make comparisons with brexit. whatever it is that makes up economic insecurity, discontentment about the direction of the country, feeling that the country has left them behind, is that a large enough core to win the election? clinton, does she have an equal possibility of tapping into it? james: i think there's a mathematical possibility of winning with that alienated and buty group of voters, hillary clinton has a much bigger opportunity probably to expand. i think that tim kaine choice is evidence that they think they can make inroads with some moderate republicans and

republican women. trump'ssay that temperament may well play into their hands. charlie: the suburban thing. paul: i don't think it is a movement so much as a mood, a moment. the country wants change. they don't like the status of the economy. they don't think it is working for them. they don't like the rise of terror. if a generic republican were running, and i think most of the republicans would be every now if they had gotten on this, the question for trump is can he cap into that change and make himself acceptable enough? charlie: he has to be seen as acceptable to be president and he hasn't reached that point. paul: i don't think he has. remember when ronald reagan was caricatured by a lot of people and democrats said, he's going

to blow up the world, he's crazy. charlie: dr. strangelove. paul: by the time he gave that debate, he reassured everybody. james: the debates were really pivotal. charlie: that is the moment for donald trump to reassure america that standing next to a woman of this experience, barack obama said earlier, the most qualified person to run for president -- paul: he's got to reassure those voters. he's got his core followers, the people that want to have an assault on washington. republicansn enough , 90%, 95%, and that means college-educated voters are worried about him and his temperament. that is going to be tested across the next three months. charlie: thank you. james: it may seem unlikely he will change no. this has come up again and again, that he would make some

pivot to more presidential behavior. time, they the same said he would never stick to a prompter. he essentially did that in his speech. paul: no predictions from here, charlie. [laughter] charlie: it must drive you crazy, the fact that the two primary candidates are against trade. paul: it is really disappointing. it is a bad moment economically, a dangerous moment. we have to get this economy moving again and trade is a vital part of that. it is concerning to me. i can't tell you the number of ceo's look at this and say, if we do what they are saying, we don't have to make things in the united states anymore. they can move just as easily. they would lose jobs through protectionism in america rather than gain them. james: i think this is going to be one of those interesting questions with hillary clinton,

where she really is on this question which was so core to -ism as we understood it under bill clinton. trade was really core to his policy. charlie: thank you for coming. we will be right back. ♪

charlie: we continue this evening with congressman adam schiff of california, ranking

member of the house intelligence committee. the address the convention today. and madeleine albright. she addressed the convention yesterday. i am pleased to have both of them. let me begin, congressman, with a letter you sent to the president. you said the recent hack into the servers of the democratic national committee and the subsequent release of e-mails demonstrated yet again the vulnerability of our institutions to cyber intrusion and exploitation. the timing, content, and manner of release was clearly intended to undermine the democratic party and the presidential campaign of hillary clinton, and disrupt the democratic party convention in philadelphia. i think a lot of people are asking, what is the evidence that its intent was to disrupt the campaign of hillary clinton? adam: i can't discuss any

classified information, but on the basis of russian capabilities, russian motivations, and russia's history of interfering in political affairs of other countries, russia has to be the leading suspect. charlie: i just want to clear this up. one, the question is did they do it. there seems to be a consensus that they did it, but that hasn't been -- they deny it. but we know they have done these kinds of things, as has the chinese government. the second question is, what was their motive, and was it to disrupt the political process so donald trump would be elected? you would have to believe it is a complete coincidence that they dumped these e-mails right on the eve of the democratic convention. i don't think those are reasonable assumptions. i think you have to believe the act was deliberate.

i think the motivations are so palpably clear in terms of a candidate in donald trump who says he may back away from sanctions on russia over its invasion of a neighbor, undermining the security guarantees of nato, the case is pretty clear what the motivation is. charlie: and allow countries to acquire nuclear weapons as well. what do you think? ms. albright: i think it is outrageous. it is interference in our electrical -- electoral system. i think trump's behavior is a gift to putin. what putin wants to do is disrupt europe and make more problems for nato and they are on the same wavelength. i am stunned. i think especially the part to do with lifting sanctions and making clear that nato shouldn't

exist, and the russians should hack the e-mails from the state department, is basically seditious. i think it is illegal, it is something that needs to be really examined. i've heard them call the siberian candidate. charlie: at the same time, it is pretty wide knowledge, the government's hack. president obama has talked about the chinese. ms. albright: the chinese have done a number of different things, but this is directly interfering in our electoral process. even as awful as what happened with the dnc hacks, i think calling upon the russian government to get involved in hacking former secretary of state's e-mails is stunning. frankly, cyber attacks are really a very threatening thing to our security system. charlie: that is the latest

twist. you saw his vice presidential nominee try to pull back from that. ms. albright: his vice presidential nominee. i don't know when he has authority to speak for trump. i think it is outrageous. the fact that it is even being considered, when we talk about what it is like for foreigners to interfere in our electoral process, this is the most direct kind of interference i've ever read about. charlie: you agree? rep. schiff: absolutely. you have a candidate for president, one of the major party nominees, inviting an adversarial government to engage in cyber espionage on behalf of his political campaign. it would be disqualified for any other candidate. charlie: disqualifying meaning you are suggesting he should step down? rep. schiff: i think it is too late for that, but he ought to be disqualified by the voters.

he's not waiting to become commander chief to do damage to the country. he already has done damage to our alliances. he is undermining our counterterrorism fight by saying we should alienate the muslim community at home and abroad. he is doing damage now. this is what you get when you make a reality tv performer your national candidate. it is a disaster. ms. albright: the question is whether he even recognizes how serious his actions are. i was in warsaw during the nato summit and i was in england. i spent more time trying to explain what trump was talking about, why he was doing it, was he kidding, did he understand what he was doing, and i think people feel in a campaign that you are only talking to the american people. he is talking to the world and he's scaring everybody and making our situation much more

dangerous. i think he is on the five. charlie: not fit to be president? ms. albright: not fit to be president. charlie: secretary clinton said to me, a dangerous man. ms. albright: he is a dangerous man. when i woke up this morning and heard about this business of trying to get the russians to help in terms of sanctions lifting, that totally fits into putin's campaign as well as trump's and i wonder what it is they are thinking about doing. admires that trump so an authoritarian figure like putin and would give him an a in leadership, i have said if trump were in my class, i would fail him on decision-making. charlie: do you think putin would prepare to move on the baltics? ms. albright: i think we don't know. part of the thing with the baltic states is the government. there was an incident several

years ago. people were concerned. we don't know what putin's motives are. charlie: if he did, are you confident what the obama administration would do? ms. albright: we are nato members. we are obligated under article five. the question is whether you can trace where it came from. the president has made quite clear, and he did at the nato summit, in terms of our obligations. charlie: many have observed that nato is not prepared to defend those states at this moment. ms. albright: they are deploying troops. the summit in warsaw was quite remarkable in terms of the collaboration, the decisions to have battalions in all the baltic states and in poland, american troops, and have equipment in various areas. i think nato is living up to its

expectations. charlie: turkey is a member of nato. ms. albright: it is. turkey the situation in is also very complicated, but they are a nato member. charlie: this is national security night. we are taking this at -- we don't know what the president will say. we don't know what the vice president will say. we don't know what tim kaine will say. what is the democratic party, what is it they want to say about national security? rep. schiff: i think what we want to say is that we confront some real threats to the united states from terrorist groups like isis and al qaeda, from increasingly belligerent countries like russia and a rising china, from a madman in pyongyang who has nuclear weapons, threats from iran, and we need a commander in chief who

has the experience and the judgment and the toughness, who understands the consequences of what she says, of what he would say, and the power in that office, and is prepared to walk in on day one. there's only one person who fits that bill and that is secretary clinton. for the national security needs of our country right now, we have the best qualified candidate we could possibly ask for. charlie: what worries you the most as the ranking minority member of the house intelligence of four people that gets to see most of the intelligence of the country? terrorism, north korea, aggressive china, russia? rep. schiff: in the near term, the terrorism threat concerns me the most. it is the continuing pernicious conduct of isis.

it is al qaeda that we haven't had as much focus on in the public discussion, but very much wants to create what they did on 9/11. in the near term, we have a great risk from home-grown radicalism. in the mid-and longer-term, places and al qaeda are trying to get people here to attack us. over the longer term, i worry about nations like russia, china's belligerence in the south china sea, and the nuclear operations of iran as well as the unpredictability of a regime like kim jong-un. charlie: and increasing ability to incrementally gain in their capacity. rep. schiff: absolutely. charlie: what worries you? ms. albright: all the things the congressman stated, but i also worry about an accident. we were talking about the south china sea, that there would be an accident that would be seen

as provocative, and actually an accident in the arctic in something the russians are doing with the baltics. part of the reason to have somebody with a steady hand and experience is to assess whether something is deliberate or an accident. the thing that worries me is you have something in the republican party that has not a clue how the decision-making process works or how to de= conflict -- de-conflict in a crisis, and who is trigger-happy. what secretary clinton is so good at his understanding the various sources of our power and understanding that force is one of them, but so is diplomacy. so our economic measures. charlie: you've been a friend of hers for a long time. some say there- is some gap between where she is and where obama is, that she wanted him to do more in terms

of supporting the moderate arab forces at the beginning, that she was more in favor and led the charge with respect to libya. she is said to be more hawkish than he is. ms. albright: i think there's been an evolving situation. president obama was elected to end the wars in iraq and afghanistan. the thing i admire about president obama and secretary clinton, and what you have to have in decision-making, is the capability to state your views and to respect diverse views and make a decision. they weren't on the same wavelength on everything, but he listened to her, she listened to him, and the important part is that hillary understands that she wants people around who will present different perspectives. the situation has evolved a lot. i think hillary will make the

considered judgment and have people around her who she respects and be able to assess what to to use. charlie: when you look at the middle east and what has happened with isis, now you see isis claiming credit for lots of things one way or the other, and we discover that some people we thought were lone wolves have some access, some kind of allegiance to isis. have they changed their strategy in your judgment as to how they want to continue the attack on the west? in the sense that they weren't so determined to engage in the very highest mass casualty attacks. they were more quantity over quality of the attacks. they have urged their followers to engage in whatever acts they

can. that makes it very hard to defend against. they've had a different philosophy in terms of hunting a caliphate now. charlie: john brennan has said we have not done well in stopping that. rep. schiff: we've done a better job stopping the caliphate. charlie: but we haven't done as good a job as he would hope to do in stopping the lone wolves and the penetration in terms of what we saw in nice. rep. schiff: true. part of that is the ideological fight. we are not very good at pushing back in the communication devices, the social media campaign. our government is lousy at social media. charlie: why is that true after an understanding of what social media can play and how they used it? rep. schiff: part of it is, we have discovered we are not a credible messenger on this. we are not able to speak to what

islam is and isn't. we're trying to empower others who do have credibility. still, we have seen there are people in the fringes of society here and around the world that are very amenable to isis' message. some of those have mental health problems are on the fringes of the criminal justice system. routing that out is a very tall order. ms. albright: one of the things we have to do is intel sharing with our allies, which is why alliances are important. charlie: on a bilateral basis? bilaterally i would say, but also through nato. there has to be more intel sharing. we have to recognize that we are dealing with a long-term problem. charlie: you don't have a problem with turkey knowing everything we would share with nato? ms. albright: it depends on the issue.

we need to know more about what things are being thought about. the europeans have to do better in terms of their own intelligent policing. i think the other part is, we want an instantaneous answer to this. that is aproblem generational issue. we need to get muslims to help us because it is something that has to be done from within. we have to work very hard on the situation that created the issues. issuesre very ironic that are taking place. as we do better in controlling the size of the caliphate, they go somewhere else. charlie: do you think calling them in islamic extremists, the president does not do that, you think those who do that aid the islamic call? ms. albright: it comes down to the semantics thing.

i think they are extremists who have hijacked a religion and we have to be careful not to blame all muslims. charlie: they are saying these are -- ms. albright: that is what people indicate when they say, why aren't you using the word. these are extremists who have hijacked a religion and they are killers. charlie: thank you for joining us. you next time. ♪

>> fire worst forecast on boj decision day. new data disappoints and piling the pressure. u.s. stocks gain as giants lead the way. alphabet and amazon impressed with earnings and forecast. the stamp of approval as uber and didi brace for supremacy. coming to