♪ announcer: from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." charlie: join me in welcoming james clapp. [applause] charlie: i want to begin with the russia and the u.s. relationship with russia. the russian u.n. ambassador rice said in the last week that relations are as bad as he has seen them in the last 40 years. characterize the u.s.-russian relationship. james: it is not at its peak by any stretch.

we have had a lot of difficult issues in syria and ukraine, just to name two. so it is a stressed time for the relationship. i don't know if it is worse than times i can recall, i am a cold war warrior and all of that. it is worse than that. then, when bad times we were not getting along at all. they are still communicating. they are in a constant dialogue and that is a good thing. but i think this will be clearly a challenge for the next administration, the management of that relationship. charlie: what do you think is driving putin?

james: i think he is somewhat of a throwback, not so much to the more ast era, but throwback to the czar. [laughter] think he has a vision of a great russia as a great power. it is extremely important to him that russia be treated and respected as a global power on a par with the united states. and i think that has a lot to do with and telling his behavior. charlie: let me go right to what is in the newspapers and in everyone's mind today. it is hacking. and a threat or perhaps a motivation to impact the u.s. elections, what can you tell us about that? james: i will probably not go

beyond the statement that was issued about that. many people seem to want me to re-parse the words which were already very parsed. [laughter] james: and agonized over. i think the statement stands for itself. i will say that there is a history here for the soviet union and russia now interfering in elections, both theirs and other peoples. and there is a history of this where they have attempted to influence the outcome of our elections before. charlie: he has said he thinks we tried to interfere in his election. james: people who live in glass houses are wiser. [laughter] charlie: should not throw rocks? james: right. that is the rest of the sentence. charlie: will it have an impact

or du think he will be successful, has he created suspicion, have these disclosures raised questions that somehow will cause people to question the american democratic process and can they effect the voting machines and all that? james: i do not believe so, but that is not an issue for the national intelligence apparatus to decide. i think the strength for us in this case is the highly decentralized nature of our voting apparatus, which is run by states and local jurisdictions. they make it very hard, i think, to affect the outcome. i don't know of cases where voting machines are tied to the internet, that is the common denominator of the security weaknesses that we have. your reference to hacking is

germane. charlie: ok. but i mean, do you believe that they would be doing this and it did not go to the top, there's things you can trace to russia that would not be happening if in fact it had not been, this is not freelanced by fsb or anybody else? james: we believe it is coming from the highest levels of the russian government. i will not embellish that statement. anymore. [laughter] about a when we talk proportionate response, the vice president said putin will know but i hope others will not know. somethinghink he said along the lines of if and when we do something it will be a time and place of our choosing. it may not be necessarily a symmetrical response. it may be asymmetrical.

charlie: but there is also a sense they are not paying a price for this. james: well, maybe not yet. charlie: maybe after the election. james: i am not going to preempt, i mean, this is a policy issue when we do it. it is not a intelligence issue. charlie: you know things. [laughter] charlie: don't you? 84 days i will have my brainwashed. charlie: it is said the president is generally worried about an escalation of this kind of things with all the dangers there is, both in terms of hacking but also in terms of cyber warfare. i'm speaking about if we respond, they respond, that gets

out of control. james: that is exactly the issue. that is, and i can recall instances where we got a big head of steam up about wanting to retaliate and asymmetrical symmetrical manner and you had to consider things like, are we counterattacking through another nationstate which posescture , issues and the lawyers get heated about that. you need to think about the potential counter retaliation to the retaliation you took. and how well do you think and this applies to any nationstate, how well you think we can withstand a counter-retaliation and those get to be very complicated calculations. charlie: and the risk is? james: sometimes it is better to

perhaps consider other options other than the symmetrical. charlie: and the risk is? well, the risk is, given the tremendous dependence of this nation on the cyber-domain to do everything, whether it is personal, institutional, we have to think twice, i think, and be very cautious about retaliating in a cyber context. because the presumption that there is going to be an equally exquisite and precise calculus may not be a valid one to make. charlie: this is a new world we are living in with respect to the internet. james: precisely. charlie: i love the terms they ear -- fancy bear and cozy bear. james: ok.

[laughter] charlie: does all of this show something about the vulnerability of our system? james: it does. when the internet was first -- as an experiment, and then as it mushroomed, security was never an integral part of what the internet was designed for. i mean it just was not a consideration. charlie: it was the opposite. james: we're paying the price for that now. charlie: what are our options then? james: i think we are always -- in the absence of a technological breakthrough, in a catch-up mode. there are some fundamental cyber-hygiene things that surprisingly, people, individuals and institutions do not attend to.

increasingly, though, i think there is an awareness in the commercial sector, and of course the attention getter there is how does this affect my bottom line? that is what i think is motivating increasingly the private sector companies to pay more attention to cyber security, but it is always an action and reaction. as long as we have this dependency on the internet, we're always going to have this fundamental challenge of how to promote some security in the cyber domain. charlie: it is a fact that we have gotten much better at attribution. we pretty much know where it comes from these days. james: that certainly helps.

i think that that provides some degree of deterrence. but we do not have enough body , of law yet, we have not in my opinion, this is not company policy, this is me speaking. but we have not been able to generate the substance or the psychology of deterrence in the cyber-realm. that is going to continue to be an issue for us. it is easier perhaps with nationstates, and nationstates have other vulnerabilities beside their cyber-security weaknesses. it is non-nationstate entities or the nations that have been in the past considered to have a lesser capability and i am thinking of the likes of north we haved iran, where

had this disparity or contrast between the capability of the most sophisticated cyber actors, which are clearly russia and china, but have, to this point, perhaps more benign intent. and then you have other countries with more nefarious intent and more nefarious are other nationstate actors. so how to create the substance and the psychology of deterrence against all those potential actors, i do not think we have figured that out yet. charlie: was the internet attack a nonstate actor? james: well, the investigation is still going on. there is a lot of data to be gathered. preliminaryo be the

case. i do not want to be conclusive. whether a nationstate was behind that or not. charlie: why -- i mean, we anded at the north koreans sony identified them. with the iranians later there was some indictments. we have not said anything about the chinese, and it took us three or four months to respond and identify the russians. what is the calculus behind all that? ,ames: in the most recent case the reason for the delay was at least for my part, was driven by confidence, greater certitude about attribution. charlie: right. james: and in our business, it is always better to have multiple sources when you are going to dime out a nationstate publicly.

and so we want to be kind of careful about that. the other thing about all this business of attribution is that oftentimes, the means by which we do that is fragile and perishable. and so if we are too transparent about it, everybody wants to know and i want the details, then we risk losing those perishable, fragile sources that give us the insight in the first place. charlie: let me turn to north korea. can you tell us how, what is the status of their ability to put a nuclear warhead on a missile that can reach the west coast of the united states? james: we have actually assessed that capability. we -- in a situation like this,

we always have to worst case. but frankly, in the case of their intercontinental ballistic missiles, neither they nor we know whether that missile will actually work, it has never been tested. but nevertheless, we ascribe them -- to them the capability to launch a missile that would have a weapon on it that could potentially reach parts of the united states, certainly including alaska and hawaii. charlie: what is the timeframe? james: timeframe for what? charlie: when they could do it. james: we have assessed this for years. charlie: they could do it? james: they could do it. themld say again, neither nor we know if the missile

systems will work. we have to make the worst case assumption here. charlie: what if it worked, what are our options? sanctions, sabotage? we know they have the capability, so it is not a worst-case scenario, but a scenario that is possible and likely. what are our options, what is our strategy? james: that is policy. i do not do policy. charlie: i know. [laughter] charlie: but you have opinions. james: i am just in the engine room shoveling. charlie: when the president says what should we do, you say that is opinions i do not have , opinions. james: there are a number of options, military is one of them, sanctions, although we are running out of gas on sanctions because we imposed most of them that we can. charlie: right. james: the key player is china with respect to sanctions. so if a military option were to be exercised, obviously, we would play very heavily in that

process. but that is not a decision, fortunately that the , intelligence community will make. ♪

♪ charlie: when you look at china and their game in the south china sea, this is not a policy question, this is an analysis, what are they up to, is the sum -- is there some kind of monroe

doctrine by china? james: the chinese feel very strongly that their rectitude about their exorbitant claims in the south china sea, that all the maritime contained, the tribunal decision notwithstanding, they are very committed to their claims in the south china sea. i was there recently and it was certainly reaffirmed to me by the chinese interlocutors that i engaged with. charlie: when you go there, who do you see? the head of intelligence? james: the primary figure that i engage with is the politburo member who is the overseer for other intelligence and security organizations. doesie: one thing the cia

clearly and therefore, you, is make analysis of leadership in respective countries and their ambitions and their profiles. lots of reports in newspapers about the continued authoritative kind of moves by -- and he may want to do another term. him?can you tell us about james: that is always a hardy perennial for intelligence. we do the best we can, oftentimes we have to do it inferentially by behavior that they exhibit, because there is the old saw in intelligence about mysteries and secrets. [laughter] james: and secrets are known facts and mysteries are, too

often we are held to the same exacting standards for dividing both. and we are not clairvoyant. nevertheless, i would offer that the president -- you know, the thing that impels leadership in china is first and foremost, i believe, is domestic stability. charlie: right. hence, their paranoia. james: yes, i think there is a certain amount of as we would call it, paranoia about being contained. they are very sensitive about the appearance of the u.s. containing china. and so i think a manifestation of that behavior is the way they have approached their claims in the south china sea. the biggest thing internally is

the domestic stability. and so, he has embarked on a reform program to try to eliminate corruption, and i think he is bent on keeping the control by the party apparatus, as well which i find disturbing is theo impressive military monetization that the chinese have mounted across many fronts. charlie: including a huge naval investment to extend their power around the world. james: yes. and also in the space arena. they have in recognition of our dependence on space for lots of purposes, they have accounted for that. this is part of their monitorization.

charlie: characterize the middle east. james: a miss. [laughter] mess. -- a it makes your head hurt. it is an extremely complex situation and the complexity is probably most focused in right now in syria. the many competing interests there. charlie: including the russians. james: including the russians. i think, tom friedman, many of you know he writes for "the new times," and he said the mideast is too important to ignore and too hard to fix. charlie: you have said we cannot fix the middle east. james: no we can't.

think we can help others but , in the end, i think fixing the mideast, whatever that means, is not something the united states can do unilaterally. charlie: but we are participating in iraq in that battle to retake mosul. how long do think that is going to take, what should we know about that? james: probably a long time. i tell you, the greater concern i would have is what happens after mosul is declared recaptured. charlie: what is your concern? james: what will happen in terms of holding it and importantly, what about governance in mosul, depending, and recovery, depending on how much destruction occurs in a highly urbanized situation. and if that vacuum is not filled rapidly with governance,

provision of meniscal services, etc., that will just provide the fertile ground for isil or some other extremist group to come back. charlie: everybody in today's papers are talking about turkey wanting to come in. they want to fight and be part of it. is it like trying to be there for the takeoff, seed can be there for the landing -- so you can be there for the landing ?james: the turks, yes, they are ? james: the turks, yes, they are concerned about isil, but the primary concern they have, of course, is a united british nation, if i could usually term with air quotes across the southern border. they are most concerned about

the kurds, that is their primary motivation and to the extent that they can prosecute a campaign against isil -- charlie: the iraqi prime minister said this is going faster than he expected. obviously, you have all the things after mosul falls, and you have said you clearly need some kind of governing there. this is also a concern in syria as well. in terms of what happens there. and if, in fact, isil is defeated in raqqa, and they take the battle someplace else, you end up with a civil war, just a civil war. james: we already have one. charlie: that is what i mean. that is the primary fight between the assad government and rebels. james: i think it is a lot more complex than that. because there are so many shades of opposition groups. in syria. and of course you have the other

complexity, the russians, who very much want to keep their beachhead, toe hold, whatever figure you want to use, in the propping up what has been a staunch ally of theirs. that adds to the complexity. charlie: it is likely a son will be in power when president obama -- asaad will be in power when president obama leaves. what worries you the most? james: in general? charlie: about syria and where it is going and where the -- whether mosul will make an attack on raqqa, and whether, what role they play? -- manyhat concerns me

things concerning. charlie: you said, what you don't know. [laughter] james: exactly. you remembered. that is very good. i think what we have to be mindful of as the nationstate attributes, such as they are of the caliphate, asserted by isil, is being defeated as a so-called or nationstate-like enemy. i think the history of isil going back to its al qaeda in is one of resilience and flexibility. we have the emphasis on recapturing territory and

cities, in this case, mosul. and iraq and ra when that happens, what form does isil take? it is probably not going to go away. it will morph into something else, or other similar extremist groups will be spawned and i believe we are going to be in the business of suppressing these extremist movements for a long time to come. charlie: whatever happens in raqqa, isis will be with us in some name. james: right. charlie: when you look back in terms of the intelligence world you inhabited, what mistakes that we made, for example with the focus on terrorism and all we have to do by nature, did we take our eye off what russia was

doing? james: that is a good question. i have been concerned about just as, for the program i manage, the national intelligence brown program, which funds the agencies and the other components of the intelligence community is the very large proportion of that that is devoted to counterterrorism. while at the same time, keeping our eye on all the other challenges that we have, major nationstates like russia, china, north korea, iran, we are focused, so consumed and preoccupied with counterterrorism. i do worry about that.

how we allocate resources in proportion to each one of those targets is not unilaterally the intelligence community's decision. we have lots of help from policymakers and from the congress as well. to determine those priorities. sitting in my position, i worry about that. charlie: you have experience in this, too. should the same person command nsa and cyber security? james: we have reached it where it is time to separate the two. i was part of the decision-making in the pentagon when i was the undersecretary to start cybercom as

a200 arrangement. two-headed arrangement. that has not been intended to be remnant and it has been six years. we reached the point where each of these responsibilities, the cyber come commander and director of nsa are large enough and sufficient magnitude that they should be separate. i have done a couple of agencies myself. as director of dia and nga for almost nine years and running any of these agencies is an all-consuming, seven by 24 proposition. there are lots of -- for lots of reasons, they should be separate. charlie: do you ever leave a note on the president's desk as a tradition with presidents, what will your note say? james: i would hope that the next president, whoever it is, will continue in the tradition of the current president in allowing and encouraging truth to power.

i think that is a fundamental writ of intelligence that it be presented to the president in an unpoliticized and unvarnished manner. and i would hope the next president would continue in that. and to encourage it and to defend it. charlie: you said that what you worry about what you don't know. i mean the seriously. what might you not know? [laughter] james: a lot. charlie: what is it that you do not know about that you would have some sense of it, intuition backed by experience and some evidence that scares the hell out of you? james: when you have some insight into, say, a terrorist plot, even a you may not know a lot of the details my but you

have some insight, you may not know timing, you may not know all the individuals involved, you may not know what the nature of the plot maybe. -- may be. if you have something to start with, you can build on that , bring to bear more resources, more collection. the situation, the things you worry about where you have no insight whatsoever into a potential bad event and you can conjure up all sorts of nefarious scenarios that could happen, that you may not know about. charlie: i have not asked you this one last question about climate. is climate a national security issue? james: it certainly is. we are seeing this already. the effects of climate on national security issues, things

like the availability of water, of food, or energy, and this increasingly, i believe, is going to play a big part in our national security landscape in the future. charlie: director clapper, thank you so much for joining us. [applause] james: thank you. ♪

charlie: 20 years of the tiger woods foundation, people have been touched by the tiger woods foundation and all of the scholars who were found because of education and opportunity to find a new life. we want to talk about the foundation and thought to be and the remarkable relationship between tiger and phil and tiger and nike. and talk about golf. it is an honor to be here. let's begin with the obvious question, how you two got together. tiger: he hired me. [laughter] charlie: he came to you and said, i have some money for you, how much will it take? [laughter] phil: yeah, it got to be a

negotiation. i got in last night in time to watch the bait. -- to watch the debate. tonight's event is a lot better than that. which is not really a competent. one thing i learned from that is the new use of the word pivot. as long as tiger made me get up here which i do not like to do that much, i decided for the next minute we will talk about what i want to talk about. [laughter] phil: i will read to you from a 1997 issue of "sports illustrated." "the 1997 masters was a record-breaking week, be on the scope of any record book, tiger

broke down racial barriers that have been embedded in the sport since its inception. once identified as one have african-american and one half thai, what the public self from saw from those at the augusta national to those glued to their televisions was the first black man to win a major championship. and in truly historic fashion no less. augustine national, golfs eternal mecca, emanated exclusivity and elitism. the course had only begun allowing african americans to become club members prior to woods' victory. the cofounder in 1933 one said as long as i am alive, golfers will be white and caddies will be black. the quote does not mention champions. i was there that day, on the 18th green, the clubhouse, with its maintenance people, it's cooks, its waiters, emptied, african-americans dropped their frying pans, their mobs, their

writing pads, they came out to the 18th green to cheer. this was golf's jackie robinson moment. 19 years later, it is somewhat forgotten because of what happened next. tiger woods simply went on to transcend race. he is cheered by people from every nation and every color because of the dramatic way he won and the relationship with his mother and father, because of his relationship with his kids, because of his big smile and the way he competed. for 20 years, nike has been a small part of that journey, just a sideline but i can tell you, it has been an honor." [applause] tiger: thank you. when we first started the foundation 20 years ago, it was basically a traveling circus. i would hit golf balls around the country in various cities and try to raise funds for local junior golf charities and get some type of teach the kids,

there is a way to earn money and to earn a job and to earn a living besides going out there and playing professional golf. fast-forward, we had a tragedy here, 9/11 happened. i was in st. louis playing in the americas first championship. i drove home on the 13th, i drove nonstop, 18 hours and i kept thinking, what if i was in one of those planes in the building and i was gone, what would my foundation look like ? it would be gone. a week later, i said we need to create something different, we need to create something that the kids can call their own, something they can touch and feel and something that is bricks and mortar.

he said what do have in mind, we need to create a building where the kids will fit. he says, ok, let me go to work. 10 days later, he says, i have got this place in anaheim you might know. it is where i played my high golf right across from savannah high schoolh. the mayor had agreed to a 50 year lease, a dollar a year. they believe in what we can do for the community. i said, sweet. he says all right, what do you want to do question mark i said, we are going to change the foundation from golf-based to educational phase. he said, why? i was raised where family came first, then education, then sports. whatever sports may be, baseball, track, cross-country, or golf. let's go back to putting family and education first. he said, you're taking over. i said, really?

he said, you're ready. i set for the direction, you're the boss, let's go. charlie: this is represent a second part of your life in the you greeted the foundation with your dad in 1997? tiger: i am not going to be playing golf at the elite level for 20 more years. i would like to, but i know that is not going to happen, let's be realistic. i can't wait to get to a seat or a cart. [laughter] i drive around in my cart. put joey on the back. so that is where, this work is far more important than hitting and making a few putts. this work will change the world

and as i was alluding to earlier, these kids, they need our help, they need our support, they need our guidance. i think they deserve it. charlie: you both are passionate about science education, you have given money to oregon, tell me about that, that sense of your commitment. for both of you. phil: i think science is about the future. in a lot of ways, they are synonyms. i think that basically that will be what defines the united states and the world going ahead. to educate young people in that area is hugely important. charlie: and stem for you? tiger: our lives have changed so quickly so fast. i remember joking around earlier tonight that when i was in college we did not have the internet. i do not feel like i am that

old. we were talking about the dewey's it -- dewey decimal system and microfiche. this is a totally different world and it happened so quickly. why didn't happen so quickly, -- why did it happen so quickly? because of science. this is the wave of the future as phil is alluding to. charlie: how have you seen tiger change of the years as you have known him? phil: i will not pivot. obviously, he has gotten a little older. i am not talking about here -- hair. that he was, taking a chance on a skinny kid, he was skinny but he was already a phenom, so it was not that big a risk. we expected it to turn out well and it has turned out even better. he has obviously matured and i'm proud of the way he has matured. i am proud of the association. [applause] charlie: so that nobody in the

room does not want to know, how is your golf? tiger: i am playing and shooting good numbers, in the mid-60's and things of that nature. i need to get out there and do it in a retirement situation and -- do it in a tournament situation and i am getting there. getting to where i am feeling more explosive, getting faster, the balls are starting to jump up again and i am gaining confidence in my body. it is a lot of fun. i have seen the numbers, i have seen what these younger guys are doing and what they are able to do, my nubbers are climbing so i am excited about it and also it is about getting the job done and seeing the lowest score possible. i understand how to play and i am out there and i have to get out there and do it. just do it. [applause]

[laughter] tiger: so i will. charlie: there is also the question, when? [laughter] tiger: in the future. [laughter] charlie: what is it about him that makes us so curious about him and so rooting for him to come back? phil: it is really interesting that you have the five best players in the world, even the -- though tiger has not played in almost a year, his tv ratings go up 25%. the world is interested in tiger and it is because, if you want to be, look at the commercial aspects which is as we are talking about, that is the number of eyes that watch tv.

he has done it all. he is articulate, he is a great human being, he is handsome, and he wins. tiger: aww. [laughter] phil: it is the full package of what you are looking for and for us, an endorsement, what television is looking for in a hero. charlie: is it because he plays the game so well and people want to see him come back if they might be witnessing that, that is why the ratings go up? phil: probably, but i think they are rooting for him. in television, when you elect a president, he becomes the family and sports is a -- and music are the big parts of american culture that people identify with. tiger woods has been part of the family for 20 years and they want part of the family to come back. charlie: now they have this foundation and you know you're touching lives, to know that what the tiger foundation can do to change a young person's life

that has meaning as much as winning golf tournaments? tiger: as a sports figure, we are in the entertainment industry. we are on tv and retaining, people, entertaining people want to watch and they want to root or blue or whatever they want to do. that is part of it. what we are doing here with the foundation and helping these kids is literally going to change the perception and the reality of their lives and make it so much better not only for them but their entire families and their communities. we are trying to do it at the grassroots level and it has been fun these last 20 years, it has been fun but these next 20 and beyond will be absolutely incredible. charlie: what new directions might go with the tiger woods foundation other than we have talked about? tiger: we are sticking with

stem, we are very single-minded on that. i believe in being focused on the one thing and i think we have done that. i think there is different opportunities within that, what i mean by that is we can expand using our new digital platforms, not just here domestically but internationally. you can teach so many different kids in these different areas , that whatever their needs are, i think we will meet them through stem, and each individual city or state or country may have different needs, and it is up to us to work with the government bodies or states and cities at the local level to know what those needs are and we will create the programs that are necessary for those needs. charlie: will you take a more public role generally? tiger: absolutely. that is one of the reasons we created tgr, the new chapter two of my life.

i will take a more public role in that regard. i still want to take some -- still want to kick some butt tournaments. [laughter] charlie: that is the warrior spirit. have you known anybody, michael jordan, have you known anybody that has a will to win any higher than the guy sitting to your left? phil: no, it is right at the top. michael being one and lebron being another. maria sharapova, another one. [laughter] [applause] it is a common trait of the greats. charlie: define it for us. phil: serena williams also is maybe one. in her early years, she would really not play good until she was down and then she would not lose. i think that is what it is. they just refuse, and there are not very many of them.

you can see many people come along with great potential and the next great one. many people become the next great one. it can be rate, it comes more from inside than the outside. charlie: did you acquire that or were you born with it? tiger: i learned to develop it. i have always liked being people. [laughter] first of all, i wanted to beat my dad in whatever we were playing, and that to me was fun. i like to compete. i like to compete, i am very competitive by nature. very aggressive by nature when it comes to competing. i like mixing it up, not afraid to mix it up and get out there and try to get it done. charlie: there has been no diminution of that, that will, that intense desire?

tiger: the mind has not changed but the body certainly has. [laughter] it has gone through, i put it through its paces, i won through some tough injuries and tough times physically. but what has led me to do that has been i think the internal drive that has allowed me to overcome some of these obstacles, some of the different injuries i have had and played through, even some injuries that people do not know i have played through. the whole idea is once i start and compete, that is it. you just got there and compete in a try to figure out a way to get it done. phil: tiger's desire to beat his dad was real. he kept a scorecard, the first time he ever beat his dad and they went to the 17th hole, all even, and his dad went par par.

and tiger went par birdie. [laughter] we took the card and photographed it and we haven't it in a building in our campus which is coincidentally named the tiger woods building. it is about the size. it is signed by tiger woods at age 11, 10 months. in this sport, we lose far more than we win. tiger: taking a harder look at myself a lot of times, it is not fun. i messed up on this and i made that wrong decision there, i should have played that angle. why deny understand or remember what that -- putt looked like. that to me are things that are fixable but then again taking a hard look at myself at times and turning around for the next. charlie: we are here salivating herelbrat -- we are

celebrating the 20th anniversary of this foundation and we laid out the future and we talked but your game and her relationship with phil and in a sense, you have taken note of the fact that this is a second beginning. so, thank you. ♪

mark: i'm mark crumpton. you are watching "bloomberg technology." let's get a check on first word news. a new associated press poll has hillary clinton leading donald trump nationally by a staggering percentage point. percentageng 14 points. the poll has clinton at 51% and trump at 37%. the poll attributed to solid democratic turnout in early voting. an earthquake shook central italy on wednesday. a powerful aftershock closed a major highway. historic buildings were damaged. two months ago, an earthquake destroyed nearby villages, killing 300 people. for the first time in 25 years,