♪ >> you are watching book tv on c-span2, television for serious readers. here are some programs to watch out for this weekend, under author interview program, "after words", sara huckabee sanders reflects on her time as the white house press secretary for the trump administration, cnn chief media correspondent brian stelter offers his thoughts on the relationship between president trump and fox news. a former democratic congressman katie hill of california, chronicles the events that led to her resignation for it by schedule information about tb.org or consult your program guide. cnet hello welcome to today's virtual program. my name is laura rosenberger i'm the director of the

alliance for democracy and a senior fellow at the -- in your moderate for today. with that to introduce our special guest both have had the pleasure of working with. david is the author of race, america russian 100 years of covid interference. foreign-policy reporting going the "new york times", the new yorker in foreign affairs. steven is pursuing a doctorate in natural relations at the oxford up as a marshall scholar. he is an associate fellow at yale university where he received his undergraduate and masters degree i got to know david his interning on hillary clinton's presidential campaign. john brennan is a distinguished fellow he is a former scholar the university of texas in austin. his director of the central intelligence agency where he spent many hours in the situation room and previously

served as assistant to the president, homeland security and counterterrorism. specialists in middle eastern affairs and counterterrorism, john has received cell several awards for his contributions include the national security federal, national distinguished sub public service medal and the fbi director medallion but please join me in welcoming david shiner and john brennan. select david like to go riding today congratulations on the release of the book for before you disseminate specific aspects can you give us an overview of what the book is about? and importantly why you wanted to write about this topic? >> guest: absolutely. first i doing to say thank you both for being here. i'm really, really excited to talk about these issues in my book with you. i would say that i wrote this book because after 2016, after rush attacked her democracy and found it bizarre if not dangerous that operation was sort of treated as

unprecedented and novel because something is unprecedented that means is no history to it. that myths and misconceptions to suit whatever you are seeking to advance. soy sought to provide that history. i end up spending years of archives and talk an individual trying to re-create the history before the operation read what i do in this book is to map out the century long story of the electoral interference. show how the soviet union, as well as united states use their till actions to interrupt around the world. and brushes has interfered all around the world. look at 2016 and detail as part of that history. and use all of that background to chart out a task for the future. not only by 2016 but everything that came before it is a general purpose of the

book. that's why it needs to be written. >> thanks to david britt is a super interesting historical book. when putting this issue in historical context is something really interesting and necessary. like to pick up on that. the unclassified version of the 2017 community assessment of russia interference in the election found that quote russia's average influence the 2016 u.s. presidential election had a significant escalation in level of activity in scope of effort compared to previous opportunities break could you elaborate on how putin's recent efforts are different from the past? >> lawrence could speak with you again, even virtually. i'm pleased to be participating in this virtual event. because david has written a very excellent book, very well researched and written. believes i as to the literature. not lead to thousands eczema the years before.

what happened in 2016 spars russian interference, from my perspective as it did demonstrate a much more robust intense wide ranging effort on the part of the russians. partly that's because of the opportunities that exist when the thin the digital domain to cause problems. whether it be to go in and get e-mails and intercept them as well as use social media platforms. but there is a really determination that putin had to undermine hillary clinton's prospects and help donald trump. it was as though a wide ranging effort as part of the russian intelligence system. also working with various other mechanisms such as internet research agency to have a full-court press if you will, particularly in the last six or seven months before the electio election.

so the social media aspect of anything, was the one that was most surprising. but the newest elements of the russian effort but we know the russians are very, very sophisticated when it comes to operating in the cyber domain. inside think what we saw in 2016 was a real effort to undermine the integrity of that election. as well as try to tip the balance so that the outcome is something favorable. select that would be consistent with david's findings in the book. much of the tactics were similar to the soviet efforts are in the cold war, it was technology proud of you want to elaborate on both what the similarities were why the technology peace made such a defense in your min mind.

nothing about bladder prudence operation was original. when his predecessors had done in certain instances what our country had done. breaking that out into three components first the objectives. help donald trump and hillary clinton interfered in the electorate and our politics to accomplish those three to help the people for a generation. the russian g are you targeted our voting systems to access, penetrate and open them up to manipulation. in the postwar area, and his fellow travelers manipulated voting systems across eastern europe. in recent years targeted voting systems in countries like the ukraine. so again this is the application of the idea for the united states buried the second was taking what was private. private information about individuals in the democratic national committee making them public. so abolishing the line between

what is personal and was in in the public arena. again that's in the kgb idea. in the 1976 presidential election, the kgb presented a forgery without the personal life of the presidential candidate and sought the senate to media outlets to look at is personal life to describe his political career. instead having one forgery that is tens of thousands of real documents and to send them to newspapers upload online through wikileaks as a third-party cut out. they third was social media which had seen the most novel and in many ways in a real evolution. but what the russians were doing across the ira, was suppressing some voters, turning out others, sowing racial discord, scaring voters. appealing to sort of the leaks in personal abilities. and again that's an indication be as well as a cia has done all over the world.

they allowed russia to really enhances statics. the real tradition of electoral interference. but the idea behind the operation are not just well walk, but in some ways we can predict them moving forward because her 70 decades in the past. select thank you david. i think it is all really interesting the common thread there. but also will come later to some of the lessons we should be drawing from with that evolutio evolution. david has mentioned here the kgb and the cia, during the cold war were engaging these kinds of operations. but one of these things david's research confirmed this after the cold war, the u.s. moved away from engaging, but of course russia under putin had not actually both

elaborated, really doubled down. i will be interested in your sentiment of the reasons for that departure? i'm thinking on democracy and putin's own worldview. speech of their reasons it has evolved read certainly the united states has evolved with the russians. they are very much engaged trying to manipulate the processes and trying to shape the outcomes. during the height of the cold war in the aftermath of world war ii, really think the administration felt it was essential threat with the soviet union. they were involved in the disgrace to shape the birthing of number of countries in world war ii. they're working hard to ensure either liberal democracy and democratic systems were going to evolve and emerge.

i think successive u.s. administrations engaged in a lot of activities. in the public or whatever, tried to boost the prospect of governments local parties who were sympathetic to the western democratic model. i do think that u.s. administrations in the u.s. government has toured and seeing this exploitation of electoral system and process is that democratic values. and certainly when i was in the government and when i was in those circles in the white house situation, i am really relieved and argued strenuously about doing anything that is inconsistent with all those democratic values and ideals that we espouse globally. and i do believe the truth is

more powerful than misrepresenting the facts. from now i am talking about what is the situation in 2017. i don't know the trump administration is doing. and how does operating on the global stage. but certainly during the obama and the bush administration, those discussions i was involved in, there's never an effort to influence the outcome of a free and fair election. we tried to strengthen the ability of the governments to hold election. that is certainly true to increase voter turnout. but not try to advance the interests of the potential outcome with one candidate or another. i do think the global situation is change now compared to the post world war

ii environment. i've until january of 2017, the administration i work with saw that it was best to allow these processes to play out. >> thank you. it's interesting, david actually writes something that david quotes from you in his book as well, about the truth being more powerful. you are among several who are staunch opponents of using the idea of disinformation to counter russians own efforts for a think it's important concept. a lot of conversations on the policy side, that we hear about countering for an interference printer countering information. i think the tendency why don't we do the same thing back. i think that you made it very eloquent and really critical points about how the values

and principles of democracy need to be guiding not only our response but are tire approach. >> it think it is important for the united states to remember that we are fighting for principles and the democrat foundation in the country. we should never stoop to using the tactics of other countries. whether we are fighting the russians, whether we are fighting fascism, modern-day. whether we are biting military efforts. i think we really have quite a few and our vote that we can us use. and not stray from those basic principles and ideals. to make this country truly

what it aspires to be. which is a beacon of freedom and liberty. one that is built on ideals. i think being dishonest on the world stage. being dishonest anywhere is so counterproductive. that is why i am particularly dismayed by what i see. : : : to double down on truth as we are something we're seeking to protect and not allow it to be undermined. david, one thing you discuss in your book is why u.s. democracy promotion efforts are different from election interference.

in previous work i've done i laid out three key distinctions and i'd be interested in your reaction. first is that promotion in other countries openly and transparently. secondly democracy is may available to parties if they commit ode to the democratic process, and u.s. policy tries to give people a voice in determine thing country's future. in other words u.s. democracy is about strengthening the democratic process and foreign interference is for -- >> it marks a evolution of american foreign policy in the since that as director brennan said during the cold war the threat was an ideology and the strategy was to contain the ideology and using covert axe to prop up anticommunist

candidates -- a logical case to be made. the post cold war period, promoting democracy and one of the people i interviewed what president bill clinton who said he much preferred using organizations like ndi, iri, u.s. democracy promotion organizes to shore up elect troll processes over cia covert actions for a couple of reasons. one being that is public cannot be dramatically outed. so the opinion is that it's visible, that you know what america is doing and what america is doing to achieve its objectives which is to make sure countries can hold stable, free and fair elections which contrasts with the russian objective which is to degrade democracy, undermine democracy and the is that, therefore, parallel between our objective of strengthening versus theirs of undermining it all over the world which is a really important point. other folk is interviewed were

the president of montenegro who the russian intelligence tried to asass. >> the former president of colombia who said their democracy was under seem to sow discord. promoting democracy makes sense in our current environment because it helps to mitigate the effectiveness of the russian effort to tear democratic systems down by subverting elections and undermining elections. >> really interesting. director brennan on the point that david raises but other countries facing russia's tactics, i think in the u.s. we have a tendency in our american exceptionallist ways to think the challenges we face are exceptional to us, but in fact this is not a challenge that is exceptional to us. vladimir putin's russian has been engaging in these tactics across the european stage as well as in other parts of the

world. think david noted we need to understand the history in which russia's 2016 operation was occurring, and i think it's also important we understand the broader global context in the these tactics playing out. i'm interested in your reflections on what you have seen in terms of russian interference operations in other countries as well as if we need to be doing more in fact to work with our partners and allies, just as we would on any traditional security threat to really actually put together more of a coalition effort around protecting sanctity of our democracies. >> the way the russians before them tried to influence the u.s. elections for men decade they have been edge gauged on the effort in a global scale and global stage and i think they're

more active in other countries than in the united states. that's why things -- for many years i was looking at and tracking, russia would like to affect the outcomes of elections and political challenges in other countries so that they can have in those countries governments and politicians and individuals individuals who have even more sympathetic to russian policy goals and objectives. i don't think the russians like to roll over borders with tanks and then russian troops. ukraine is a different case. but to the extent they can attract, influence the outcome of elections and have independent politicians who will be in governments so they can get them to support maybe a lessening of sanctions against russia, get them to support rarous russian initiatives at the u.n. or other places. this is a very, very active russian effort.

whether or not you are talking about europe or africa ya or asia to influence the outcome of these political elects or political struggles, so that people will rise to the top who are going to either, i by design or just we happenstance, be the ones to support russian initiatives. so, russia uses a lot of different tactics, whether it's money that guess to their preferred candidates, sending out propaganda, disinformation to denigrate the prospect for candidates they want to lose an election of it's very active. we have talked with a lot of our partners over the years. i was involved in a number of discussions they foreign counterparts about the types of tactics and practices the russians use. so i think there needs to be greater awareness and i know we're focused on russia right now but i would say it's not

limited to russia as far as the opportunities for a number of foreign countries, governments s and intelligence services, to try to influence the outcome of those electoral systems. >> thanks. actually as a point i want to come back to what we're seeing from other actors, particularly i think authoritarian regimes who find this tool kitt to be particularly appealing, whether it influences the outcome of an election are so simply undermine and weaken the democratic foundation-of-their competitors as a way of weakening from within. this is a tool kitt that is proliferating, although i think there are distinctions amongst different actors based on long-term strategies which i'd like to unpack etch'll come back to that in a moment. david, stick with the history

point of this, just for another couple of minutes, one of the something conclusions for me that you reached is that even during the cold war, there was a difference in the u.s. and soviet tactics when it came to covert electoral enter phoenix, that u.s. tactics were rooted in democratic process itself even when seeking to pervert it and the soviet approach was corrupting activities that have little to do with the democratic process. you say these reflect the characteristics of states that execute them and in particular you point to the different domestic experiences of intelligence agencies so i'd be interested if you could talk more but why you found that to be the case and then director brennan given your extensive background, ask now to reflect on this particular point as well. >> i would say there are two key

differents in the soviet and now russian and the american approach as to covert electoral interference. first as you have been talk about and as we mentioned, russia's moved toward this practice in the post cold war period where america moved away from it except in rare exceptions such as in serbia. the core objectives is attacks underlying them and across them tee soviet systemic objective and now russia's systemic objective is to tear down democracy. the first -- the very first soviet operations to too this sort of thing in 1919 where with the express purpose of lenin to topple dramatic systems, abolish national borders and create a communist international utopia, through lies, deceit, through disinformation, to through bribe by, blackmail, extortion, those methodded that extend across decades. the american objective, the

genesis of cia covert expert to interfere in election was to preserve a democratic system. in italy in 1948, eastern european states fell interest communist, the communists after winning rigged elects undyed their democracy so harry truman authorized the cia to help the christian democrats win in italy and prevent the outcome. in those operations that followed you saw things like orchestrated voter registration drives, get out the vote efforts, making sure that campaigns knew how to reach and influence the masses in effective ways, in campaigning tactics that mirror what campaign does in the united states. the point was that the cia's hand was hid canner when i would talk -- i interviewed a former kgb general and they described figuring out how to figure out what someone's vulnerabilities were to blackmail them into doing what they wanted in relation to an election and that's different than what i found the cia's approach to be. so even when we were in this

game, this systemic objective this tactics differ, which is just one of the reasons why anyone who seeks to say there is equivalency between america and russia hire is totally missing the ball in various respected, one of which being we approached this idea in pretty different ways and the lines we have been willing to cross have dissed across time. >> really point points. director brennan, i would invite any reflections on this. >> i guess the the prism we look to world through and there's a similar discussion in moscow but what happened in world war ii, in terms of who was right and who was wrong, the good guys and the bad guys. agree with david our efforts since world war ii have been to try to preserve and strengthen democracies. i think the united states over the years sometimes has engaged in certain types of unsavory

practices or tactics that were justified because the end justified the means in terms of whether it be disinformation or whatever, but i do think that the soviet soviet union others dissolution and the evaporation of the ideological drives between moscow, it's much more real politic and that vladimir putin just sees opportunities to massage what is going on in other countries to get favorable outcomes and i don't think there's a real concern on the part of putin and others about engaging still in these very, very unsavory tactics work it be black mil, intimidation, bullying, sending money to candidates you don't want and then expose the moneys as being tainted. so, i think there's a lot of

dirty tricks the russians have engaged in over the years. innovate saying it was only the russians but i would like to think that at least the main purpose behind a lot of the u.s. efforts and that the cia and others were involved in over was designed to ensure that democracy was going to survive and flourish despite that ideological drive that was coming out of the soviet union. >> if could i add a quick thing. i agree with what he just said and want to make clear it is not accurate to say the cia has only ever organizationed voter registration drives and turnout initiative. that is not true. disinformation was spread by the agencies in italy and chile in chile a fail operation went to coupe. votes were authorized to be

bought in purr sure oft ends purported to be for democracy but the history is complicated and there are exceptions in which the cia did thing is imagine today americans would say are lines we shouldn't be crossing and i agree. >> thank you for that and to be clear from your findings those are activities conducted in the past that are not today. >> precisely. >> david, question how in the past and present one of the goals of russia's operations or the soviet union's operations has been not just getting particular kid d candidates elected but undermining democracy itself. your bork defines covert elections as a concealed effort to influence a democratic volt

of suggestion succession. you find efforts by russia are not on influencing the outcome of an election per se but on fomenting discord as an end in itself and undermining the democratic process and attacking a country from within. this is consistent with other reports from research institutes, the senate intelligence committee, from the. [unintelligible] ens community, and franklin fore had a theme to is recent consider store not atlantic and he says boost thing trump campaign was a tack take #democracy rest in peace remains a larger objective. i'm just interested in your reflections on whether in some ways we actually tend to think about electoral interference or

foreign interference in too narrow a term remember focusing jounce on the electoral outcome hinder us from seeing the ongoing activities that we see happening. >> so i would actually flip it, chillings that ford's argue. which i agree with is that russian objective is to transform democratic systems interest authoritarian crypt versions of them. s which is presuesly why electoral matters so much. i was struck when i interviewed a kgb general for decades and he described elections as a once every four years opportunity as an irresistible opportunity to manipulate the future of a democracy, to sow doubt but the sanctity of the democracy and tear down the democracy. there's a reason there's this practice orphone that stretch across the century which is to target the elects. why the kgb and now russia is

engaged it in and such consistent and well-rooted ways is that elections are the heart of the dream yeah, unable progress and order and when you target those processes and sow doubt whether the people who are elected reflect the will of the people, whether the people who are i elected are loyal to the people or loyal in fact to the foreigners who helicopter put them in their chair you're sowing doubt but the very sovereignty of your state. so there's an influence operations that is not aimed at an election, that's pad but it's not existential, whereas if you are able to basically take away the future of a state, to show the world as well as the people of the state your deckcracy doesn't actually have a process of succession which you can believe, the way that democracies are die are to corrupt versions of themselves almost all of the time and that is what russia is seeking to achieve and that's why put is so

aggressively targeting our election, donald trump is a means to an en, it's chaotic, disruptive and undrastic nature is what putin likes because it helps hmm to at tear down the democracy why he is supporting him and undermining candidates who are harder oregon russian and abid by the leader of a well functioning dreamese. >> those are important reflections reflections and i think you make an important case here for why elections for the preeminent institution of the democracy. they're not the only institution that is important. one of my colleagues has a phrase i'll plagiarerrize here which is that when it comes to foreign interference, elects are not a starting opinion or inpoint, they're a flash point. director brennan, intelligence communities, the mueller report

ands found the russian operation targeting the 2016 election started in 2014, david chronicles in his book with the agents that came to the united states. but we also knew that in the aftermath of the 2016 election, russia's social media activity increase substantially in order to foment discord about the president's election and support for him. i'd be curious for your reflection on this, too how we should conceive of ongoing foreign interference in the context of elects as well ason. >> i think political discord in the out and increasing porlarization in the country and the fighting among americans within congress and other places is something that russia sees was very favorable to its interests because if the out is focused inward and trying to resolve issue order fight with each other, our ability to

actually carry out our global responsibilities is undermined. so, i agree with david, there's an effort to really try to ensure that they -- the russian does whatever they can in order to hurt the u.s.' ability to be that leader of the free world to counter russian efforts globally as we have seen the last couple of years, unfortunately americans are at each other's throats and you look at congress increasingly dysfunctional but all of the porlarization and the political fights taking place. so in 2016 we saw that the russians were trying to sow discord within the democratic party between bernie sanders and hillary clinton and the more they can agitate and stimulate these political and social -- within the united states-it is -- russians objective to weaken america's able to use its i think exceptional capabilities

on a global stage. so, i do think at the last couple of years that putin has not just looking at the outcome of the 016 elect but looking at what is happening inside the united states where there is this significanttive cord discord that is helping putin moving forward with his agenda. >> david, picking up on one of those opinions, one theme in your book which is consistent with other research is the long history of the soviet union and now russia weaponnizedding race in its effort to sow discord in the u.s., to suppress the black vote. i would just especially sort of in this moment in time in which we're in, i'd be interested of you could elaborate on that through line of the use of race as a weapon, and if you have any thoughts on what that means for the national security community in terms of maybe taking on racism in a more serious way

than we have today. >> one i was struck by the kgb payments is how often race came up, how often the operational objective, the intelligence collective had to do with how to divide americans along racial as well as religious lines to further the goal which you both alluded and discussed, which is to divide the united states at home and to show the world abroad the united states is, quote, hot bed of hate that is dysfunctional and uneven have iable and no other country should aspire to be. in fact the american model is fraud and the russian tradition of interference in elections and otherwise is to prey upon pre-existing division friday fissures and in the systemic racism they see a glaring division so easy to exploit and

embarrass america at home and abroad. staged hate crimes during the cold war, statemented letter that purported to show extraordinarily racist behavior from americans con octobered by the kgb and -- signed kkk as a lie. so what we need to understand, and i really believe is that when people talk about how to defend our elected, one step we have to take is confront racial injustice in our society, systemic race sim, police brutality because the more well function as democracy we have the less divided democracy we have the less opportunity the is for russia to not only sow gigs but also to make us believe they're not attacking because because a divided society is very easily manipulated and very easily distracted and that again is what russia is best at exploiting, so in a lot of ways the racism and the racial issues

we see in our society in a certain sense they're domestic but in another sense they're real national security problem because they're so easy to weaponize from the perspective of russia as the kgb did for generations before us. so i hope we're able to take steps toward mitigating that glaring vulnerability in our society which has the added benefit of create ago more equitable society for our own democracy but the issues are hand in hand and this is not ueek to putin. when the ira focused on black americans it surprised people. didn't surprise the people who know things mutt russian intelligence and didn't surprise the kgb general i was able to interview who said that's the oldest trick in the book, your greatest vulnerability, the racism. bedded in american society. so this is a long-running issue that i hope we're able to address moving forward. >> i couldn't agree withyou more and also points to in this issue

set in countering foreign interference in our democracy how our typical stove piping between foreign policy and domestic policy needs to be tomorrow down, where so many of the steps we need to do to make ourselves more resilient and reduce our vulnerability starts within ourselves and at home. another area you point to, this historical fact and what we saw in the ira and gru do in 2016 is the use of traditional media as a mega phone and amplifier for the weaponized information. and the weakening and hyperpartisan media we see in the u.s. i think -- at least i argue is another area we are actually making ourselves more vulnerable and strengthening our media institutions domestically would make it more difficult for russia to be able to successfully use these tactics.

questions specific to 2016 before we turn to audience question and answer. director brennan, david writes in 2016 the focus on one interference tactic, the cybermanipulation of voter role order tabulation may have disdistracted from other threats or tactics russia wag engaging in, e-mail releases and social media. some of your colleagues are quoted talking about how in fact the social media aspect of the campaign was really not identified until after the election, much later on. so, i'd be cure your from your curious from your perspective having through this. as we approach the 2020 election are we at risk from your privilege of having the blinders on, focuses on one tactic,

member the last battle while missing what may be the next war, and then secondly, are there lessons that you took away from the experience and challenges of the obama administration failed in dealing with -- faced in dealing with russian's interference operations in real-time you think are instructive for how these kinds of campaigns should be handled in the future. >> we mentioned the ira several times and just make sure that listens don't counsel fuse the ira with my irish relatives. that's the russian internet research agency we're returning to, and in david's book, it was always -- former colleagues who were out of government at the time throw darts against those in the government at the time of the 2016 interference and what should or santa heave been done.

i don't think we were distract by focusing on -- i think it is the point we're trying to preserve the integrity of the election and by disabling voter registration which we knew the russians could that would cast doubt on the integrity of the election to a lot of things we were trying to do to prevent technical interference that we knew the russians that the capability to do. on social media it is really the most difficult challenge that we faced then and that we continue to face. we're struggling with what is allowed in social media in terms of truth and fabrications and it's difficult to term what is coming from abroad and what the russians are behind and the russians i think have been really quite capable in terms of taking advantage of to freedoms and lisch inside the united

states, including the free media and press, whatever else, and disguising their activities and masking their activities as being in fact from americans. and so as the head of the cia where we focus on foreign intelligence, i couldn't take a look at what was happening in u.s. social media platforms because that's not foreign intelligence and rick for the fbi and law enforcement to do things because you have to respect privacy and civil liberties and freedom of speech and so this is something that i think the russians as well as others have very, very differently taken advantage of -- deftly and take advantage of and use that very large echo chamber in the social media environment to be able to propagate its views. it's happening every day. it continues to happen every day and we see that twitter and faints and others continue to struggle with what they should allow or what -- how they should intervene in these activities.

and unfortunately there's so much of false information and fact brian indications from domestic sores -- fabrications from domestic sources as well. the systems in our voting infrastructure is important and i thing congress has to make it less vulnerable, that type of foreign interference, but that social media environment, that information environment, that ecosystem, that people can play in so readily and that russian intelligence services again have just developed a lot of different tactics and practices and tools, that's one i think we continue to struggle with and we need to come to grips with it. it's a complicated issue and the issue you point to of authorities and the different roles of the intelligence community is one that is often

not understood in the public conversation on these issues and it's an important one to lift up here. david, do you want to elaborate on this finding from your book and this piece whatout write pout. >> yes, would say a core fining of my book as relates to 2016 -- it's tough to explain this while talking with someone who was at the table and dealing with the issued but one ofindings a drier brennan discussed there are two types of electoral interference, efforts to alter ballots to change votes and efforts to influence minds, just by propaganda which is what the dnc -- the research agency, social media piece were and what i found is that the glaring vulnerabilities of our electoral infrastructure in the summer of 2016, the access that russian military intelligence had to the systems was to flairing and spokesmanly explosive that the overriding policy objective of the obama team as explain by

many of his aides was to just maintain as director brennan said the sanctity of the vote and make sure the elengths wasn't disrupted. that white the election itself, the cybersecurity coordinator in the white house, mike oacademy, was running a crisis team awaiting a russian cyber attack because this was a real hypothetical that could turn interest a reality in which president obama was by reaching ago tout states and a critical infrastructure designation the other finding is in focusing on that the the problem there was no retaliation for the other -- or debitors easier to neglect or say this is an seasonable level of interference in some sense of the e-mail releases and what was understood which my understanding is was very little of the social media manipulation because if you -- putin would

escalate to allty altering the vote and what i find in my book is that to secure an election you need to secure both things, you need to prevent direct vote alterations and do what you took reduce the ability of foreign actors to manipulate your people covertly. i would say the first bucket there can be brought to zero if you secure your systems but something history instructs you'll never keep foreign actors completely out of your environment. elects are vulnerable and that's what lovein and putin see. you can mapping the threats and seek to deter bad behavior but i think it's an illusion to say that if not for for example donald trump we could get this problem under control because the attack happened when president obama was the president and he tried to stop it but it still happened the point of the book is that addressing those two avenues i

securing an he expects and what can be achieved and showing what he do to our vote while actually manipulating americans put the obama team in a very difficult position in seeking how to balance responding to the two types of interference at the same time. >> it was especially difficult since since one of the major candidates was publicly solicitous of russian interference which was a stark difference from any previous election in the united states that i'm aware of where one of the candidates was encouraging that type of interference. >> you had a candidate seeking to sow doubt be the integrity of the process and whether the process may be rigged which was also in the some of the russians to cast doubt on the integrate of the process. so certainly complicating there

to be sure if want to take a question from the audience. what would a national strategy look like to address disinformation only social media by russia, china and other parties and i might justed a add to that, one of the analytic conclude is reached in my work is that the pollitticization is one of the barriers to addressing and you touched on this in your point. so, i'm wondering, what you think that means about any national strategy to address these issues going forward regardless of who wins in november. how too we take the political aspects of this out and build a national strategy to count are these efforts? both of you. >> so, i would say in my study over history one of most damaging things the current president has done as director

brennan referenceds not only solicit foreign interference but convince tens of millions of americans that foreign interference doesn't even exist, that russia isn't doing what we know russia is doing because in doing that what he has done is made this a partisan issue. he said that if you believe in this issue, then you're just trying to help the democrat, when in truth this is anything but a partisan issue. again, what history shows, who did the kgb target in the 1960 and '68 election? richard nixon, a republican. in the 1976 and 1984 election they targeted ronald reagan, republican. now they like a republican but don't like any one particular political party. they like the person who advances russias interests and that's not america's another. in the future what i hope -- this will not happen under our current pratt but the next president has to do what is possible to remind americans that even if russia's helping

your person, it is a national affront, offensive, undermining the very notion of what it means to be a sovereign democracy, and we need to come together to unite against it because any response to this threat has to have the buyin of the people because so much of what it means to manipulate an election is manipulating people if if you release e-mails and focus on the gossip of the e-mails rather than the source you're misplaced. i if you north disconcerning on the content and taking in what you see you're being played. other countries have come to grips with that, like in france their population, when russia tried to pull something similar said we don't want to let another country determine our leaders, but in america right now, not only have we not figured out how to dress the threat and we haven't even agreed the threat exists because of our current pratt and that's so profoundly unfortunate and two american presidential candidates during the cold war

were approached by soviet ambassadors offering to help them get elected and the immediate reaction of the candidate was get the hell away from me. this is offensive and if i win, if i lose i do not want the help of your government. we need to get back to that attitude and i was so disappointed to see the congress pull out a provision that would fierce and avail campaigns to report offers foreign help. if we can't even do that i don't know what it would mean to defend an election when be say way want foreign interference in our elects. >> unfortunately the congress is such a dysfunctional cesspool of partisanship they will be unable to dress tis in a bipartisan, care and significant way. after the 9/11 attacks and the standup of the 9/11, my an independent congressional man dated commission, came forward with a number of recommend that

put partisanship aside because we recognized this was a serious threat to u.s. national security. i have argued and i lost my arguments -- some type of commission, focusing on the cyber environment. i'm very concerned but how troublemakers whether it be russians or chinese or ridge criminals or whomever will take advantage of that environment to advance their interests and i think it's the challenge of the 21st century and i would advocate for there to be some notable members of both parties as well as businessmen and futurists and engineers and others who can come together and look at what is in the realm of the possible and not have a partisanship lens really governing what they're going to advocate for. this is something that i thick is going to take quite a while. maybe two or three year commission, because it is just

so complicated. it was in my portfolio at the white house in terms of homeland security that was in that portfolio and what made my head hurt most and as we talked to already, the russians and others are taking full advantage of that environment and we struggle as a nation to try to figure out how to deal with it without trampling upon the prims of liberty and freedom, speech and privacy. it's a tough question. >> but critically important and potentially maybe an area if we can be humble enough to learn from our allies we may be able to do that of the the european parliament just established its open special committee on foreign interference in democracy that is just getting stood up right now. our allies in australia have had

special committee on foreign interference and on social media and disinformation, so maybe our allies can do a little bit of legwork for us if we're humble enough to actually listen to their recommendations and learn some lessons from them. want to turn to another question from the audience, which is about the -- on the question of actually cyber intrusions into the election system. what would be the resources really necessary to protect those systems and what are the impediments to getting this type of investment together and it really builds on some of what director brennan was just saying on the gridlock in congress where we have seen some pretty significant battles over attempts to get additional funding for election systems, where we have seen numerous bipartisan bills that have been

introduced whether the secure elect act that would have put in place higher standards for cyber security of election systems that just died on the vine. interested in your thoughts to either of you on what we really need to do on that investment side and how we actually get there. let start with director brennan. >> the systemed are are to reserve, the purview of the states and in 2016 be hat a disof a time trying to assure the states and governments and others would take the appropriate steps and her measures under to 'protect the voting system. and so again this is something that is ideally the focus of congressional hearings and discussions and debates, and looking at how we're going to resource as well as try to

strengthen the systems. one thing i'm worried about are the i think rather blatant efforts to suppress votes in a variety of states, because of political objectives that individuals have, and we really should be trying to facilitate the greatest extent possible the ability of every american eligible to vote, to vote. and a lot of the falls narratives about how write yip ballots will about so manipulated. again this is just an effort to i think suppress the votes that could be a threat to some individual as women as some parties. so -- as well as some parties. while the congress is at each other's sort throats it's difficult to see the way ahead. i'm hoping with a new administration or new attitude there will be a real effort to try to bring bipartisanship to these very critically important

national security issues and not continue to fuel divisions that exist. think thwart our able to address these challenges effectively. >> another question from the audience, what should we be most aware of as we approach the election in november and director brennan you just highlighted those really key issues. david, i'd be interested if you have any thoughts on that particular question as well. >> sure. i wouldn't say i'm watch fargo couple of things between now and november. the first is how, again, breaking these operations into the two tracks, the first is how russia will seek to manipulate americans into supporting donald trump, opposing joe biden or just into pitting them against each other. those tactics are always evolving. last time it was stolen e-mails and social media manipulation but that was just the latest episode in a very long story.

what is certain itself russia tries to manipulate people it will be updated tools, new memes, billing on preexisting ideas so we should watch out for that. think when we get to election day itself the question persists whether russia will veal seek to disrupt eher to try to affect the outcome or perhaps more maas by just toshow don't around the legitimate si of votes whether it be causing chaos in polling stations and i worry we are more vulnerable to that sort of attack because of the coronavirus in which there's already so much doubt built interest people can vote safely, securely and fairly, that it makes it so that only the slightest disruption -- russia loves to take advantage of pre-existing weakness to provide one candidate on the incumbent with fooder to say this wasn't actually fair. the last thing i say i'm watching out for is con continue generality planning.

electoral operations don't end with single elects. that's never really lines up historically. there's always continuous engagement and the interference in the nations you're targeted. russia started targeting the 2016 election in 2014, to sow discord toward hillary clinton and intended to continue to undermine hillary clinton after the election had she won, so, were ed hypothetically to win i would watch for how russia will continue to engage in politics and dangerous to presume that without donald trump this would stop bulls what history clarifies is that it started long before donald trump and that russia will continue and other actors will continue to try to manipulate our elect toll processes once trump is no longer part of the american plate sal system. so a myth is is everything to do with him and i think it's important to dispel that pause the challenge isn't going away because regardless of who wins in november.

>> that's an important point we have to focus on and for all the reasons director brennan laid out hour complicated the issues are, something we all need to be very focused on, this is a problem that's not going away and we need to focus and commit to tracing it. it's time for one last question. turn to the questions of other actors. i would just love some final reflexes whether in the context of november or more broadly how you both starting with director brennan are think but other actors, david's book focuses on russia in particular, but what are you seeing, we hear a lot from the administration about chinese interference operations, certainly seem them do things on tie juan, in -- taiwan. and australia.

what are moe concerning pout other factors. >> i think the chinese as well as others, the iranians and -- have tremendous cyber capabilities, number one. whether talking about trying tober fear technically or through social media influence operations. but also i think there is -- if you look at countries around the world, they have -- astute followerred of u.s. politics and not just the presidential level. we have been talking but the presidential elect be senators and members of the house of rep tide have strong views on certain issues and some of these foreign actors may be aiming to try to get some of these individuals out of office as a way to enhance their prospects for better treatment by the congress or whatever vis-a-vis the countries, talking about sanctions on iran or tariffs on china or whatever.

but then just to make final point for the final question. democracy is pretty messy, and i think it's becoming even messier over the last 240 plus years since the founding of the country, and there are lot of things -- aspects we have been talking about, electoral interference and russians and cyber but other things also that -- tend to fuel some of these problems, whether you're talking about these campaign finance laws, gerrymandering or other things. and we want to make sure that just the way the national-international ecosystems have really evolved and grown and changed of the last 240 years, thad to be rethinking these democratic principles, not move a. from it but what to do to streppen and ensure the principle offed democracy are going to be able to thrive in this technology include driven 21st century, and i think too many people are

holding on to past practices and it's difficult to change systems and that's why the people look at the united states and all the problems we have now and then compared to maybe maces that have an authoritarian leader whether it be china or whatever, that strong man model seems to be more atrick of to some of those people who are resistant to change. i think that types of things we talk bog in david's book, why it's very important that david was able to put what happened in 2016 interest it's historical context and privilege, we need to take a step back and look what was we need to do to ensure the american experiment is going to continue to thrive and is going to be able to deal effectively with the challenges we face, both domestically as well as internationally and it's something that i think can be our legacy for future generations to get back on a productive track as opposed to one that we're on right now.

>> so well put in the context of the current moment where we sear drastic back satellite and resurgence of authoritarian jim, doubling down and updating and modernizing our dreamcracy -- democratic processes. david, any final thoughts sneer. >> i think that about covers it. would just say ten thank you to you both. really can't imagine two people would to the more but these issues and who have lived through these issues and studied these issues and this has just been so fantastic. so thank you no you beth for reading my book and -- both for reading my back, being here is wonderful. >> thanks to you, david, the author of "rigged, america, russian and 100 years of covert electoral interference'" to john brennan, former cia director forks for joining us. thanks to our viewers for

joining us here for this conversation. this evening we encourage you to order a copy of david's book through your local independent poock store and thanks again for joining us and have a great night.

recently our weekly author interview program "after words" thought on he call the new face of socialism. >> i identify and try to diagnose this new type of socialism, which is a marriage of classic socialism and identity politics. so think of classic socialism as essentially a strategy of

marxian division between the rich and poor loosely speaking, class divide. for the modern american socialist left the biden society is not just that it's also a race divide, black against white, it's a gender divide, male against fee feel, a sexual oreown addition device, straight against gay and trans gender and also an immigration divide, legal against illegal. so one may say while marc was trying to carve up society into two groups the left is trying slice american society into many different -- across many different lines. why are they doing? because they think that if we divide society in these eight different ways, we can assemble a majority coalition of aggrieved victim grouped that can come together and then sort of take on everybody else. they're trying to get the 51% in the firm belief that democracy

itself will then legitimize them looting and oppressing the other 49%. this is what they call democratic socialism. to he me it's a form of gangsterism. >> the book is the unite of socialism. visit our website and click on the word word tab to view this and other episodes of "after words." >> next, bernard-honry levy, look at the impact of the coronavirus around the world and then tiffany cross offer has thoughts on the power over the black vote. and later, author and political commentator, armstrong william discusses this book, what black and white america must do now. consultor program guide or visit booktv.org for more schedule information.