no billing and empowering in terms of this country stands for and the greatial writers like harper reed are eeminding -- like harper le are saying our tribe wants to be something special, not just a city on a hill but a city that cares and works with one another and understands that politics is indispensable to learning about progress for as much people as possible. "q&a" sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span. some of thek at recent changes to president trump's national security team. this is 30 minutes. host: joining us is gary schmitt, the former executive director of the white house for an advisory board and the

codirector of the center for the americanies at enterprise institute and she is here to talk about the recent changes in president trump's national security team, more shakeup news as we move into this hour. , we read aet to that headline a little bit ago that talked about the russian cyber attack or attempt to attack the american energy grid. thatignificant is that russia is targeting now critical infrastructure within the united states? it is critically important. everything in this country runs on the grid, from our cell phone to the electronics we use. our grid has been exposed for a number of years. i remember talking about a security firm a couple years ago

and he was talking about some of the efforts he was tracking, both russians and the chinese tried to get into the grid. this has been a problem for a number of years and it was good to see that it has become much more of a public issue. host: you agree with the experts that it is not time to panic but this is something that the united states should keep an eye on? guest: i always think it is time to panic. is, defense when you talk about cyber security always lags behind the offense of effort. i think news about this might generate a little more energy to beef up our defensive posture. host: i want to move to the personnel issue surrounding national security in this administration. "the washington post" is reporting that national security advisor h.r. mcmaster is all but out here in

president trump has decided to remove h.r. mcmaster and is talking about replacements. trump is now comfortable with outing mcmaster with whom he never personally gelled but is willing to take time executing the move to ensure that the general is not humiliated and that there is a strong successor lined up. would that move mean in terms of national security? guest: i think it is damaging, frankly, because what you have is a situation where you want somebody with expertise, you want somebody who has been there and this kind of constant ,urnover leads to instability at least instability inside the government and you have a new person who has the direct security policy, but also internationally. people begin to wonder, are you speaking for the president or

not because there is so much turnover. they are never quite sure how long president x is going to be in that position. the instability is damaging to the president's agenda. host: this news comes right on the heels of the firing of text -- of rex tillerson. from ajust weeks away potential meeting between president trump and kim jong-un, the leader of north korea. talk about that timing. guest: i think one reason why mr. tillerson has been let go is because the president was uncomfortable with the secretary of state and wanted to move into that office somebody he had a better relationship with. knew het mike pompeo was getting the job a few months ago and has been preparing for the switch. sadly, i think it was handled poorly, mr. tillerson being told he was gone by a tweet is not

the appropriate way to do these things. in terms of the report i just read about trying not to humility -- to humiliate general mcmaster, it seems that this sort of drawnout process might be affecting the exact opposite result. guest: i think so. you never want to embarrass people. mr. tillerson is a decent man. he was probably not the right man for this job for a variety of reasons, but humiliating something not only humiliates the person but it sends a single to the rest of the government about instability in the white house. by thee are joined codirector of the director for security studies at the american enterprise institute as well as a former executive director of the white house foreign intelligence advisory board from 1984 to 1988. we are talking about the president's national security team.

can call, republicans, and independence. -- an independents. you talked about whether rex tillerson was right for the job of secretary of state. he had the backing of former republican officials like condoleezza rice. why was he not necessarily a great fit at the top? guest: a number of reasons. he had never been in d.c. being inside the beltway does matter. i do not think he had a strong foreign policy vision, it was not like he had this expertise to bring to the job. that, he did not have a personal relationship with this president. given this president's personality, i think it was inevitable there were going to be tensions and difficulties.

everybody speaks of mr. tillerson as a decent human being but he was probably a fish out of water. host: let's take a look at a bit of secretary tillerson's fail where -- farewell address after news of his firing broke. [video clip] much work remains to respond to the troubling actions on the part of the russian government. how itsust assess actions are in the best interest of the russian people and the world more broadly, continuing on their current trajectory is likely to lead to greater isolation on their part, a situation with just not in anyone's interest. to my colleagues in the state department, much remains to be done to achieve our mission on behalf of the american people, with allies and with partners. by thanking -- for the

privilege of serving by you. the 300 million americans, thank you for your devotion to a ofe and open society, to ask kindness toward one another, to honesty and the quiet hard work you do every day to support this government with your tax dollars. all of us want to leave this place as a better place for the next generation. i will now return to private life, as a private citizen, as a proud american, proud of the opportunity i've had to serve my country. god bless all of you, god bless the american people, god bless america. host: his decision to focus on russia as part of that farewell address, russia is part of the area where he in the president did not always agree. what do you think about what he said about russia and you think it was a message to the white house? definitely.

there was always this tension a lot of policy areas. there was a tension both the congress and the national security bureaucracy believed that russia was a threat that had to be dealt with strongly in the white house was not on that same page. having said that, the national security strategy they released in late december, the white house strategy, does speak about russia as a competitor. we can say that, but you still have to do things to match your rhetoric with deeds. host: virginia is calling on our democratic line. washington, virginia, you're on the line. say.r: i have one thing to feel russia put president trump in office.

nobodymp does not want that does not like him and agree with him. america was strong. i feel as though he has got to go and got to go in a hurry. if not, i would like to know how much the united states of america oh russia since he has been in there? i want to hop on two point she made, meddling in the election and coalescing around people who do not agree with him . guest: on the first point, it is essential that we prevent that from happening, we are an open society so the doors are always cracked open a little bit so it

is always a difficult task to keep foreign interference, but on the other hand we have to deter that by taking strong action. i think in that respect, the white house has been lacking. i disagree about people agreeing with him. mike pompeo, when he was a member of congress and also as the director of the cia has made clear that he thinks russia is a real problem. is aat respect, if there disagreement between the president and mike pompeo, it is over russia. been mike pompeo, who has selected by the president to go to the head of the state department. talk about his reputation. is he somebody who world leaders will likely be able to put their trust in, maybe more than rex tillerson? guest: that is an essential

point, that he does have a good relationship with the president. they did not know each other before the election. on a daily basis he is briefing the president as the director of the cia, and i think they have developed something of a personal relationship. i think that does matter when he is talking to foreign officials because they will have more of a sense than they did with mr. tillerson that when mr. pompeo is saying something in is something the president agrees with. it is a stronger hand at state. host: lawrence is on the independent line from syracuse, new york. caller: good morning. could you talk more about the grid? i am concerned about what could happen with the hacking. i've heard they have the capability to attack a nuclear plant and have it malfunction or even explode.

could you talk more about that? guest: i'm not an expert on how the grid works, but i do know there is dangers with nuclear power plants that if your safety mechanisms are disabled the chances of an accident, which would be a serious problem when you're talking about that kind of power plant are issues that need to be addressed. in some respects, it is always difficult to protect your cyber systems. one of the things people look at is getting redundancy into their system so that if there is an attack, you have backup systems that allow you to put things back in order and a quick fashion. defense buttion of it is also a question of resiliency. johnny is on our republican line from virginia. trump is clearly our

first read party president, i mean red party as in russian backed president. that.es about we are going to have to go back to a morse code because the way these guys are getting things , i'm disappointed about that about our legislative and judicial branch. we deserve to check this guy and they will not do it. he is a red party president. host: i want to give jerry a chance to respond to the issue about government oversight and checks and balances. take: one lesson we can away from the current situation is the degree to which, if this

was a parliamentary system and mr. trump was the prime minister, there would be less checks and balances. it is the striking the degree to which, even though the republicans control both houses ,f congress and the white house congress still has investigations going on. the courts have often said no to the president when he has put forward executive orders. it may not be the healthiest of situations but it certainly suggests that our separation of powers is working better than many people would have expected. host: we are joined by gary schmitt of the american enterprise institute and he is the former executive director for the project for the new american century's and an adjunct professor at john hopkins university. he is here discussing some recent moves within the presidential administration as

part of his national security team. let us talk about the president's pick to lead the cia , she has been described as a tough person from her time at the cia. there is also been controversy over this nomination. to the washington post, just every year after the september 11 attack, she was dispatched by the cia to oversee a secret prison in thailand contractors waterboarded and al qaeda suspect three times and subjected him to brutal

interrogation techniques. she showed her willingness to take part in the agency's rendition, detention, and interrogation program. there is also a report she was involved in recordings related to waterboarding during her time. is she going to have a tough time with confirmation and what are your thoughts about her nomination? guest: she is going to have a tough time. it is probably a useful exercise that we have this debate about interrogation again. i do not think that can be avoided. she is also going to have a tough time as a political matter because the republicans who might support her only have 51 senators. marginve a one senator in the senate. host: and rand paul has already

come out against her nomination. mccain wouldnator also likely vote against her because of the issues having to do with waterboarding. 49. brings you down to she has a reputation, 30 years of exemplary service as a clandestine officer. you do not get the position she has had a must people think you're doing a good good job. on the other hand, she has to defend her role in that period. host: is it a defense that she was carrying out orders from the top and at the time these interrogation techniques were not banned? does that carry any weight? guest: politically, not as much as one would hope. it does matter if you are not behaving in a roadway but you

are carrying out responsibilities. most honest people would say that the issue is a complex one. it is not so clear that what she was doing was illegal at the time. it might've been unethical, but again that is a debate that we are going to have to have. host: when is calling from -- from columbus, georgia on the democratic line. assume you have multiple degrees behind your name. i challenge you to read the definition and characteristics of a sociopath. all of what you're talking about and everybody else is talking about, why this happened like tillerson got fired, how mccain got fired, all of this is going on on a daily basis.

this is based on a president that is a sociopath. anyone who deals with this type of person will be turned to dirt , their name and reputation and everything else. this country, the fbi, all of it will fall. you cannot deal with a sociopath and everybody seems to be ignoring it. host: i want to give gary schmitt a chance to respond. guest: i do have a lot of letters behind my name, none of which are medical. i do know psychologist and psychiatrist and one of the things they will say is that you have to have a patient before you are able to comment about the mental health of somebody. ,et me go to the larger issue which is we have a presidential system and it is extremely important that when we think about voting for president's that we think about their character.

if you're in a parliamentary system and you have a cabinet, this cabinet officers have been elected and they have a personal standing inside the cabinet. system, the executive power resides with one person. it is incumbent upon the american population to understand that when they vote, they are making a major decision about somebody holding a massive amount of power in a single person hands. host: there was a correction about her record, they had reported she was overseeing this particular site in thailand at ,he time of the waterboarding it turns out that happened before she arrived but she still oversaw this facility and did

play a role in the destruction of recordings, just not this. is that going to play a role in these confirmations? guest: people are going to ask her whether she thought it was legitimate to do so. even though she was not the officer in charge of the time, she will have to defend her role subsequently, and whether she agrees with that policy. is on the line from tulsa, oklahoma. good morning. gary, who did you work for? guest: i came to town and i worked for senator moynahan, a democratic senator from new york when he was vice chairman of the intelligence committee i was the democratic staff director and then i worked for president ronald reagan during his second

term in office in the white house. host: john is calling from arkansas on our independent line. hello, kimberly. i want to ask your opinion on something. of china the president was having dinner with president trump at mar-a-lago, trump told this gentleman off hand just launched cruise missiles into heia, but he did not tell xi had called russia and told him he was launching. knowing russia was the one to supply the chemicals to people over there, why would he call russia and tell them to get their stuff off the air field so it would not be destroyed? what is your opinion on that. guest: there are two things. we also want to exhibit how powerful we were so we put f-22s

and stealth fighter jets over syria and wanted to show the russians that they could not actually deal with that, that they cannot see it. that was an example of american power and strength. also i think the white house was determined to punish the government that was engaged in chemical warfare, which is the syrian government of a sod. -- of assad. i'm not surprised they told the russians. this was a strategic strike against a particular government for its behavior. host: i want to talk about the morale within the state department after the departure of secretary of state tillerson and leading up to that. ofhave also seen a lot foreign service folks leave. what is the morale within the state department, both abroad and at foggy bottom? guest: not particularly good.

half of the jobs in the state department have been filled. axed it -- mr. tillerson had specific idea of how he wanted to run the department. any government department can be managed better. this is, after all, the government. usually the best way to get a reorganization done is to get the trust of the employees so that when you do make a decision about reorganization, they have a sense that you've a better understanding of what their tasks are what the job is. it has been unsuccessful, to put it mildly. one of the things about mike pompeo is that you've not have the same sort of complaining from agency personnel about his administration there. he has ahat suggests better understanding of how washington bureaucracy works and

how you have developed the trust of the people you're working with and head up before you make changes. host: stephanie is on the democratic line from california. caller: good morning, kimberly. i want to say it is very scary times. most people who work in the civil service are dedicated, especially having worked over 20 years. governmented for the . we are very devoted employees. i think it is a shame that they would fire mccabe two days before he was set to retire. i think it is political. i have worked in the government, i know you can get political. it has been said that all the government employees in every agency are under attack. we are americans first. we may have our own independent

view, but we are americans, and we need to stick together. it is scary. i do not think that america could last four years under trump. this is not a reality tv show. mccabe firing, somebody who spent 30 years serving the country, it is tough to fire him and possibly put his pension at risk in this moment. was notther hand, it the administrations that suggested he be fired, it was the workings of the justice department who came to the conclusions that he had lied to investigators. the administration may be pleased that he is gone, on the other hand, the original judgment of was not in the

factors. host: your colleague wrote a asking if mike pompeo can turn the state department around. she lists areas he would have to address to restore the state department. she writes that people appoint leadership, rex tillerson had a tiny inner circle and mike pompeo would have to do a better job with that. policy. she says the state department has been mia under this administration. also trust. do you agree those are the areas that pompeo has to focus on and you think he can turn it around? guest: since she is my boss i think i agree wholeheartedly with her. i will go back to rex tillerson. he had a specific thought about how he wanted to manage the place and it didn't tell a small

group around -- it did entail a small group around him and so there was less interest in getting personnel in place. i think that is wrong because the point of the state department is the department heads, the bureau heads, the assistant secretaries, and when those jobs are not filled or those jobs are left with uncertainty, than the result is you will have a less effective state department. ray is on our republican line from michigan. caller: i would like to make a statement. i wonder how you ever got this job of monitoring when you're anti-trump? i pay $200 for my cable bill and this is terrible. calling from san francisco on our republican

line. caller: i love you and green. happy st. patrick's. this is a democrat we are speaking to. i hope you can honestly answer this. inm concerned about a coup our government. it is a silent coup and are unwilling to accept president trump because they had a plan for globalism along with hillary clinton. was the one that oversaw the trial that is stealing money for the foundations. there are so many dangerous things we have to protect ourselves from. host: we're almost out of time and i want to give gary the chance to respond. guest: i am much more confident about our system of government and confident about the character of the people, even surrounding the president.

mr. pompeo is a veteran. h.r. mcmaster was a generalished general, kelly, the chief of staff is a remarkable american military veteran. i am confident that our system, despite these troubled times, will hold. host: formery schmitt, executive director of the foreign intelligence advisory board -- you can see that on their app. thanks for joining us. chest but thank you. journal"'s "washington live every day. sunday morning, former nsc director jeffrey edmonds the double poisoning

of an agent in britain and his continued meddling in u.s. elections. then the debut of our series, 1968. a discussion of the major political and diplomatic developments in the vietnam war. be sure to watch c-span's "washington journal." join discussion. >> monday, on "landmark cases," plessy versus ferguson where plessy, in african-american, was arrested in new orleans for taking a seat on a train reserved for whites. the decision established these equal doctrine. this narrow interpretation of amendment was not

overturned until brown versus the board of education. examined this case with ted shaw, director for the center of civil rights at the university of north carolina. and michael gorman, a constitutional law professor at her law school and the author of the 2000 four book "from jim crow to civil rights." watch on listen c-span.org, or with the free c-span radio app. for background in each case, order your copy of the landmark cases book. it's available at c-span. org/landmarkcases. senatehursday, the intelligence commi h