angela stent is a professor at georgetown university, a former national intelligence officer for russia at the national intelligence councilthor of the book putin's world. she gave me her take on the situation at the border. lukashenko has orchestrated this, flying these people to belarus deliberately. he wants to cause havoc in the eu, he wants to punish the eu for the sanctions that have been imposed on him, really since an election which was falsified, and for other things that he has done to his own people, and forcibly downing a plane. so he certainly is the, if you like, evil genius behind this. now, the role of russia itself and president putin is maybe a little less clear. this looks as if this was lukashenko�*s idea. on the other hand, belarus is very dependent on russia for its economic help, for its energy supplies, and it's very difficult to imagine that if russia didn't really want belarus to be doing this, that it would't pull some strings to get lukashenko to back down. so, so far, we have russia, as we just heard in the report, backing belarus also in the united nations security council, and saying things l

policy program at the brookings institution she'sok a former national secury council official and former officer of the national intelligence council. operatives in the kremlin and the siberian curse how the planners left russia out in the cold and has roots in extensively on issues with eastern asia. there's nothing for you here. as the daughter of a coalminer to three u.s. presidents. to examine the desperation impacting american politics it shows why expanding opportunity is the only long-term hope for our democracies. tonight she will be in conversation witht trudy, the worldview columnist with the philadelphia inquirer and trudy, fiona, it is an honor to have you join us. the screen is yours. >> it's a pleasure to be doing this and it couldn't be more timely because this book goes from the personal to the political and to the whole issue of populism and how we are all struggling to save democracy. and since you all know about the testimony and the impeachment, it is interesting to see the ex-president still can't let go of coming out of anyone who criticized him and has put together an outrageous statement after issuin

angela stent is a professor at georgetown university, a former national intelligence officer for russia at the national intelligence councilbook putin's world. thank you for being with us. what is going on at the border and are strings being pulled by president lukashenko and president lukashenko and president putin? t5 president lukashenko and president putin?— president putin? is your reporter _ president putin? is your reporter said, _ president putin? is your reporter said, presidentj reportersaid, president lukashenko has orchestrated lu kashenko has orchestrated this, lukashenko has orchestrated this, flying these people to belarus deliberately. he wants to cause havoc in the eu, he wants to punish the eu for the sanctions imposed on them really since an election which was falsified and for other things he has done to his people and possibly downing a plane. he certainly is if you like the evil genius behind this. the role of russia and president putin is maybe a little less clear. this looks as if this was present lukashenko's idea. he is very dependent on russia for its economic help and energy supplies and it is v

brookings institution, she is a former national security official former officer at the national intelligence council. co-author operative in the kremlin and the siberian curse. communist players left russia out in the cold. and she has written extensively on strategic issues related to eastern europe, central asia. there is nothing for you here, she trayce her path as a daughter of a coal miner and northern england were service to three u.s. presidents. examines a desperation impacting american politics is the only long-term hope for our democracy. tonight the sale will be in conversation with trudy rubin the columnist with the philadelphia inquirer and a longtime friend of the author. truly, fiona it is an honor to have you with us, the screen is yours. >> thank you so much. it is a pleasure to be doing this and it could not be more timely. because this book, there is nothing for you here goes from the personal and a coal town to the political and the white house. and to the whole issue of populism and how we are all struggling to save democracy. and since you all know about fiona's testimony in th

brookings institution, she is a former national security official former officer at the national intelligence council. co-author operative in the kremlin and the siberian curse. communist players left russia out in the cold. and she has written extensively on strategic issues related to eastern europe, central asia. there is nothing for you

policy program at the brookings institution she'sok a former national secury council official and former officer of the national intelligenceil. operatives in the kremlin and the siberian curse how the planners left russia out in the cold and has

brookings institution, she is a former national security official former officer at the national intelligence council.

national intelligence council report said this, it was put out in 2005. it said in terms of size, speed and directional flow, the transfer of global wealth and economic power is now underway, roughly from west to east. it's without precedent in modern history and the shift derives from two sources, first, increases in oil and commodity prices, have wind fall profits for gulf states and russia. lower costs combined with government policies, in the manufacturing and service industries overseas, and so basically it said there's a massive shift going from the american people to nations overseas, and it was because of two reasons, one was oil and gas profits going overseas, and two, manufacturing going overseas. that report went on to say the transfer was inevitable, it could not be stopped yet the last administration. the trump administration showed that those two things could be reversed and give a great wind fall to the american people. the world's demand on energy is growing. that's a good thing. that's people coming out of poverty, people finding mobility

national intelligence council report said this. it was put out in 2005. it said in terms of size, speed and directional flow, the transfer of global wealth and economic power is now under way roughly from west to east. it's without precedent in modern history and the shift comings from two sources. first, increases in oil and commodity prices have generated windfall profits for states in russia and second, the shift in locus of manufacturing and services industries overseas. basically it said there's a massive shift going from the american people to nations overseas and it was because of two reasons. one was oil and gas profits going overseas. and two, manufacturing going overseas. that report actually went on to say this transfer was inevitable, it cannot be stopped yet the last administration, the trump administration showed us indeed that those two things could actually be reversed and give a great windfall for the american people. now, the world's demand on emergency is growing. that's a good thing. that's people coming out of poverty. that's people f

he is somebody that worked at the intelligence agency when michael flynn was the head of dia and brought into the white house on the national security council that very short period of time was the national security director. apparently michael flynn believed that. and when cohen got that job at the pentagon during the transition after the election, he called ezra cohen and said he wanted his help in doing whatever the heck michael flynn wanted to do. this is when he is talking about marshal law, when he is organizing this stop the steal effort. and ezra cohen again said, look, no. this is crazy. the election is over. and michael flynn started screaming at him and saying that he was part of the problem so yes. here's somebody again who you know by his bio and the background you wouldn't necessarily think he would be the one to stand up in disgust and say no to all this but he did and there are a number of people like this who i think at critical moments stopped this entire disaster after the election from actually being a lot worse. >> one other point i want do get before we go to break and i'll keep jonathan. mark meadows, you talked about

foreign policy programs at the institution, she's a former national security council official and former officer at the national intelligence rated in the co-author operative and siberian purse, a communist left russia and the cold and written extensively on strategic issues related to eastern europe and central asia. and "there is nothing for you here", she traces her path is a daughter of a coalminer in northern england it to her service to three u.s. residents and examines the desperation in passing american politics, and shows why expanding opportunity is the only long-term hope for our democracy. tonight fiona hill will be in conversation with judy rubin and a colonist in philadelphia inquire a longtime friend of the author and trudy and fiona hill is an honor to have you join us in the screen is yours. >> thank you and it is a pleasure to be here. i it cannot be more timely because this book, "there is nothing for you t here", it goes from the personal and cold town to the political in the white house and is the whole issue of populism and how we are all struggling to save democracy. and since you all know, about fion

, the national security council in the form of anna newberger, applies instruments of power that are outside of cyberspace to bring about the dire conditions inside of cyberspace. are intelligencessets, military assets, diplomatic assets, financial assets. all of that is traditionally the role of the national security council. if we do those three roles concurrently, they can complement one another. >> in your experience as the first ever u.s. national cyber director, how confident are you that oncd will be able to unify federal cyber efforts around the common vision and shared purpose? >> i'm not in a position to ultimately judge my own performance, but i think we can make a difference. that is the point of accountability that should be imposed on me. did the system perform better? are we more cohesive in these impressive pieces at the end of the day? i think we can and will make a difference. >> director easterly, would you care to weigh in on the dynamic between oncd and cisa, and whether you see these roles as complementary to each other and any areas for improvement? >> thank you for the question. as we have talked about, and we go back about 15 years. we have known each o

national security council inside the trump white house? i don't actually because the motivation forjoining the administration back in 2017 was what had happened in 2016 when the russian intelligenceervices at the direction of the kremlin interfered in the presidential election, that was the 2017, 2016 us presidential election. as of course as we all know, that created chaos in us politics. it became a massive domestic crisis and i certainly felt as someone who has served before in the government, i was national intelligence officer for russia back from 2006 to 2009 under both the bush and 0bama administrations that something had to be done, and so that was my motivation, was to in to do something of the national security front, greatly concerned about the impact of what the russians had done and i would do it again, for sure. ultimately, though, you're working for a boss who from the very get—go patently didn't believe or didn't want to believe that moscow was involved in that interference in the 2016 election which you regarded as so important and so dangerous. that's absolutely right, i think it was that he didn't want to believe it because that put a great big cloud over his l

intelligence official jobs, national security jobs. this is how people got vetted for national security council and at times it was basically loyalty overo you, nicolle, a little over a year ago as changes started happening in terms f departments, certain people were placed in roles. and i know these people, knew them and worked with them daily, knew what they were capable of. at that point especially in the last year, it was really about your loyalty and how far you were willing to go to prove your loyalty in whatever situation, no matter what cost. >> olivia, it is so different in hindsight. i remember those conversations, too, i remember the anticipation we had to talk to you because there were precious few people that came out and told the truth. people way above your range. so far john kelly has never told the truth about everything he saw, dina powell, she was in the oval office with h.r. mcmaster when the russians were in there. secretary mattis was never given accounting for what he saw. was there anyone to talk to about this, anyone to turn to? >> you had to be really careful who you would confide in. you had to be incredibly c

intelligence and i'm not saying that was going on. >> it's interesting you mention because one of the big characters in the book matt pottinger at the national security council at the time, you depict him as being someone who was kind of this oddball at the white house. wearing a mask, telling everybody this is serious. and no one else waswearing a mask and people thought it was silly to wear a mask . was that an example of someone who was in touch through other sources and world health organization about what was really goingon in china ? >> the mast history, part of his history is he had worked for the wall street journal in china and have broken the story about the initial sars-1 outbreak. max also moved his office out of thewest wing . his own active social distancing because he was so worried about the precautions being taken in the white house he extricated himself from the white house and made a decision on the national security council on the two top officials that they wouldn't meet in the same room together so theywere taking precautions early . >> they were taking precautions on the official position of the white house . >> it's only 5:46. >> you

describe is the role of the national security council which is accountable to use all the instruments of power that this nation can bring to bear -- diplomacy, intelligence, military resources, financial resources, sanctions that might be applied to bring about the proper conditions in all domains not least of which is cyberspace. the third role is discrete individual roles of cisa, the fbi, sector of risk management agencies, to do what they do in a way that is complementary and concurrent and coherent. rep. hice: sounds like the buck stops with you as far as ransomware is concerned for every agency in our federal government. do you set federal policy? director inglis: the back doesn't stop with me in terms of the federal government. i am not capable of setting federal odyssey which is dictated a law or tends to exist in statute, but the extent that we need to adjust various roles or responsibilities or relationships, i am the accountable person. rep. hice: as it would relate to whether or not, just as an example, if you wanted to withhold encryption keys from victims, as it appears the fbi has done, what rule or policy would you have in that decision?