He received his undergraduate and masters degrees in history. I got to know david when he was running on Hillary Clintons campaign. He is a distinguished fellow, National Security and board of law school. Scholar of the university of texas. He spent many hours together in the situation room and previously served president home and security and counterterrorism. Middle Eastern Affairs and counterterrorism, john received several awards for his contributions including National Security panel, Public Service medal and fbi director medallion. Please join me in welcoming david and john. David, congratulations on the release of the book before we get to the specific aspects, can you give an over view of what the book is about . Why you wanted to write about this topic. I want to say thank you for being here and i am excited to talk about these issues. I would say i wrote this book because after 2016 after russia attacked our democracy, i found bizarre, dangerous the operation was treated as unprecedented and noble because that means theres no history to it and if theres no history to something, it becomes easy to create misconceptions about something to manipulate something for whatever you are seeking to advance so i sought to provide that history and the end of the spending years going through archives and interviewing individuals to recreate the history before the 2016 operation. What i do is map out the century long story of electoral interference, they use their Intelligence Services to interfere in elections all over the world. Russia has rediscovered and enhanced that idea and interfering in elections all over the world. I look at 2016 in detail and use all of that background for the future not only by 2016 but everything before is the general purpose of the book. Thats why its needed to be written. Its super interesting historical book in putting this issue into historical context, you said something necessary. Id like to pick up on that, the unclassified version of the january 2017 intelligence immunity investment in the 2016 election founded russias effort to influence the president ial election represented significant escalation in the level activity and scope of effort compared to previous operations in the u. S. Elections. Could you elaborate on the reasons efforts differ from the past . I am pleased to participate in this virtual event. David has written an excellent book. Very well researched and written, it adds to the literature not just about what happened in 2016 but also the years before. What happened in 2016 from my perspective, its much more robust, and tensed and wideranging in the russians. Partly its because of the opportunities that exist in the Digital Domain that caused problems. Using social media platforms but there was a determination that putin had to undermine the election and help donald trump. It seems as though there was a wideranging effort on the part of russian intelligence servic services, also working with various other mechanisms such as Internet Research agency to have the press particularly in the last six or nine months before the election. So social media aspect of it was the one that was probably the most, not surprising but the newest elements of the russian effort. The russians are sophisticated when it comes to operating in the domain. I think what we saw in 2016 was a real effort on the part of putin to do what he could to undermine the integrity of the election as well as tip the balance so the outcome would be favorable. Thats one of davids findings in the book, much of the tactics were similar to soviet efforts during the cold war, it was technology. David, i dont know if you want to elaborate on both the similarities and why the technology is such a difference in your mind. Sure. I would argue nothing about Vladimir Putins operation was original but all of it was within an enhanced version of what his predecessors had done and what our country had done. Breaking that out into three components with the objectives to help donald trump and hillary clinton, the interference in our politics to accomplish those three to help people they liked for a generation. The russian targeted our voting systems to access them and open up to manipulation. In the postwar, stalin and his travelers many plated voting systems across Eastern Europe. Russias targeting systems like ukraine so its an application to the u. S. The second was taking what was private information and making them public. Abolishing the line between whats personal and whats in the public arena. Thats an old idea. In the 1976 president ial election, he created forgery, personal life of the president ial candidate and saw to publicize what they claim the private life to destroy his political career. With the internet afforded them to do was instead of having one forgery with tens of thousands of documents rather than newspapers to upload them online through wikileaks as a thirdparty credit. The third was social media which seems the most novel and in many ways, is a real revolution but what they were doing across the ira was suppressing voters, turning out others, steering voters, appealing to the personal vulnerability and they had done with elections all over the world. But the internet did was allow russia to enhance those tactics to reach more peaceful people precisely. The idea behind its operation on just well but in some ways, we can predict them moving forward because theyve been taking place for so many decades in the past. I think it is all interesting, the Common Thread there, if wrenching factors and i think will come later in the conversation to what we should draw from the evolution. David mentioned your book and the cia during the cold war were engaging in these operations but one of the things davids research confirmed was after the cold war, the u. S. Moved away from engaging in electoral interference but russia under putin has not really doubled down. Id be interested in your assessment of the reason for that departure and what it tells us both about u. S. Thinking on democracy as well as putins worldview. Why things have evolved and for the u. S. , not evolved as much for the russians. They are engaged in many blading and shaping that. But in the height of the cold war and aftermath of world war ii, the u. S. Administration saw an extra central threat between the soviet union and the u. S. And union were involved in this race to shape the number of countries in the aftermath of world war ii. We are working hard to ensure either liberal and democratic systems were going to evolve and emerge for communist systems. I think success of the administration engaged in a lot of the activities and propaganda or whatever try to boost the prospects and politicians were sympathetic to the democratic model. I do think u. S. Administrations of the u. S. Has matured in those respects as well in terms of seeing the exploitation of electoral system and process is that it is Democratic Values. When i was in government and in those circles, i really believe and argued strenuously against doing anything that is inconsistent with all the Democratic Values and ideals that we have globally. Do believe the truth is more powerful than misrepresenting the facts, i believe, now im talking about what the situation up until january 2017. I dont know what the Trump Administration is doing and how its upgrading on the local stage during the obama and bush administrations, those discussions i was involved in of a fanfare election would try to strengthen the ability of dominance to hold elections, that is certainly true but not to try to advance the interests of one time or another. I do think the Global Situation has changed compared to the post world war ii, up until january 2017, they saw it was best to allow these electoral processes to play out. Its interesting, one of the comments you made in the book as well about the truth is more powerful. On the policy side, we hear about countering one interference, disinformation, sometimes the tendencies because the national one is say why dont we do the same thing back . I think you made it eloquent and article. There about how the values and principles of democracies need to be guiding not only of response but entire approach to engaging on democratics. It is important for the u. S. To remember we are fighting for our principles and the foundations this country was built upon. We should never stoop to using tactics of other countries. Whether we are fighting the russians or fascism, modernday, i think weve really got quite a few that we can use and not stray from those basic principles and ideals, it makes this country truly what it aspires to be which is a beacon of freedom and liberty. Thats why being dishonest is counterproductive and thats why im particularly dismayed by what i see happening. David talked in the book about either the goal in the social media space and information from russia is the attempt not only the false narratives and discord undermining the idea of truth. I think thats really important points of you made about the need for doubling down on truth and something you can protect in advance and not allow it to be undermined. One of the things you discuss in your book is why u. S. Democracy is different than western. And previous work ive done, id be interested in your reaction to these. First, engaging in other countries openly and transparently and second, its made available to parties across the political spectrum if they are committed to the democrat process and third, this policy tries to give people a voice in determining their countrys future. In other words, u. S. Democracy is about strengthening the democratic process while one interference is about weakening or subverting it. Does that match up with the conclusion from your book and findings . It does. It also marks evolution of American Foreign policy in the sense that director said during the cold war, the threat was an ideology so the strategy was to contain ideology and therefore using action to prop up anticommunist candidates and democratic candidates. There is a logical space to be made to be doing that. In the postwar period evolved to promoting strengthening democracy itself in one of the people i interviewed, he must prefer using organizations like iri, organizations to shore up electoral processes over action for a couple of reasons. One, it can be dramatically added. Like you said, it is open. It is visible, you know what america is doing, no objectives to hold stable, free and Fair Elections which contrast with the russia objective which is to degrade the most democracy, underlying democracy and its parallel strengthening and undermining it all over the world which i think is the important but others i was able to interview with the president of russia intelligence they attempted to assassinate as well as former president who said elections were under siege, to undermine democracy so the reason why from my perspective promoting democracy makes sense in the current environment because it helps make the effectiveness democratic system subverts and undermining the election. Interesting. Other countries also facing russias tactics, i think the u. S. , we have a tendency in our american exceptionalism ways, the challenges we face are exceptional to us but this is not a challenge for us. Across the european stage and other parts of the world, i think just like david noted, he thought we needed to understand the history where it is occurring. Its important we understand the broader global context in which these tactics are playing out. What youve seen in terms of russian interference operations in other countries as well as if we need to be doing more to work with our partners and allies. Just as we would on any traditional Security Threat to actually put together will of a Coalition Effort around protecting sanctity of our democracy. Russians and soviets before them tried to influence the outcome of elections, theyve been on the effort on a global scale. I would argue that they are more active in other countries around the globe than here in the u. S. I was looking at and russia would like to affect the outcomes of elections and political challenges in other countries so they can have in those countries, governments and politicians and individuals will be more sympathetic to russian policy goals and objectives. I dont think the russians like to roll over borders with tanks and russian troops, its a different piece. To the extent that they can attract influence the elections so they have empathetic politicians and government so they can get them to support maybe sanctions against russia get them to support the initiatives in the un, this is a very active russian effort. Whether or not youre talking about europe or africa or asia, try to influence the outcome of these elections or local struggles so people will rise to the top were going to either by design or happen, need to support russian initiatives so russia uses a lot of different tactics whether money that goes to propaganda, disinformation, the prospects for candidates they want to lose an election so it is very active. Weve talked with a lot of partners over the years, i was involved in a number of discussions one by foreign counterparts about the types of tactics the russians use. The needs to be greater awareness, i know we are focused on russia right now but i would say it is not limited to russia as far as the opportunities for a number of Foreign Companies and services to try to influence the outcome of those systems. Thanks that is something i want to come back to, but we are other, authoritarian regimes designed this toolkit, whether it influences the outcome of the election or simply to undermine and weaken the democratic foundations of the competitors is a way weakening us within. Its a tool that liberating hello, i think our distinctions based on their strategies which i would like to unpack but we will come back to that in a moment. David, sticking with the history for a couple of minutes, one of the interesting conclusions for me that you reached is even during the cold war, is a different in the u. S. And soviet tactics when it came to electoral interference and they were rooted in the democratic process themselves. While the soviet approach was more about corrupting activities and had little to do with the democratic process, you wrote that electoral interference where the state could execute that. You say the different experiences and intelligence agencies so im interested if you could talk more about why you found that to be the case and i will give your background and ask you to reflect on this particular part as well. I would say there are two key differences in the soviet and russian and american approach. First, youve been talking about russias move towards this practice where it was america with rare exceptions such as in serbia but the second difference has to do with systemic objectives and tactics. Across time, soviet objective and now russian interference is to tear down democracy. The very first operation to do this in 1919 for the express purpose of vladimir, the democratic systems will abolish borders and create communist international utopia. The idea was to undo democratic systems through disinformation, bribery and blackmail, extortion. Those kinds of methods that extend across decades. The american objective here is the a reaction to interference was to preserve a democratic position. Eastern european states, theres communist after winning rigged election of the democracy so they authorized the cia to help christian democrats present that outcome and in those operations, you saw things like orchestrated voter registration, get out the vote efforts. Making sure campaigns knew how to reach and influence the masses in effective ways and campaigning tactics that mirror what they do in the u. S. What they described was figuring out what the vulnerabilities were and blackmail them into doing what they want in relation to an election. Thats different than what i found the cias approach to be. Even when we were in this game, the objective difference, which is one of the reasons why anyone says theres equivalency between america and russia here, it is totally sniffing the ball, one that we approached this idea in different ways in the lines weve been willing to cross across time. These are really important points. We look at the world through this prism. Im sure theres similar discussion going on about what has happened since world war ii. Since world war ii has been to try to preserve and strengthen democracies. I do think the u. S. Sometimes has engaged in certain types of a tactic thats justified because the ends justify the means. I do think the soviet Union Dissolution and the real ideological drives behind moscows and global activities. Its much more and Vladimir PutinSees Opportunities to massage against different outcomes. I dont think theres a real concern for others about engaging in these tactics whether it blackmail, intimidation, voting or whatever one we send money not just for the county and then expose the money and i think theres a lot of dirty tricks they have been engaged in over the years. Im not saying its only the russians but would like to think at least the main purpose behind those involved were designed to ensure democracy was going to survive and flourish despite ideological drive me out of the soviet union. If i could add, i agree with what you said, it is not accurate to say the cia has only ever organizing drives and turnout initiatives. That is not true. Disinformation was spread in places like italy and chile, they preceded. There are a vote authorized to be bought. In pursuit what was forced democracy so as director said, means versus and calculation of the history is complicated and there are exceptions in which they did things that i imagine today americans would say the lines we shouldnt be crossing and i agree. But also to be clear, those are activities that were productive in the past that are not as far as to reach is today. I want to ask another question that relates to what you said earlier about the past and present, what are the goals of operations of the soviet Union Operation has been not just getting candidates selected but undermining democracy itself. Your book defines electoral interference in narrow terms for concealed effort to influence democratic vote of succession. Im wondering though, given what you find in the book that a lot of the efforts we see from russia are not influencing the outcome of the election but are making this court as an end in itself and undermining the democratic process in the country from within. This is seen from other research institutions, my own team and others as well as intelligence committee, etc. There was an interesting theme to his recent cover story in the atlantic and in a quote from him, the Trump Campaign was a tactic democracy. Im interested in your reflections on whether in some ways, we actually tend to think about electoral interference or foreign interference in two narrow of terms. Focusing on just the electoral outcome as the main goal. I would flip it, the argument is the russian objective is to transform democratic systems into authoritarian versions of themselves which is precisely why they matter so much. I was struck when i interviewed pollution, and he described elections as a fourthyear opportunity as irresistible opportunity to many plate the future of the democracy for the sanctity of that democracy and tear down that democracy. Theres a reason theres this phenomenon stretched across the century which is to target elections, like theyve engaged in it, its so consistent and well rooted ways which they are the heart of the democracy. They determine the future of the state, they enable process in order and when you target those processes around whether the people who are elected reflect the will of the people, whether the people elected are loyal to the people or loyal to the foreigners who helped put them in their chair, were down about the very sovereignty of your state. As an influence operation and an election, that bad but not existential whereas if you are able to basically take away the future of the state to show the world as well as the people of the state democracy doesnt actually have which you can believe, thats how you discourage democracy because in my opinion, the way the democracy is dire corrupt versions of themselves almost all the time. That is what russia is seeking to achieve and to me, thats why putin is aggressively targeting our election, donald trump is a means to an end, its chaotic, disruptive and undemocratic nature is what putin likes because it helps him tear down our democracy which is why been actively supporting him and speaking to undermine the candidates who are harder on russia and more like traditional lines, what it means to be the leader of a wellfunctioning democracy. You make an important case for elections preeminent institutions of democracy. Id argue there probably not the only Important Institution under attack. One of my colleagues has a phrase here, when it comes to foreign interference, elections are not starting or and. The Mueller Report and others have found russias operations targeting the 2016 election started in 2014, the agents who came to the u. S. But we also know in the aftermath of the 2016 election, social media activity in the Research Agency increased substantially in order for discord about the president ial election and support for him. The context of elections and beyond. Political discord within the country and fighting among americans within Congress Certainly is something is capable in his interest. The interest is dissolving the issues, they are going to carry out responsibilities and is undermined. Its an effort to try to ensure russians do what they can to hurt the u. S. Stability to be that role in counter pressure efforts. As we have seen, americans are at each others throats and look at the polarization and sites taking place, in 2016, we saw russians were trying to fill this within the Democratic Party between Bernie Sanders and hillary clinton. The more they can agitate, the more they can stimulate these political and social accreditations within the u. S. It is on precious objectives which is weakening americas ability to use its exceptional capabilities on a global stage so i do think putin has, not that is the outcome of the 26 election but just whats happening in the u. S. There is significant discord that is helping putin as he continued to move forward with the agenda. David, picking up on one of those points, which is consistent with other research, now russia organizing race in its effort for discord in the u. S. To suppress black codes, in this moment in time which we are in, im interested if you could elaborate the line of the use of race as a weapon. If you have any thoughts on what that means. One of the things i was most struck by in the hundreds of pages i went through was how often race came up, how often the operation of objectives, had to do americans along racial and religious lines and discuss which is to have the u. S. At home and show the world abroad the u. S. Is a hotbed of hate, but dysfunctional and therefore no other country should aspire to be. The american model is flawed and what the russians were dishing of interference both in elections and otherwise to prey upon division and in systemic racism is blaring division. Its easy to exploit and create discord dysfunction and emperors americans home and abroad. There were letters that reported to show extraordinarily racist behavior from americans by the kgb but actually signed by the kkk as a lie so what we need to understand, and i really believe when people talk about how to defend our elections, one of the steps we take is to confront Racial Injustice for systemic Racism Police brutality because the more wellfunctioning we have, the less divided democracy we have, the less opportunity there is for russia to not only sell the division but make us believe they are not defending us because the society, a polarized society is manipulated and easily distracted. That is what russia is exploiting so in a lot of ways, racism and racial issues we see, in a sense, their domestic but in another sense, their real National Security problems because they are easy to weaponize their side for generations before us so i hope we can take steps toward negating that vulnerability in our society and create more equitable societys and democracy. The issues go hand in hand and this is not unique to putin again and when the ira focus on that, is surprised a lot of people. Of course that the oldest trick in the book, racism embedded in american society. I hope they were able to address that moving forward. I think, thank you for that. To me, it also points to issues in countering foreign interference and democracy how our typical typing between Foreign Policy and domestic policy needs to be torn down so many of the steps we need to do to make it resilient and phone abilities starts within ourselves and at home. In our area, you have this historical fact and the ira and you have a megaphone and amplifier for the information. For the hyper partisan media we see in the u. S. I think, at least i would argue is another area where we are making ourselves more vulnerable and strengthening media institutions domestically, make it more difficult for successful and easy tactics. A couple of quick questions specific to 2016 before we turn to audience question and answer, david writes in the book in 2016, the focus on one tactic, cyber manipulation may have distracted from other threats or tactics russia was engaging in social media. Some of your colleagues are quoted in his book talking about how the social media aspect of the campaign would really not identify until after the election much later on. Id be curious from your perspective having lived through this, through a twopart question, as we approach the 2020 election, are we at risk of having the blinders on in any way . Focusing on one tactic, maybe in this case, the last battle while missing what may be the next war. Second, other lessons you took away from the experience and challenges the Obama Administration faced in dealing with russias interference operations in real time, you think are instructive for how these campaigns should be handled in the future. First of all, you mentioned the ira several times, dont confuse the ira with my irish, the russian internets agency we are referring to. Its always cool to see former colleagues as opposed to those in the government at that time. I dont think we were distracted by focusing on those roles, they preserve the integrity of the election and by disabling voter registration, the integrity of the election so there were a lot of things are trying to do to prevent technical interference we knew the russians had the capability to do. On social media, it is really the most difficult challenge we face for them. As we see now, whats allowed in the social media in terms of whats relevant, it is very difficult to determine what coming from abroad and with the russians are behind. The russians i think have been quite capable of taking advantage of freedoms of liberties within the u. S. Including media and press. Disguising their activities and masking activities as being americans. As the head of the cia focus on foreign intelligence, id be crazy to look at whats happening in u. S. Social media platforms because that is not foreign intelligence. Its difficult for the fbi and Law Enforcement to do things because you have to respect privacy and Civil Liberties and freedom of speech so this is something i think the russians and others have taken advantage of and use that large echo chamber within the social media environment to be able to propagate its youth. Its happening every day. We see twitter and facebook and others continue to struggle with what they should allow, how they should intervene in these activities. Unfortunately, i think theres so much false information coming out so i do think although the typical systems within our voting electorate infrastructure is important and congress has made it less vulnerable but social media environment, the information, the ecosystem people can play and so readily and the services have developed a lot of tactics and tools, that is one i think we continue to struggle with and we need to come to terms with it. Its a complicated issue and the issues you say for authorities and the roles of the Intelligence Community is one of the often not understood, it is important to lift up here. You want to elaborate on this . Sure, i would say a court finding in my book as it relates to 2016 while talking to someone was at the table dealing with these issues in 2016 but one of the findings is that as he discussed, there are two types of interference, their efforts to offer ballots and their efforts to influence lines, despite propaganda which is those were. Thats what social media beats were and glaring vulnerability of electoral infrastructure involved 2016 access to Russian Military systems was so glaring and potentially explosive that the overriding policy objective explained by many of his aides was too just maintain the same to the of the vote to make sure the election wasnt disrupted, thats why the cybersecurity for nader in the white house was running crisis team waiting the cyber attack because it was a real hypothetical that could turn into reality that president obama and the moves he made was seeking to prevent by reaching out to the states by having congressional statement by considering the Critical Infrastructure designation but the other finding is that in focusing on that, the problem is there was no allegation for the other, or no, it was easier to neglect or assume to say this is an acceptable level of interference in some of the releases and what was understood which was little of social relations because of the concern if you get russia for that future action would escalate for altering the vote. What i find in my book is the secured election, you need to secure votes. You need to prevent direct vote operations and do what you can to reduce the ability of foreign efforts. I would say the first can be brought to zero if you secure your system but something history instructs is that you will never get completely out of your information environment. Electrons are penetrable. So what you can do is manage the threats, seek to deter the behavior but its an illusion to say if not for example, donald trump, we could get it under control because it happened when barack obama was president and he tried to stop it but it still happens. My points are that addressing those two avenues is what it means to secure an election and interplay between those two showing what he can do to our vote while many bleeding millions of americans but the obama team in a difficult position seeking the balance, how to respond to those interferences at the same time. One of the major candidates was publicly solicited of russian interference which was a difference from previous elections in the u. S. That i am aware of where one candidate was encouraging that type of interference. You also had a candidate who was speaking about the integrity of the process as well about whether the process may be rigged which was also interest of eruption on the integrity of the process. It is simply complicated. I want to take up questions from the audience. What would it look like to address this information on social media and i might add to that, one of the conclusions i reached in my work is the foreign interference and democracy is one of the greatest through addressing it. You both touched on this so im wondering what you think that means about the strategies to address these issues Going Forward regardless of who wins in november. How do we take the political aspect of this out . So i would say in my study, one of the most damaging things the current president has done is not only solicit foreign interference but convinced tens of millions of americans have formed in different doesnt even exist, russia isnt doing what we know russia is doing because in doing what hes done is made this a partisan issue. He said if you believe in this issue, youre just trying to help the democrat. When in truth, its anything but a partisan issue. But history shows, they target in the 1960 and 60 election . Richard nixon, a republican. The target of ronald reagan, every public and. It just happened that now they like a real horton but they dont like anyone particular party where russia likes the person with answers that interest. Its not americas interest. In the future, what i hope, it will not happen under the current president , that is clear that the next president has to do whats possible to remind americans even if russia is helping your person, it is a national front, it is undermining the notion of what means to be a sovereign democracy and we need to come together because any response to the threat has to have the people because so much of what it means is manipulating people to get if you release emails and focus on the emails rather than the source, youre being played. If youre on social media and not focusing on the quality of the content before you and taking in what you see, youre being swayed. Other countries have come to grip the. France, we dont want another country to determine our leaders but in america, not only do we address the threat, we havent even agreed that it is happening. It is unfortunate and to american president ial candidate during the cold war were approached by soviet ambassadors offering to help them get elected and the Immediate Reaction the candidate was get away from you. I want nothing to do with it, if i win or lose, i do not want the help of your government, we need to get back to the attitude and i was disappointed to see congress pull out a provision was forced campaigns, we cant do that, i dont know what it even means to defend an election if we are saying we want foreign interference in our elections. A dysfunctional part these days, theres a chance to address this. A barbarous, fair significant way. After the 9 11 attacks and stand up of commission, independence nice it was a sense of security. I have long argued there is commission, focusing on the center, i am concerned about how russians or chinese or criminals or whomever are going to take advantage of that environment to advance the interests. I dont think our government for nation be interested in this. I would advocate for the to be notable members and democrats and engineers and others are going to come together and look at what the realm is possible and not have partisanship of governing of what they are going to advocate for. Its something that i think will take quite a while. It is complicated, within my portfolio in terms of only 30 and what might hurt the most. The russians and others are taking advantage of the environment and we struggle as a nation to figure out exactly how we are going to deal with it and mitigate the threats without trampling upon those symbols of liberty and freedom, speech. It is important. Maybe an area we are humble enough to learn from our allies, we may be able to do some of that. The European Parliament just established its own special committee on foreign interference and democracy the right now in australia had a special committee on foreign interference and social media this information the maybe our allies can do a little bit of legwork we are humble enough to listen to some of the recommendations and learn lessons from them. I want to turn to another question from the audience, which is about the question of cyber intrusion into the system. What would be the resources necessary to protect those systems and what are the ways of getting this investment . It builds on some of what director brandon was saying where hes seeing significant battles over attempts to get additional funding for election systems where we seen numerous bipartisan bills introduced for secure election acts put in place on Higher Standards for cybersecurity. Im interested in your thoughts either on what we need to do and how to get there. Well start with doctor brennan. As we know, the voting systems for the 816, have ensured some of these states and governments and others are going to take appropriate measures necessary the voting systems and other things. So this is something ideally it would be the focus of congressional hearings and discussions and debates and looking at how we are going to resource as well as trying to strengthen those. One thing im worried about are the efforts to suppress and a variety of states because of political objectives that is individual. We should be trying to facilitate the ability of every american eligible to vote to both. How the palace are going to be manipulated, this is an effort to suppress the vote that could be for some parties. While congress is at each others throats here, its difficult to get ahead, im just hoping with the administration will have a real effort to bring bipartisanship for these critically important issues and not have divisions but i do think they are going to address these challenges. On that note, another question from the audience, what should we be most aware of as we approach the election in november . Doctor brennan, i think you highlighted key issues. Id be interested in any thoughts on the question. Say is a couple things between now and november. The first is making these operations into those two, the first is how russia will seek to manipulate americans to support donald trump, opposing joe biden getting them against each other. Those tactics are always evolving. As time is social media manipulation but that was just the latest episode in the long story. If russia does try to manipulate people, it will be updated, new means building on existing ideas. We get to election day itself, the question persists of whether russia will seek to disrupt either to affect the outcome or the legitimacy whether its by the polling place or otherwise. I worry we are more vulnerable in the attack because of the coronavirus which is already so much doubt open to other people will be able to vote, securely and fairly, that it makes it so only the slightest disruption in russia loves to take advantage of preexisting weaknesses could provide one candidate on the income but to say this was actually fair. And other actors will continue to try information once donald trump is no longer part of the american political syste system. Think its important to dispel that going into november. Thats an important point nt point we have to remain focused on how complicated thes issues are we need to be focused its not going away and to commit to addressing it. We have reached the point we only have time for one last question. So i will turn to other actors we have alluded to several times it was some find all reflections in november or more broadly so what do you see . So what are those that are most concerning to you about america . And you have those tremendous capabilities and then to influence operations but i think if you look at countries around the world, not just president ial election but also senators and those who have views on certain issues and there are actors who know they need to fight to get some of these individuals out of office as a way to enhance their prospect for better treatment by congress whether tariffs on china or whatever. Over the last 240 years there are a lot of aspects but there are other things also with these problems talk about these Campaign Finance laws and gerrymandering. Were just not sure the way the National Ecosystem and then to think about these principles so what do we need to do to ensure that the principles of democracy that is driven from the 21st century . Is difficult to change systems and then look at the United States and then china or russia but that strongman model looks more attractive to some of those people who are resistant to change. There is such a thing from 2016 and put into a historical context. But we need to take a step back and look at what we need to do to make sure this american experiment will continue india with the challenges that we face. It could be our legacy for future generations as opposed to the one we are on right now. Especially in the context of the current moment to see globally democratic backsliding to double down and update. Everything else is really great points any final thoughts . I think that covers it. I really cant imagine two people with thes issues this is been fantastic it is wonderful. And also to john brennan former cia director for joining us today and all of our viewers for joining us for this conversation this evening. Through your local independent bookstore and thank you for joining us. Have a great night. Over the last few generations it has become a lot harder to effectively govern western countries and effectively reform or transform or build or unbilled government programs. So in age that its possible to elect the president have a dramatic president from roosevelt or johnson down through reagan have given way to an age where president s are lucky they can pass one major piece of legislation across their presidency if they succeed like obama did with obama care he may pay a price for the rest of the presidency and overall politics is dominated by various stalemates and polarize parties competing with each other without building clear majorities in this congressional application and the increasing form of government that leads us to negotiation between the executive and Judicial Branch which now how policy gets made so now a different version in europe with the institution of the European Union advancing to appoint where it is too big to fail but nobody accepts the wild and crazy english to take the step of leaving even the nationalist of Eastern Europe dont plan to leave the eu but this inefficiency creates the common problems but he cant move forward or backward it cannot shrink back toward a more sensible arrangement or toward the european superstate so it has a stalemate. Thats what im describe being as sclerosis and thats the easy one the others are more debatable also economic stagnation is not as with a respectable pace of growth basically since the Great Recession of 2008 but you do see a pattern of deceleration and lower growth rate compared to the norm prior to the 1970s and those growth rates achieved through perpetual borrowing for you can get to 2 percent growth with massive deficits or in the fifties four. 5 percent that men complained about that really were not deficits at all i think they may be more sustainable than some think but if society pays itself to maintain that its own fundamentals dont justify. Fundamentals dont justify. Welcome to the atlantic author talk series i am your host and tonight im talking with lisa about her new book up all night you can purchase the book directly from us the link is in the chat on the right of your screen and also the Atlantic Center website