Transcripts For CSPAN2 Former Trump Administration Officials

All right, everyone find your table, please. You will have time to mingle during lunch. Good afternoon, everyone. And welcome to our annual event, celebrating womens leadership. Can i have your attention . Thank you. Again, thank you. Good afternoon, everyone and welcome to our big annual event celebrating womens leadership. Im lois romano, culture of the board of directors and im going to be brief because we have a pretty full program. On behalf of myself and my cochair, kathy russell, ambassador kathy russell, thank you all for your support and for being here today to honor three phenomenal women for their service to our country and for their contributions to National Security. We all know that with more women at the top and more women at the table, better policy is made. It fosters global democracy, gender equality and peace. Thats our goal here, and its what we do best. I i would like to acknowledge or diplomatic colleagues who are here, both americans have served abroad, ambassadors, as well as foreign ambassadors who are here today. Could we get all the ambassadors and the deputy chief of mission to just stand for a second . [applause] you all have been critical to our mission from the beginning and we really appreciate your support. I would also like to thank current and former board members, including our founder and president meridith meredits who is here today. Can you all stand for a second . [applause] can we get the board to stand real quickly . We couldnt do any of this without you. [applause] and lastly, thank you to our executive director who holds it all together, and our Program Assistant maginn, and all the interns and volunteers who have helped today. [applause] i would like to suggest a brief word about journalists, and were fortunate today to have two very Accomplished Women moderating our conversations. Journalists have been critical to the womens Foreign Policy group from the beginning. They have been supportive. They have loaned us their expertise and is moderated and made a programming better from the getgo. Recently we have seen whats happening around the country, and its troubling times for journalists. They are threatened everywhere just for really holding the government accountable, and now we see this happen in our own country. Which reverberates globally. So im half of the organization we would like to thank all journalists for what you do. [applause] on behalf. In closing, just a quick pitch, if and not a member we hope youll consider it. Its a great, Interesting Group of people. We do a lot of info programming, and we are mentoring the next generation. I would like to turn things over now to board member for steve rogers who chaired this event and who we are so grateful to. Shes a, shias worked so hard today so lets give her a hand and she will take it from here. [applause] i dont know, i need to twirl when i come up . Ive been called many things thats not one of them, so thank you, lois. Im christy rogers, good afternoon and happy to simmer. And we believe it . I cant. Im stuck on four july so i dont know whats happening. I hope everybody had a wonderful angst giving, enjoyed family, friends or your dog, your cat, or yourself. Just had time to sell. We all do it something to be thankful for even in these chaotic times. I truly want to thank you all for being here today because i know how busy each and everyone of you are. I want to thank you all for your efforts and everything you do, whether its big and small, to actual help make this world a better place. I know that sounds cheesy but this world could use all the help we can get right now. Right . Amen. I heard that in the crowd. As we all know when would open up the newspaper, when we turn on the cable news, we see that the United States and the world are facing challenging times. Dangerous uncertainty, shifting alliances and urgent crises that are striking at the core of nations. These perilous challenges range from escalating proxy wars, increasing election meddling, growing Nuclear Threat from rogue states, all the way through to come if that wasnt enough, through to the pervasive and rapidly transforming cyber threat. Not just from criminals and organized crime but also from nationstates that dont just affect our National Security, but they affect each and every one of us sitting here today and how to protect and secure and store our own data. So today as we begin the program, we actually have as little as pointed out, we have three Stellar National Security Leaders adequate help us walk through these challenges and solve them all, right . Im just going to walk through the show of the bit. First we are going to have a Panel Moderated by Elisabeth Bumiller who is the New York Times washington. With the new times shes also covered the pentagon, also covered the white house and then when she was with the Washington Post she served in new delhi and around the world. Elisabeth also has had such a stellar career. Elisabeth is going to be engaging in a discussion with susan gordon. The recently retired Deputy Director of National Intelligence and also under secretary conformer under secretary of state for arms control and interNational Security andrea thompson. I think first, one thing we do, cant forget this because we all want to engage each and everyone of you. We dont just want talking heads appear, so were going to the question from the audience. So there are pads of paper and pens at each table. We know this group is not shy so think of your questions, write them legibly with your name on it and then wave your hand and one of our five those volunteers will come around and grabbed the card and it will be called to ask a question. We will have microphones. Im with the program and have to put my classes on, its terrible. So bad, i didnt have to do this five, ten years ago. Its terrible. So im going to just jump right in and introduce the two and credible role models with today. Im going to hold the introduction for ambassador susan rice until later, but first we have Deputy Director of National Intelligence sue gordon, smh in. Sue recently retired from the dni in august, and i think there was a collective gasp not just across the Intelligence Community that quite frankly across washington, d. C. When she stepped down. She is incredibly incredible, incredibly well respected across the Intelligence Community, sue gordon. Shes been serving in the National Security across the icy and multiple disciplines for nearly three decades. Im not going to sit over three decades. Her leadership, knowledge and ability to collaborate with others is unparalleled and will be greatly missed in that role. Next, with state Department Former i undersecretary of arms control and interNational Security, andrea thompson. Andrea thompson also has served in the Public Sector National Security for nearly three decades. Like me, they started when they were 12. So like most of you, right . Prior to this role in undersecretary, andrea served in the white house. She was Deputy Assistant secretary to the present National Security adviser to the Vice President argued that shes been over 25 years in the military serving in iraq, boston, afghanistan and was the j to which is intelligence director in afghanistan. At state department she helped diplomatic policy for the United States around the world meeting with leaders in various countries, traveling the globe nonstop on everything from emerging technologies to cyber to emerging threats. So with that im going to turn over to elisabeth. Thank you much and hope you all enjoy your lunch. [applause] thank you, christie. Thank you all for coming and thank you especially to sue and to andrea. We have exactly half an hour. We will be dealing with Nuclear Capability and intelligence in the trunk white house so dont have a lot of time. Im going to do about ten minutes for each and then open up to your questions so please get some good questions ready. Let me start off with this right off. Sue, you have briefed president trump. I have. With a mostly talked about how he doesnt read a lot of intelligence briefings, prefers perhaps naps sometimes to work and youll set a very complicated exit from the trump administration. Id like to do talk, ask you again what was like briefing the president , how you did it, how much testing secondly at [inaudible] cant hear you. Can you turn it up higher . Is that better . One minute down. How is that . Is that better . Ill have to talk loud. Is that better now . No, thats not on. Ill just have to shout. Great. Also talked a bit about your exit from the white house. Okay here i had the greatest to ever. Intelligence is a lovely discipline that all you have to do is pursue the truth as hard as you can. And then represent it in a manner that policy can be formed. So three things, ill give you three things that are the same about this president for others i briefed and through their different. The three that are the same are come everyone who i briefed is different. Some people, president obama was a reader and just voraciously consumed it. Jfk wanted three x five cards in his pocket. So the notion that youre going to have someone different who your briefing that just figure out a way to convey information. Because openly thats what youre trying to depict or trying to present information in a way that is both heard and then can be used. The other thing that is at the same is intelligence is massively inconvenient. It actually typically steals some of the decision space of the president. You are walking in their making things difficult because of what youre presenting. You are limiting the choices because once it is hard, it is theres nothing different about this president. It is a foundational piece of his morning to it is a foundational piece of nsc meetings, whether that was 20 years ago or now. The third thing is every president for whom i have worked has wished intelligence could say things that it cant. Right . You wish that some piece of the truth existed that would allow you to justify, and none of that is hard for the Intelligence Community. Whats different about this president , number one is he is the first in my experience who had no Foundational Framework to understand what is come with the limits of intelligence are, with the purpose of it was, and the way that we discuss it. I do a lot of sports analogies. Its like playing pickup basketball with one runner. Anyone else knows how the game moves in place and just one person that comes in place and is just so different that that in and of itself was different. He ask different questions. He pursued different he had different trusts, because hes probably the first president that arrived with no framework in a in a world that is massively available information with infinite people offering opinion that often times sounds the same but, in fact, are grittier because they dont have to have the same standard. Hes different because he is much more economic in the way he sees the world in the Intelligence Community tradition is much more political military, purposefully so. And so we were scrambling a bit to try and produce intelligence that was foundational leak useful for some who is interested in making trades and deals and be able to explain how we see the world when we were all think set of the people of been. I found him actually kind of a fun brief because he was interacted, he would challenge you, and again because the role of intelligence is to provide wisdom clarity and insight, you cant wish that the recipient were different from who they were. Present in a way that can have your i think that was something anything ever who is been in the oval office with this president would say that is true. Can you guys hear me now . Okay. What kind of questions we ask . This this is a weird question bw long with the briefings . How long did the last . Different desha i just lost i dont think that whispers interview it differed on the day. We would brief two other times a week religiously. I cant think of the week what we do another session. It would always start out with us presenting a set of intelligence that without either were relevant to what he was doing or that needed to be heard. I would say some of between 30 minutes at an hour would be typical. And the questions you would asked . You know, im sorry. I just hadnt thought about it that way. I was a two varieties. One, i dont think thats true. [laughing] right . But again, a member intelligence is fundamentally a crap of uncertainty and the possibility of so that doesnt put you off. Its trying to catch up to how you adjudicate the sources the lead him to believe that and how you responded. So one is, im not sure i believe that. And the other one is, second and third order complies that true . Why are we there . Why is this what you believe . Why do we do that . Those sorts of things. Disproportionate with economic bent to it. Last question before i get to andrea. Which is, better exit come, it exit, what do know about it . I hear snickering in the background. So on the simplest level, the president who appointed me to the position of principal deputy, which is the seniormost career intelligence advisor, ultimately decided that he was not comfortable with me continuing as the acting director when dan stepped out and there was a gap. And if youre the third kit of a naval officer who has for whole career professed she was simply a student of the community, not the community itself, you give a teary eye and you give the president the space. Do i think that hes wrong . Yes. Why would i . [laughing] [applause] why wouldnt you want me to be in that role . But i think that on the simplest level, once he decided, and you give them room to do that. Because what you believe is the community is the strength and that community continues to go in at a think thats what i told him. Thank you for your candor. Ill be back to you in a minute. [applause] andy, the president just said in london at a nato meeting that he is talked with bladder put in about a broad new arms control treaty turkey said i have to say this, this is about an hour ago or two article russia want to make a a deal on arms control e russian whats make you as recently as two weeks ago. Also sort to bring in china. We may bring them in later. We may bring them in now. What is he talking about . [laughing] and why easy saying that china is excited to join in . I assure you, just expand on it. The refreshing thing about no longer being the undersecretary is i dont have to follow my twitter feed. If it happened in the last hour i was probably talk to folks here in the room. But i can get some background on that because it did work while at the state department. No surprise to folks in the room we had been in discussions with russian counterparts ive met multiple times to modernize our existing armscontrol agreement. Again, its a better section for about another hour on violations of the imf treaty, but modernize those systems that Vladimir Putin said the systems is going to already built or is in the process of building and testing. Weve had this discussion peer we been in talks with the russian counterpart again to modernize the armscontrol treaty come to reflect what is the current state, the violation from the past to make administrations continue to we left a treaty and collaboration with some consultation from allies and were all in agreement that any to reflect the reality of today. So those discussions are ongoing here we also need to have the systems their building be part of the treaty. Again, i left the department about six weeks ago. If it happened in the last two weeks, i wasnt tracking that but i but i can say what i did during my year plus as a dissector and in previous to that as National Security adviser for the Vice President. With china, less optimistic. I have met with my chinese counterpart multiple times in the construct of the p5, in the concept of the npt. Muscle armscontrol to armscontrol across the table. I have raised it with my chinese counterpart multiple times. If you want to be a responsible actor you need to be at the table having discussions. They were not interested. In my personal assessment now as plain old taxpayer is theres not much incentive for china to come to the table. Trump keeps talking about it, and as one of my colleagues pointed out, the chinese have three to 400 Nuclear Weapons and would this encourages them to build more if they came into the cup . The important thing is dialogue. For those who know me and of heard me say it again and again, this starts with diplomacy and it will end with diplomacy, and thats talking to one another. If and not having discussions we will never have an armscontrol treaty with china if we dont address it. We will never have a safer and secure world if we dont address it. I hope he continues to talk about it. It needs to be discussed. We are not in a good place with what our chinese counterparts are doing with the weapon systems, with their policies writ large. Many of you in the room are experts in those fields so were not going to solve it unless that doors open and talking. I hope he continues to talk about as i hope the women and men in this room continue to talk about it. That brings me to our next question, we are in a new cold war with Nuclear Weapons. Do you see that as the case and is it anyway theres an arms race in place, do you see any way to a rest it . I disagree with that assessment. I think its a Bumper Sticker i think it bodes well for media