A podcast. All after words programs can be viewed on a website at booktv. Org. Now on book tv after words, former Obama AdministrationNational Security advisor and un ambassador susan rice discusses her life and career in american diplomacy and foreign policy. She is interviewed by robin wright. After words is a weekly Interview Program with guest host interviewing top nonfiction authors about the latest work. Welcome susan rice to after words. Think is so much its great to be with you. A fascinating book of personal tail and a chronicle of your professional life and through a wide rate of crises and challenges but lets begin with the Current Crisis that the United States faces. As you know President Trump had a telephone call with the president of ukraine in july, a whistleblower reported in august and was released last week, what do you make of the whistleblowers complaint, what to do tell you and what struck you. What is so extraordinary is we have an blackandwhite in the president s own words evidence of the fact when he is conducting business supposedly on behalf of the United States with foreign leaders he is only conducting his own personal business and in this case his personal political business and there may be Something Else financial or what have you. If you read the transcript of the phone call, not want to the president of the United States release anything of National Significance to the United States. Nothing about the sovereignty of ukraine and how it was violated by russian invasion and nothing about sanctions and continue to hold with russia to speak to the fire and nothing to provide economic and security support to the ukrainians as a matter of u. S. Policy. It is bizarre conversation and all the president asked for is that zelensky, president of ukraine do trump a personal political favor by digging up dirt on his adversaries in the case he asked that he look into allegations and be debunked alleging that biden did something wrong as Vice President and theres no evidence to that effect but he wants the information to try to use it against biden politically and he also asked for more debunked information that suggests that ukraine rather than russia would be involved in meddling in the 2016 election. It is incredible, what is most disturbing in addition to the case of the president putting his own personal interest above the national interest, the whistleblower report we learn not only did the president do this but his team tried to hide the fact that he did by storing the transcript of the conversation on a very supersecret server and let me explain that. When you have president ial phone calls, there are no takers who sit in the situation room usually two or three taking realtime verbatim notes. Policy staffers including the National Security advisor or another senior representative and the expert staff are also in the room taking notes and advising the president if theres anything he needs to react to. None of that happened in the case of the experts being in the room. There were notetakers during the normal job. Those notes wouldve been stored on a secure server that is always the case. But then theres a separate server that is only the most sensitive highly compartmented information of the u. S. Government. Ive never even myself seeing the server. I received reports from it there were an envelope and had to be hand tied back. Thats how sensitive the material is. And yet somehow from the white house decided even though the conversation was not classified in the least. They hit it on the server to prevent anybody but the most narrow circle from having access from the knowledge. That is deeply disturbing. Why is there no tape recordings of those who were not alive in 1974. I dont know the historical of how the decision is made. I was in 1974 when they had nixon in the watergate and all that stuff. After that a decision somehow by someone was taken to record president ial phone calls so they are meticulously recorded in realtime by notetakers to make sure that the final transcript represent there, take on what was said. Who get the transcripts of the conversations. Do they go to the state department, Intelligence Community, embassy abroad, how widely are they distribute it . Im speaking from my experience or prior ministration. On a bipartisan basis anything is the same way i cannot speak was certai certainty of the trup administration. Normally what would happen a small group of policy staffers at the embassy in addition to National Security advisor and deputy National Security advisor and the president s office would receive the transcripts on a need to know basis meaning not everybody gets it and not everybody has access, if you have a policy you need to know for example with ukraine if you were to the European Office and responsible for ukraine or russia, if you worked in the military Defense Office and you needed to know about Security Assistance then in all likelihood you receive a copy of the transcript. And then cabinet level principles at the secretary of state and defense, the cia director and director of national intelligence, they too in all likelihood would see a personal copy of the transcript but it would not be widely distributed within the department. You said a few and theres a sense that theres a lot of people who will witness or participate in the transcript of the conversation to inform the whistleblower who got the information secondhand according to his account. How many people will see something that is considered sensitive. I cannot be certain how things operate in this white house. But traditionally there would be 2 5 staffers listening on the call, policy staffers plus 2 4 notetakers in the situation room plus or minus if they max ten in the immediate access to the call and then they might be a slightly larger circle that received a transcript of the call once and was produced in as they describe people who had a need to know. Youre not talking about a lot of people. My guess 10 15 on a normal call max. Did the whistleblower do the right thing . Absolutely. Should he or she testify . I dont know his or her personal story but i think this is a gravity and were called where we are. This is the case when the president of the United States has a leverage of appropriated congressional and money that congress had approved for a National Security purpose to protect ukraine from russian aggression, 400 million in assistance but the president of the United States held up to use his leverage to have the ukrainian president do him a favor that was political in nature. That is a very serious thing. And im not a lawyer so i will not characterize the legality but is deeply concerning. And theres a suspect that you have a president who is most often not doing the nation business but his own business. The ministration will say were interested in eliminating corruption in ukraine which was rampant a longstanding bad policy and something that has concerned a lot of the ministration. In the administration claims or finding out whether biden and his son were engaged in a manipulation of reality or fax. Or a financial gain for hunter biden. You were actually at the white house at the time what is your response . Let me take a few minutes to explain. This is completely false, there is no basis to the president s claim that joe biden was misusing his office and his interaction with ukrainians to benefit his son. Lets back up. The fact of the matter is every time Vice President biden engages the ukrainians on issues of corruption, he was doing and support a very transparent and clearly defined u. S. Policy. And at the request of president obama prewhen i was pressing for the removal of the prosecutor general, that prosecutor general was corrupt. He was feeling to conduct the appropriate investigation that needed to be conducted. This is not just the United States, this is not just the Obama Administration, this was in congress interviewed shared by the International Monetary fund like us was providing economic assistance to ukraine and a view shared by the european union. We were working together to help rig ukraine of the manifestation of corruption. This is an endemic problem. When Vice President biden was making his push to have the prosecutor general removed he was doing transparently, openly and support of a defined u. S. Policy. He was not doing it for personal gain and in fact the prosecutor general was not even at the time investigating the company the hunter biden became a board member of. There was no ask of the prosecutor general to step off of investigating hunter biden. He was not investigating him. This is all a classic taste that we see so often, unfortunately out of this ministration were they try to confuse the American People to deflect and deceive to create a story that does not exist, there is nothing improper that im aware of and this is been demonstrated that Vice President biden did anything improper, he carried out the policy and did openly and transparently and talked about it publicly and the records of his conversation by phone i can assure you are not hiding on a secret server that nobody can access. Hunter biden did profit financially awful member of the ukrainian company. My understanding and i understand it to the public which he was on the Public Domain at the time he began to serve on the board and he became a board member and he received compensation. So to your book, it is an interesting personal and professional tail and what is interesting is your heritage that you have on your mothers side they were jamaican immigrants, your grandfather was a janitor in your mother was a seamstress animatedly produced five children and they all went to college, one became a doctor, president of a university and a optometrist bareback in your mother went to radcliffe. Thats an extraordinary. And on your fathers side they were defendants of slaves. Your father became renowned economist advisor to a bank and on the federal board of reserves. So, you came from unusual circumstances in your life in many ways is the american dream. Im interested in your title of tough love. It was in part of all the good things in your life in your extraordinary upbringing. And as you mentioned the jamaicans that came to portland in 1912 and managed to send all their kids to college and see the one and see them succeed but on my dad side descendents of slaves but my greatgrandfather fought in the union army during the civil war. But then went on to achieve a college education. And then to educate generations of africanamericans and then to also go to college as it was a college prep as well. But tough love the title that i selected is how i was raised its also how i try to raise my kids and serve our country. We knew every step of the way my parents loved me and when i was growing up they would tell me when i was falling short they would not sugarcoat that or blow smoke to pump up my ego and i could do whatever set out to do if i did my best it would be the best no matter what. If some other way i did take my responsibilities seriously also as i described in the book they also had a very difficult and bitter divorce that included violence and a public custody battle and very powerful one painful challenges for me and my brother from the time i was seven until 15 or 16. I knew that my parents both loved me and my brother very much they were devoted in my view they had no business being married and then they split up. That was another tough experience for me and my brother and we had no choice but to decide b would persevere to get back up despite having been knocked down by their experience. That wasnt in her culture and upbringing we had to get back u up. That was another aspect of tough love. I have it now 22 yearold son and a 16 yearold daughter and they could not be more different from one another. And one moms around they will get that fears committed love and they will also get it straight and theres no way to get away with murder. We will get back to your son later. [laughter] you are as tall as i am. 5foot 3 inches and you played point guard in basketball. Usually that is the shortest person on the team. There are exceptions in the nba but at some of that hands the ball but most of the time it is the playmaker and i must say that that is striking because later in the book you bring point guard back. It is your name so it is the callsign. Also it is your philosophy of what you were doing so that resonated. I read about this in the book it is analogous to National Security advisor is not the person that takes the shot or the star player who gets all the media the point guard is the person then National Security advisor is the person who is behind the scenes more often helping to lead a team often passing the ball to the star players whether secretary of state or president or secretary of defense to make the public impression to negotiate and the National Security advisor is behind the scenes at the cabinet Level Committee to make recommendations to the president of how to proceed on these issues. So i use that analogy because it is apt and it is important. Its not the glory position and makes the team come together to go through the various positions in government and the crisis you faced as National Security council under president clinton they had the crisis of somalia and black hawk down when 18 servicemen were killed and then the crisis nearby in rwanda were 800,000 people were killed in a country the size of vermont. So first of all what you learned about dealing with crises and issues of when you engage when there is a slaughter of humankind and president clinton in the end. I was 28 years old and my first job in government. It was for director of peacekeeping and international organizations. So i got oversight and insight into issues in africa and asia and europe so in addition to somalia and rwanda we were also dealing with bosnia and cambodia and those were major challenges that the United Nations were involved somalia and rwanda was important in my professional Development Somalia black hawk down was the culmination of the administrations decision to go after who had killed so many somalis civilians and preventing us to get assistance to those that were starving actually thats what president bush got us into at the end of the administration after the shootdown of those helicopters and the loss of those people including the servicemen being dragged through the streets congress reacted very swiftly and put enormous pressure on the president to end involvement in somalia in fact prematurely before it was safe to do so. What i learned first of all the decisionmaking process with the Principals Committee that i ended up chairing ended up being more hands on when servicemembers are deployed you cannot leave that to deputies or day to day interagency process that was a challenge. When you engage in humanitarian intervention to make that decision to go to somalia for all the right reasons you are going into a society you may or may not be welcomed r dynamics we may not fully understand. Its very hard to separate humanitarian mission from a security situation and nationbuilding so somalia was a case to underestimate the complexity and the risk. Rwanda came after the start of the genocide was seven days after the last american servicemembers were required to leave somalia. The last thing on anybodys mind in washington was that the United States would run back to a country they thought even less of at the time. What i learned from rwanda which was horrific genocide that i saw firsthand a few months later through the National Security advisor at the time to see that they were filled with dead bodies but what i learned from that tragedy is what happens if you dont make timely decisions whether or not to intervene im not sure that could have been positive going door to door and we just learned in somalia the best forces could be challenged those writing on top of vehicles with machine guns. But in the case several wanda there was never a question called. There was never a decision whether or not they should intervene. That was because it was a series of individual decisions we had to get the americans out we had to deal if it is genocide or to shut down hate radio. Should the us if they should intervene that was never taken with the decisionmaking proces process. I learned you have to be engaged and be handson and make a conscious effort. You cannot allow that to slip away from you. And president clintons regret that he expressed in public many times that we did not intervene he thinks if we sent 10000 troops that might have made a difference i am not sure im as conduct one confident in that conclusion but what we should have learned from that experience i tried to take with me to my subsequent jobs to have a hand on process. So the National Security council there is a wonderful passage you write a passage that is fascinating that from the nsc as i was about to discover and i was perceived as smart and dynamic and decisive bureaucratically skilled and tough. But also brash and demanding and impatient and hardheaded and unafraid of confrontation. Made me autocratic and micromanaging. [laughter] and then with the secretary of state and in 48 subsaharan african countries i was 30 years younger and mostly come up in career of Foreign Service they were male and mostly white and saw me, i think good for the job and with that comparative background that i had the skills in terms of intellect and capacity and relationships at the white house at the top of the state department to get things done but they were skeptical and also my eldest child, our sad when i started at the state department i was a breastfeeding mom. So putting those to gather i was not the typical assistant secretary. And theres a bigger challenge breastfeeding. [laughter] so the crisis at stake arguably a 1998 with us embassy in kenya america lives of people who worked for the United States this was your First Experience of personal attacks. So explain why you came under criticism. I talk about it in the book but actually there is two different things. I was never attacked for the Embassy Bombing in fact the accountability review board said anytime theres an attack on personnel with Diplomatic Service so with my conduct or anything of the sort. This wasnt so much about the Embassy Bombing as it was 9 11. So fast forward almost four years later at that point i was the assistant in private life and two or three months after 9 11 there was an article published in vanity fair that alleged that i as well as former secretary of state Madeleine Albright in fact were responsible for 9 11 because we were offered intelligence on the government of sudan but they we would not accept because of our antipathy but if we accepted it that could have given us information. And the sudan connection was in the aftermath of the embassy attacks striking al qaeda. He struck al qaeda and in retaliation for the Embassy Bombing and with that pharmaceutical plant according to intelligence information was chemical weapons production. So they had connections to Osama Bin Laden who had lived in sudan. So those who were behind were frustrated by our policy with the clinton administration. They did not belong the state sponsor of terrorism. With the policy. So that was my First Experience. And then for something to come back and haunt you see you came back to government as un ambassador and you oversaw several crises but what you do besides vote on resolutions you paint a picture whether the ambassador of russia or the ambassador to iran with some of those relationships you developed and to be a close associate. It was a fascinating and a fun job. In the first instance to speak on behalf of the United States whether the General Assembly or the press corps on important policy issues the whole world is focused on. In my tenure that included sanctions on iran and libya and the Palestinian Press corps. I can go on and on but then behind the scene to be engaged in very high stakes negotiation particularly with the permanent five members of the Security Council of russia , china, United Kingdom and france. Then there other members of the United NationsSecurity Council so many of the most contentious negotiations happened within the Security Council but on the permanent ambassadors. So i had very strong sanctions on north korea and what we imposed in 2010 that ultimately it led iran to come to the negotiating table that so we ended up with the deal. Its a very challenging environment but in order to succeed you have to relate to them as human beings. Its not inaccurate but as an ambassador i spent more time with them than my husband who remained in washington. So that relationship for better or worse but those core relationships made all the difference. So i became involved in the intensive lovehate relationship with the ambassador who was very experienced he was incredibly charming and incredibly obnoxious and we fought like cats and dogs in public and private we could laugh and go out for a drink and speak pretty plain truth to each other. On the other hand you went to visit their residence and they became suspicious of what you were doing. Yes. This was 2009 or ten or 11. And looking in the context of the nuclear negotiation. To take american hostage. And in the persian gulf to be sure we had a way to defuse the crisis. And those shooting rockets and missiles and we would not stand for that. So because of the proximity of the un ambassador from iran from the private channel at the request of the white house. So on a number of occasions with the foreknowledge that reports thoroughly on my conversation we would discuss these contentious issues and i would push for them to be protected and respected. And its not known to the public. And then read act like we had never seen each other before in the hall of the United Nations. Early in my engagement the fbi is doing its job to make sure they know whats going on with our adversaries in the United States. And they became suspicious why is the American Ambassador talking. So they went through the proper channels to ask what was going on to be sure it was on the up and up. One of the most contentious developments when you are at the un was libya and the decision whether to intervene as qaddafi was moving his forces closer and closer to benghazi. You got a resolution that the russians did not use their veto power to abstain. And the chinese but russia was more important because the chinese often follow the russian decisions. So that began a sequence of events that still plays out to this day. And then to set a precedent with the nato allies going in to go beyond their mandate. The russians knew exactly what authority we were getting when we negotiated that resolution. And then as we reconstruct in the book when i explain the United States with our partners that protect civilians meant using airpower and columns of Libyan Forces if they were marching on civilian targets. The russians are that in the Security Council and also moscow. And for reasons we can only speculate, and i do in the boo book, the russians did not block that resolution. My speculation is we thought we were going to get so embroiled in the situation but to their benefit. That they were giving us just enough rope to hang ourselves. And them not to face the worst case scenario. And the russians now in retrospect claim we exceeded the mandate but that is not true. The most controversial part of your life is a year later and had been noble to spend a year in benghazi. Then to go back as ambassador and as we know he was murdered. And you were put out on the face of five tv shows as the person to explain that got you in a lot of trouble. There were people felt you were engaged of a coverup because you said at the time it was in the aftermath of protest of the embassy in cairo and this look like it might have been spontaneous. What is your side of the story . s. First of all the most important part of all of this is that we lost for americans. In a horrific terrorist attack. And Chris Stevens was not only a colleague but a friend that i valued. One of the many tragedies of the socalled talking points drama and the subsequent controversy i was in was the important fact we lost americans and we needed to figure out how and why it what to do about it in the future. So at a time when american policy mightve had a positive impact, we all walked away. So coming back to my show that i described in the book on the sunday show my late mother was an extraordinary force in my life warned me not to go on the show which i describe in detail. She intuitively thought it would not turn out well. I was actually planning to take my children to ohio state to the Football Game so they could see their first big ten Football Game paraguay kept that promise and i came back the next day and went on the sunday shows. The problem was i was asked to provide the best information our Intelligence Community had in unclassified form and i do the talking points that was the best current information that we had. I knew that because i was reading the classified version as well. I went on and explained this is what we knew at the time it could change and i laid it out and predictably according to my mother that information ended up changing down the road after i went on the sunday shows and to issue a statement with a had given me and others at that point so my best judgment at the time. The point was this was an Election Year and i was administration spokesperson. The republicans decided to attack me as a liar and somebody who is either incompetent or untrustworthy because of the information i provided. It spiraled into assisting personal attack on my integrity. Across to the job of being secretary of state. I cant know that for sure and i do not say that in the book. I say what it did do was cause me to say to president obama and state publicly i do not want to be considered. I boys wonder do you feel like you were the sacrificial lamb and not the obvious choice to put on the show whether it was the secretary of state Hillary Clinton or counterterrorism community, someone else from the national secured counsel, you were not the logical choice, do feel like you are thrown out there. I dont. I really dont. I think my mother did, i dont let me explain why. In the first instance, i know the ministration did ask and i read about this with secretary clinton, they came to me after she declined and id assumed and was led to believe because she had an incredibly emotional and tiring week and do not want to go. They couldve asked the National Security advisor and other people but this is the thing that they asked me too do before and i had done before. It was also ten days before the start of the un assembly and the issues were not just about benghazi, they were about the attacks on the facilities around the world in the upcoming un General Assembly meaning in iran and Prime Minister of israel to the un. There was a bunch of issues that were beyond benghazi that were in my house. But what i think was my mistake and im quite candid about in the book, my disposition and instinct is when im on a team and the leader of the team, in this case the white house asked me too do something, i typically want to say yes, i did not think i was incapable of doing this job any differently than anybody else. And i said yes. And what i rely subsequently is the other of my colleagues were keeping their heads down because they understood that often in a crisis situation that is inevitably going to become politicized that the messenger, not just the message gets attacked. I learned that the hard way. We have a lot to cover in limited time you went on to become secretary of state in the description of the job. Most days the job of National Security advisor seems infinite it feels like a huge slab of concrete constantly resting on ones torso. Your little torso. Like it is still breathing and functioning under the pressure as more bricks were piled on top of the original slab and there were a lot, lets go quickly through them because they want to get to the subject of america in those issues. Edward of wikileaks rebuild the United States had been tapping the looters of the countries which led to real anger among the chancellor of germany or the president of brazil and you write about her for six months you spent mopping up the mess. What damage did this do, to look at them as a hero. I view him as a traitor. And what do you think first of all what did you have to do during the sixmonth and what is a Lasting Legacy . About getting classified information. I say in the book that wikileaks did in warmest damage to our security and the American People cannot comprehend. But it cost us the ability to use tools that we needed to used to keep americans safe. I think to this day that the cost and consequences indoor. Now, what i spent my sixmonth doing after this was trying to help with other senior colleagues in the ministration to repair relationships with their closest partners. In a very complicated and intensive interagency process where we tried to look at how we were approaching our use in collections of such intelligent and to make sure we have the proper safeguards in place. That was a very involved process that led the president by january of 2014 to issue a whole new set of guidelines of to how we approach the collection and dissemination. But i cannot overstate how much damage there has been into russians arms where he remains, quite smugly and i gather he has his own book out in which he tells his side of the story and from my Vantage Point if youre a loyal american you dont steal secrets and give them to an adversary and put them in public. You mentioned Vladimir Putin and the calls that president obama had with him. And in the book no call with Vladimir Putin was short. The usually lasted 90 minutes and sometimes he would keep the president waiting to take the call during which president obama might play scrabble on his ipad, a little bit of insight in the ministration. So, what was the engagement with food like, did you ever feel like we can do business with him and did you feel he was constantly undermining, you left after discovering that the russians had intervene in the 2016 president ial election. There is no question that putin personally in his objectives of leader of russia are empathetic later interest. There is nothing that one can say about his objective that aligns in a meaningful way now with ours. In the interference of our election is the most example. There were occasions over the years where we were able to work with the russians i iran nuclear deal. And in getting a large chemical weapon removed from syria. And you engage with putin entrusting them is my judgment and that is what is so worried have how President Trump is engaged with putin. He is privileged prudent word over that of her own experts and Intelligence Community. But the flipside of the ironically, phone calls with putin were not screaming matches, they were civil and involved in respectful. Even if they were adversarial in their substance. And i of course had a number of experiences engaging with putin personally and directly when he was at meetings and summits were president obama was attending and i also can attest personally that he is a creep as it relates to women. And i mentioned this in the book as well where he had an opportunity in normandy france on dday anniversary and president obama and i were at this reception in the large room and obama was across the room and i was by myself with putin in his National Security advisor and he made some unwelcome comments about my attractiveness. One thing thats striking about him is how small he is. I was with him in the hotel lobby in chile during a pate conference and i was pushed aside by his bodyguard and i turned around and i look him in the eye. And i realize this is a man who has issues. Hes got issues. What are you worried about in terms of russian intervention in the 2020 election. I think is really important for the American People to understand it has not stopped. They did and they were very actively involved in 2016 as we saw with hacking the d c and it was others on the Clinton Campaign and he tried to infiltrate our electoral system and they put out false information and then they were very active on social media trying to pit underpin americans against each others against contention whether razor immigration or guns or what have you. And this is to discredit our democracy and cause people to hate one another and turn against one another. And they continue to do that everyday since 2016 and in the context of every two years of a national election. We have every reason to be concerned that they will continue their offering 2020 and intensify with learning would trying to get around them and am very worried that congress under majority leader mcconnells leadership has not done enough to help us defend against that threat. We have less than five minutes i want to get back to your personal story. First of all your son at stanford, despite the politics of your family he has become a republican, trump supporter and take positions that are in many ways very different from yours. Whats that like. Whats it like and also he had interesting debate within the family. My husband and i try to raise her kids to be independent thinkers and have the courage of conviction and unfortunately we succeeded. [laughter] our daughter on the one hand who is substantially to the left of us in the son who is substantially to the right. And theyre both wonderful kids whom we love deeply but it makes for interesting table conversations. And they are both bright and engaged in the issues of the day but with my son in particular, there is some pretty dark differences between us. That is not easy but the good news is were personally we are very close. And we will talk about these things and sometimes at higher levels than others but i respect him and i think he respects me very much and ive learned a lot from him because he gives me an insight into the values in the thinking of our country. My last question this is getting back to race, you were born three years before the Supreme Court decision on richard levy and is very interesting that you have grown up in a. Where weve seen a consciousness about Race Relations but also real challenges on Race Relations and you have entered racial marriage as well and given what weve gone through as charlottesville, parkland, ferguson that the shootings by white policeman of africanamericans, your reflection, unfortunately very briefly on Race Relations on the United States in the 21st century. I think if you look at the long arc of history there is an extremely progress. My father was born in South Carolina and grew up under jim crow and had to fight in a segregated army in world war ii. And he was deeply wounded by the fact that german pows were able to eat in restaurants he cannot. So you have to look at the long arc of history. And yes after i was born only then in 15 or 16 states could i have married my husband. So i think we are growin growind evolving in a positive direction but we also have an enormous internal divide and setbacks and there are many people who have great difficulty still in this country and people who look like me. I dont think its a majority i think its a tricky minority that perhaps increasingly vocal one and i take no joy in saying they been emboldened and encouraged by much of what they hear out of President Trump. In given license to those who hate him both sides on charlottesville and mixed messages on racism and attacks of women of color, i could go on. But there is a segment of our society, i hope increasingly small that still has substantial racial prejudice in the structural barriers and economic brews and social barriers to mobility are still very real to many people and not just africanamericans but latinos and others. So we have real challenges ahead and we cannot declare victory and assume those challenges of race and slavery have been wiped away. It has not. But what worries me most is rather than working together to try to heal those divisions and understand their were all human beings and in this boat together. When the leadership viewed against one another and that worries me and i conclude the book with a call for us to come together across our divisions as a mustard in my own home and we need to do it on a National Level in order to strengthen and save our democracy and preserve our leadership of the National Security. Susan rice, tough love, good luck on your book to her. Thank you for joining us. This program is available as a podcast all after words programs can be viewed on our website at booktv. Org book tv continues on cspan2, television for serious readers. Booktv. Org. [applause] good evening, everyone and welcome to the george washing