Transcripts For BLOOMBERG Charlie Rose 20161212

Why are you making that announcement today . John well, obviously, one of , the situations that brought this to a boil is the allegations of russian in russia interfere not only in our elections, but in other elections around the world. That undermines, obviously, the fundamentals of democracy, if they are able to succeed. But more importantly, charlie, testimony before the committee by our military and civilian leaders in defense have all stated that cyber is one of the areas where we do not have an advantage over our potential adversaries. We not only dont have an advantage, in some instances, they have an advantage. These hearings will be focused on the overall issue of Cyber Security, and obviously, their ability or inability to effect the outcome of elections in democratic countries would certainly be one of the issues, but only one. Charlie but you are saying youll have your own investigation at the Armed Services committee. John my understanding among not whether is its they are just hacking into the last election. By the way, the chinese hacked in 1980. Lection this has to be brought and encompassing. We have already had hearings in the Armed Services committee on this. Weve asked all our military witnesses. Now we have to focus on the incompetent aspects of a challenge, whether it be their ability to shut down our satellites or steal our most important secrets, such as our new weapons systems, or whether it is to be able to listen in on evennications, or whether to disrupt or destroy communications. There are some scenarios, my friend, and im only emphasizing scenarios, where they could shut down every satellite in base. So this is it in space. So this is a huge challenge, and frankly this administration has no policy as to how to prevent it, what to do in case of an attack, and how to prepare for one. Charlie do you have any doubt that the russians tried to interfere in the u. S. Elections . Was i dont know if it intentional interference, but i do know that some of the leaks that came out cannot be helpful to the political process. I will leave it to others, and i dont have sufficient information to make a judgment about the past election, but i can make a judgment that if they are able to disrupt communications and to pervert communications to the degree makinghe people who are a determination as to how to or disruptedrted or destroyed, then, obviously, its a big challenge to democracy, whether it be in the United States or any place else. Charlie do you believe you have a different point of view than president elect trump on this, who has tended to downplay the idea that it might have been the russians . John every expert i have talked to says it is the russians, they have played a very major role, but not just in elections, charlie. They are every day bombarding some of our industrial basis, theicularly militaryindustrial complex. They are bombarding our communication systems. , its what they are doing. They are the best at it, the chinese are next, and then you have the everyday hacker who is also a significant challenge. Cybere but we also have security and cyber sb nice capability. I assume we are using it as well. Cyber espionage capability. Of thentil the president United States sets a policy as to what you do and how you achieve it, for example, right now if we think there is an impending attack, there is no policy as to what to do. Once there is an attack, there is no policy as to what we do in response. So there is really a lack of coherence from the executive ranch. Our job is to layup from the executive branch. Our job is to enact legislation if necessary, and i am sure some legislation will be necessary. Charlie you are saying mike rogers does not have a policy to respond to a Cyber Security invasion. John he has testified that there is no policy. Charlie coming out of the Armed Services committee will be a recommendation for legislation. John not just a recommendation, we will enact legislation through the senate Armed Services committee. I have received encouragement to address the situation by our republican leadership. Charlie have you had any conversations with president elect trump about this . John i have not. Charlie should you . Welcome auld discussion on this or anything else with him. I havehim very well and had conversations with general mattis, a man i have known for the last 12 or 15 years. Charlie your colleague and mutual friend, Lindsey Graham, an admirer, said im going after rush in every way you can go after russia. I think they are one of the most he influences on the world stage. I think they did interfere in our elections in our elections and i want putin personally to pay the price. John my friend Lindsey Graham is always shy and retiring. No, hes not. John i think we need to have that as part of our overall processing of the situation, and not only what the situation is, but what we need to do in order to counter this threat to our National Security. That is a part of it. According to most experts i talked to, the russians are the leading offenders, but there are plenty of others. The chinese, some say the latest chinese aircraft has some alarmingly similar features of the f35. So there is no doubt that a great deal of industrial espionage is taking place, not just by the russians as well. So we knew to develop an overall policy that not only applies to the russians but to every other nation and every other individual that might seek to harm this nation. Charlie even though they dont underlinedcy, you the fact that you do not believe the administration has a policy, lisa monaco said singling out internet related dangers is among the most Significant National Security Issues facing the administration. Ask lisaeone should monaco what is our policy if we detect an attack that is coming to the United States, what is our response if there is an attack, and look at the whole scenario of how the United States of america responds to this threat. There is none. But why wouldnt you as chairman of the Senate Armed Forces community, request a meeting with the president elect to talk about this . John i promise you, the best way to have that dialogue is to declare that there will be hearings and policy making and legislation coming out of the senate Armed Services committee. I promise you that will prompt a dialogue, and its going to take some time, charlie. Its not something we are going to be able to do overnight. Do you believe you have to turn the president elects understanding around on this . To Time Magazine, i dont believe the russians interfered with the election. It could be russia, and it could be china, and it could be some guy at his home in new jersey. I believe it couldve have been russia and it could have been anyone of a number of other people, sources or individuals. John in some respects, he is right. That hehese are players mentioned. The problem is that he may not quite understand that the best at it in the most hostile, and the ones who are probably had the most Significant Impact over a number of years are the russians. They are the best at their job. Admiral rodgers has basically said the same thing. All these experts have said our director of National Intelligence has said that its the russians who are, by far, the most active in this kind of behavior, but it is not confined to russia. Lookie senator mccain, i forward to talking more about this. Thank you for joining us. See you soon. Charlie we continue with michael and david, both from washington. David, i begin with you. Why did the president take this action today and order this investigation . David i think there is a substantial region and for reason and from everything we can tell, political reason. Tive reason is it has taken the Intelligence Community along time to come to all the conclusions on the russian effort to influence the election. Thats everything from the hacking of the dnc, the Democratic National committee and the release of those emails to the scanning of registration data, though it looks like in the end they did not try to affect the actual voting process and machines, and then all the other surroundings of this because obviously the russians have been hacking into many other american institutions for years. There is a serious question about why the United States was caught by such surprise here. Tantively, he wanted to influence future elections. I think the political reason is even more fascinating, because president elect trump has been denying there was much effort to influence the election at all, and secondly he said there is no evidence that it was the russians, while there is this flood of intelligence reports floating around the city suggesting it was the russians, and who within russia did it . I think what the president is trying to do is force the Intelligence Community to put all this down on paper, give it to congressional committees, perhaps make part of it public, before president elect trump gets sworn in and is able to come in and say Nothing Happened here. Charlie michael, what would you add to that . Michael i think david has it exactly right. If nothing else, it sort of boxes in president elect trump. I should point out that even today, the administration ratcheted up what it has said about the russian role. Eric shultz in briefing reporters at the White House Press briefing said that it was the cyberdence that attacks on the dnc and other political organizations and political leaders were directed at the highest level of the russian government. That is about as strong as you can get. The previous statement from the Intelligence Community was that it was high confidence was a term of art. In some ways, the administration is throwing down the gauntlet, and werere it is, going to compile all this evidence and present it to you in the new administration, and this is coming the same week said in thatmp Time Magazine interview he doesnt know if it was the russians the same weekend that donald trump said maybe it was some guy at his house. Pence has been getting the intelligence briefings. Number two, the president elect has been talking to the ,resident with some frequency if we understand what he is saying, that hes consulted with the president about the transition and a range of other things. That heen some pride likes the president so much in hopes the president likes him, but its been a very productive session. You wouldve thought president would have reminded him what this administration believes about the russians hacking. You would think, and shultz was pressed on that at the White House Press briefing today and said hes not going to give a readout on the conversations between the president and the president elect. To separate out those comments that donald trump what the of dismissing Intelligence Community is saying from the president s decision to make public this review today and as i said before, ratchet up the level of confidence they have that they are right about this. Charlie david, what would you say about that . Oddity,hat adds to the in addition to whatever briefings theyve given to vice ence, youveect pa now seen a raft of more traditional republican step out need to hold hearings, we need independent commissions, we need to have more of these details come out in public. John mccain said the other day that he would hold hearings with the Armed Services committee, not only of the hacks related to theelection, but perhaps efforts of russian intelligence to get inside u. S. Military operations. That theof course, hacking that took place at the dnc and elsewhere was not the first effort by the russians in recent times. There were hacks on the state department and white house, the pentagon, so this fits into a broader context. My guess is that if the conversation has taken place between president obama and president elect trump, its been in the context of, there is a bigger Russian Campaign out here and ignore it at your peril. Charlie my impression is that the investigatory effort is being your headed by the fbi, am i correct . Michael thats right, for the immediate Dnc John Podesta and so forth, but there has also been other members of the Intelligence Community being brought in. Michael the fbi took the lead on this throughout, but this clearly will encompass the entire Intelligence Community. I should point out that probably the strongest Public Statement has, from Admiral Mike Rogers at the National Security agency, who, although he didnt say clear, made it all that that he was referring to a nationstate that tried to influence our election. ,e said something even further intending to affect the election. That is operably the biggest open question here. If indeed it was the russians, what works there motive . What was there motive . Was it to create confusion in the american politics, as they have done in many other countries . Or was it a concerted effort to influence the results of the election . To help elect donald trump and defeat Hillary Clinton. That is probably the biggest mystery about this. We dont know the answer. Charlie is there any doubt that this would be taking place him if its taking place to the degree that the various intelligence agencies believe it is, that it would be carried out with out without putins knowledge . Everyone ive run into who was in senior levels of intelligence say it is inconceivable to them that someone would take the risk of doing something this high profile that could draw a major response from the United States without clearing it first with the boss. Michael its also true that the russian intentions and goals here may have changed over time, that perhaps there was some initial, when this began, it may have been an effort to help trump. It may have been an effort, there are certainly indications and his top aides were not enthralled with Hillary Clinton. At some point, though, they may have read the polls the way everybody else did and assumed that Hillary Clinton was going to win, and they may have scaled back some of their activity. Although that is not entirely clear, either. We know they were in the dnc, they were hacking emails at least through the summer of 2016. It is still not clear how long it went on. There are some indications it may have continued for a little bit of time after that. And also i should point out that there was a lot of concern over the summer and fall about those probes of state election systems. That really rang alarm bells, suggesting they may have been trying to hack the elections themselves, and i think the administration has made clear that that didnt happen. Of finala couple questions. As soon as we had some evidence that hacking had taken place and the fbi jumped on this, my understanding is that the president of the United States, president obama said there would be a proportionate response, that intelligence agencies had immediately dug into this, from the fbi, the cia, defense and other people, and that there was going to be a proportionate response. Has there been a response, as far as we know . Response weve seen so far has been some warnings to the russians that president obama gave directly when he last putin in china. Linto a warning sent through a system that is used for both cyber and nuclear warnings, but if there has been a punishment to, of for to president putin this, we havent seen it. Maybe there has been some kind of covert effort, but it has been pretty subtle. It was joe biden who said on one of the sunday shows before the election, we will come after putin, and he will know it even if nobody else does. But so far, evidence of that is pretty scarce. Became public today because lisa monaco had breakfast with the reporters. She started with an overview about threats to the country, threats to the homeland, and talked about the cyber threat. Cyberid when there are attacks that threaten american interests, we will act to. Rotect our interests i asked her later if the u. S. Government has taken or will be taking steps to impose costs on the russians as a result of these cyber attacks, and she did not answer that question. Merlie someone once said to after the russians were accused ,f doing this that the response the proportionate response would be something that would be done washat putin knew what it about, but it would look for credibility within russia, so it would not be done with a lot of bells and soundings. Thats right, charlie, but there is a risk to that as well. Theres always a temptation, lets keep it quiet and in the family, but one of the biggest problems in ciber, as weve discussed on past shows, is establishing some sense of deterrence. It does not exist in the cyber realm the way it does in nuclear. If youre going to establish deterrence, you have to have a pretty public response so that the next time, is not the russians, but instead the North Koreans are the iranians are the chinese or someone else we are not inking up, they understand this is not a free fire zone. David, michael, thank you so much. Back in a moment. Stay with us. We now turn to the latest news from the trump transition. Joined by Major Garrett of cbs news, whos been covering not only the Trump Campaign but the trump transition. Withdrew hisuliani name from consideration. Give us some sense of what was going on there . Rudy giuliani appreciates opera. He endorsed donald trump right before the New York Primary in april and became his most aggressive and most deeply loved because i thought this so many times on the campaign trail surrogate for donald trump, and he is the odd man out. Spectacularly the odd man out in transition. Its almost inconceivable to some in the trump transition that Rudy Giuliani would not find a place within the trump cabinet. Thats related to trumps on instincts, but its also related to giulianis missteps. Trump offered him the position directorey general and of Homeland Security and he turned them down. Focusing entirely on secretary of state, the position he wanted and coveted, but in the end, trump would not give him. Pulledi since that, and himself out before suffering the indignity of someone else getting that slot. So in every way, this deeply important american political figure, who revolutionized new york city, and who was the biggest, if not most conspicuous exponent of the trump approach to the presidency, will be left on the sidelines. Its an amazing story. Charlie socialist left in the running for secretary of state . Ive been told that there are only two really legitimate figures who make it the position of secretary of state. Mitt romney and the chairman of exxon mobil, Rex Tillerson. He brings for donald trump a couple of things you may not associate with the position of secretary of state. He has no government experience. Hes not a trained Foreign Service diplomat by any stretch of the imagination, but he is a big american businessman, a corporate chieftain who has done deals. Because exxon mobil operates in more than 50 countries, it explores for oil and natural gas on six of the seven continents on earth, he has, if you will, oh corporate worldview. He has experience with lots of different governments, and possibly most important, he has long experience in russia and with vladimir putin. They knew each other back in the kgbs, when putin was a functionary in the government. If youre looking for an analogy, look for the Chinese Ambassador for donald trump, currently the governor of iowa, who got to know the current head of china when he was a functionary in the chinese bureaucracy. If you look at that as a template, you might see Rex Tillerson as someone particularly amenable to president elect trumps worldview. That theits clear president has whatever differences there were with mitt romney, whatever was said about both men in the campaign, that they work their way through that and this now is a conversation which is a positive conversation about the difficult process of selecting a secretary of state. On the one hand, the menu has to make the decision for the benefit of the country, and on the other hand a man who has his own integrity and is prepared to go to work, or a man that he was deeply critical of during the campaign. Lands, if mitts romney becomes or does not become secretary of state, when he leaves the process with is a different appreciation of donald trump, and importantly to mitt romney, a different appreciation ,f donald trump to mitt romney just as donald trump has a different appreciation of the current president , barack obama. I attended more than 70 mitt romney rallies and there was not one scintilla the not one scintilla of appreciation for donald trump. Donald trump has a deeper appreciation of barack obama as president , as a man, and a figure in history. So there is evolution with donald trump. Mitt romney is in the final two of an exhausting, everexpanding list of potential secretaries of state. with respect to obama, the president elect is reflecting a very adult behavior. It is and a dog behavior, but a behavior i would cautiously, charlie, suggest adult behavior, but a behavior i would cautiously suggest in awe. I read a lot about those before the three hours privileged enough to cover. It is, in its own sense, an swe einspiring an aw institution. The American Culture needs to appreciate about donald trump that in some areas, he is awed by the institution and some who have achieved it. In ways perhaps surprising to himself, donald trump has come to appreciate that. Charlie he is a man who would admiresccess who success. Let us talk about this idea of how he does it, far more than barack obama or george bush 43 has thrown himself into this process, interviewed people, is on the phone constantly. The impression i have is that by selection of other president s was much more a product of a Transition Team and involvement by the president elect, much more involvement of a team. This president wants to touch and talk to and get a personal sense of the men and women he wants to serve. Exactly. I think its far too early, charlie, to offer an appraisal of this approach that is either positive or negative. I think the country and those of us obligated to cover this process as it unfolds before us need to take it step by step and judge it as the results speak for themselves. Remember, jimmy carter was the president who was deeply involved in the daytoday and hourbyhour details of his presidency. Ed him down and separated him from the larger vision. There is a danger involved in a kind of involvement and get, we tend to appreciate someone who has an appreciation for details and evaluating someone at the personal gut level. If i have learned anything about president elect trump in my 18 or so months covering him it is that he makes very important and crucial snap judgments about people by appraising them himself, and not getting it filtered by those around him. That is an important emergingistic of an trump presidency. It just is a reality. Charlie thank you so much for joining us. It is a pleasure. Well be right back. Stay with us. Charlie more on this weekend. The announcement, i had heard before that giuliani was out of the running. Is that simply todays announcement to make that clear that this possible nominee with a jew himself because of with withdrew himself . Made the official word that giuliani was withdrawing himself from any administration job, but Reince Priebus stated in a quote on this announcement that giuliani was vetted thoroughly by the trump team and passed with flying colors. Clears Rudy Giuliani of any rumors of whether he was passed over for secretary of state. Your reporting is correct. It matches with my reporting which is that Rudy Giuliani is fading in the view of donald trump. We know whether he could have been attorney general whether he had not insisted on being secretary of state . Philip i dont know for sure. There would have been some discussion about whether Jeff Sessions should get it or Rudy Giuliani, so you know, potentially, he could have gotten himself a job. Butmagined Giuliani Giuliani was insistent from the beginning that state was all he wanted. Charlie he could have promised sessions a Supreme Court appointment or Something Like that. Philip exactly. Charlie which would have been entirely within the sort of thing he might want because of his life within, you know, the judicial process of both in terms of Law Enforcement also in terms of judging. Let me turn to the secretary of state. What do we know . Philip well, we know that there are two people considered leading candidates. Mitt romney who has been a candidate for some time and a new figure, Rex Tillerson, the ceo of exxon mobil, and Business Executive who has done work around the world because of his role in the oil industry and including with russia. He has relationships with the putin government and has been around the world. He did mitt romney might be a more traditional political figure in that diplomatic post. Both are liked by donald trump. There are political considerations. Trump supporters are hostile to the idea of mitt romney, of rewarding a former antagonist who was not loyal on the campaign and was to listen with tillerson, he is more of an unknown. Lindsey graham would scrutinize his ties with russia. Take us inside the trunk Transition Team. What other conflicts between different groups . There are different perspectives on sectors of state. This has been going on for sometime now, really for about a month, this discussion about who the diplomats should be. Mike pence is said to be in courage and Reince Priebus. Both have relationships with romney and sit in with the Party Establishment and there are other advisors inside the circle, especially kellyanne conway, who have been hostile to the idea of romney. That is why tillerson has emerged. He matches the qualities from trump likes in romney. He has a certain stature and gravitas and can travel the world with the authority of a president. And then tillerson is seen as someone who carries himself in a similar way and i think when he came to meet with trump this week at trump tower, he was very impressive and they had a good conversation. That is what people are saying. Those are the qualities trump is looking for in a diplomat. It is at this point a political calculation of whether he goes with romney, who is more of the party insider, at the risk of alienating his loyal base and advisors, or going with someone new light to listen. Like tillerson. Charlie is there pushed back because he praises the president . Philip not within the Transition Team that i have heard of. I think a lot of his voters are trying to give him the benefit of the doubt here. It is one thing to have a meeting with al gore because your daughter tried to set up a meeting and he listened to what the guy has to say. It is another thing to change her view on the policies. Trump is as far to the right on the climate Environmental Issues as he can be. He just appointed prewitt, pruitt to be the head of the epa. It is pretty clear, whatever al gore told trump in that meeting, hes not really heating that counsel. Charlie what might we learn president elect trump will govern based on how he is running the transition . Philip hes very handson as you guys were talking about in the earlier segment. He is interviewing all of these people personally. Hes weighing in on them personally and making assessments about whether they would be a good fit and his cabinet, whether they have the leadership strength he is looking for. He has been really drawn to alphas, to leaders, to people who are ceos in the corporate world or military generals. Hes not looking at academics, policy minds, folks who spent years reading books about things. He wants people who have been in the real world, making hi decisions that have impacts on markets and global affairs. That is the approach is taking too governing. Mark i have isn with the policies will look like. We have no idea what kind of policies they will move forward without the the inauguration. There is a policy team in washington developing an agenda for the first hundred days, but those details have not been released publicly. Charlie the president elect has talked about some of his primary priorities in terms of philip of course. Charlie in terms of immigration, trade, and tax reform. Philip of course. We have to look at what some of those deals with Congress Might look like. There are a lot of details to fill in. Charlie what role is steve bannon playing . Philip a very influential role. He is with the president elect almost every day, weighing in on a lot of these appointments. He is making his views heard on some of these big jobs, certainly secretary of state eight and some of the others. Secretary of state and some of the others. The assistant secretary at the agency, they have also not yet announced senior white house staff positions beyond Reince Priebus and steve bannon and the white house counsel. Give is going to be some feel them ast who jobs. Who is the white house, who is going to be the deputy chief of staff, lee is on the congress, Vice President elect pences office. The republican National Committee chairmanship is a job that Reince Priebus is vacating. It will be the political arm. Onstarts to take shape early and there is a lot of different candidates in the mix for that. We are hearing the leading ronander seems to be robbie mcdaniel. Charlie is it an accurate statement of which seems to be the impression that while donald trump is urged not to tweet as much as he does, it is irresistible for him . Philip that is a great question. He has indicated he will continue making his views known on twitter. E has been doing it every day he plans to continue into the white house. There has been some suggestion that perhaps he would back off of twitter and one person mentioned secret service would have something to say about that, but if he is able to tweet, he will tweet. He wants to communicate directly with the American People and that is what we have been seeing throughout the campaign and during this transition. He really wants to do everything he can to break through what he sees as a press filter and speak directly to people. That is twitter, rallies, doing collins on radio, and call ins on radio. Charlie we will be right back. Stay with us. Charlie as it has, since 1927, Time Magazine announced its person of the year this week. This time it is the individual who for better or worse had the most influence on the events of the year. President elect donald trump might be the obvious choice but the nation remains divided over wide. With me as nancy gibbs, the managing editor of time. Im pleased to have her back at this table. You has always framed this as the person who has the most influence, not the most popular. This is a slamdunk, isnt it . Nancy what is interesting to me is, who has had the most influence on the year for better or worse . It seems like universal agreement that he has the most influence and his agreement over whether it was for better or for worse. This is one of the things that we really looked at is that every president ial election, we named barack obama four years ago and eight years ago. We named george w. Bush 12 years ago and 16 years ago. In president ial election years, it would be unusual for someone other than the newly elected president to be the dominant figure that year. Theny president ial year, country is divided. Roughly half the country votes for one or the other. There is something that feels different this year, at least of the levelsit, of surprise at the outcome, which speaks to how many people who were meant to be the experts and the data analysts and pollsters did not see his victory coming, and the reaction since then that even when you think about bush and gore in 2000 with the extraordinary , even thatong drama one did not feel as dramatic and , and that isis one a lot of the challenge that the president elect i think faces. He talks about wanting to bring the country together and he apologies that that represents a thatficant recognizes that represents a significant challenge. He talks about it as an honor. We have run into that for years. It sounds like the kinds of things people on with people without the end of the gear and be a noise has the year, and we have always said that it is a measure of influence. Last year, we picked angela merkel. The position she took on the refugee crisis and the eurozone and on the Economic Policy in europe made her pretty divisive figure as well. She was by no means universally admired. Charlie and she suffered politically even though she will run for reelection. She is up for reelection. We will have some change going on in italy. The netherlands i think has an election. We saw an election in austria. The whole idea if i thought of anything other than trump, to be obvious, at this particular year, because you have framed the question, it would be populism as an idea. Nancy we have a story about the rise of the populists around the world. Nigel farage, the person in the philippines. One of the reasons we were not is what isdo a group remarkable about on time that we have not seen before is somebody who comes in and defies all expectations, breaks all the rules, shatters every sort of norm and convention of how you run for president , defeated not one but both Major Political parties on his way to winning, it charlie and defeated two dynasties. Nancy and did it with largely based on his own instincts, not a huge cadre of advisors and pollsters, the help of the Republican Party infrastructure or donor class. People whos army of are usually a mound opening president ial candidate and taking some responsibility for victory, he has a small coterie of advisors and his kids. Charlie this was a transformative election in terms of the way people when the presidency . Nancy there are questions for journalists coming out of this, one of which will be, do we see other politicians trying to copy his model and can they . Its possible that he was unique in the ability to accomplish what he did. I think of the many things about the 2016 race that was to beenented, we had candidates who went into it with 100 name recognition. It is easy to forget that donald trump has been a very familiar figure in millions of peoples living rooms from his Television Career quite apart from his life as a real estate baron and casino owner. Selfpromotion was central to his brand. People felt they knew him. You know, the lifetime them, they hated him, they felt that they knew what he was about from the beginning. That is hard for someone else to replicate. Charlie i think also, and i thought about this more recently than i did before the election, is that, and he may have understood this, in terms of the winning of the presidency, the disruptive this of the way he of the disruptiveness way he ran his campaign, the attacks on other people made him be perceived by his people who were enthusiastic about him as a leader, a strong leader. That was part of how he viewed the disruption, that it was necessary to overcome the challenge he had achieved. Thelie the nancy subtext of it, whatever outrageous thing he was saying, this is someone willing to say controversial things and so, even on election day, as he injured up winning ended up winning the Electoral College road, six out of 10 voters dont think he has the judgment or temperament to be president. Charlie and only 40 of people do . Nancy yeah, and people for whom judgment and temperament were issues, important Hillary Clinton won by miles, but by a factor of two to one, most people cared most about who could bring change to washington and he won that group by 60 points. That desire for change and the belief that he was more likely to bring it, i mean, the irony there is that Hillary Clinton, what she punished for the very experience and long track record that she had . Charlie your instinct would be that she was, punished by the fact that he was able to grab the change mantle . Nancy everyone knew this was meant to be a change election. Americans typically dont rant third terms. Third terms. Nt one of the reasons that the political experts all along thought this could not possibly succeed was that he kept doing things that no one had done before or to the extent that people had, it proved fatal. It is theooking back, capacity to stand in front of a huge audience and have a conversation with them is to me one of his, one of the qualities that made his rallies different. It was not a speech. Speech, it was a regurgitation of what he was saying before, but much more of it was reacting, impressions, talking about he almost was having a conversation with them about what he read in the paper or had seen on television, and what do you think of this, or did you agree with me . It was much more that kind of dialogue. That is why, on the occasions he was back on the teleprompter, it felt so odd because that was not the vernacular of his campaign. Charlie and the spontaneity. You have interviewed before, you interviewed him last time with the evil and all that. You go back a week ago, how was he . Was he different anyway . Nancy i would be the first to say that there is every chance that because i expected he would be different that i saw a difference. But i did see a difference, the thing thating, the struck me so much, im interested in the relationship the between president because of what that job does to you. , he had been on the phone for 45 minutes with president obama, talking with him about ideas for his cabinet choices, and other topics that were on his mind, and he spoke with extraordinary warmth and respect. He talked about the chemistry he felt between them. He felt that he expected that day he went to the white house and they sat together, he he said, everyone would have thought that would have been an awkward moment. We started talking, we talked for a long time, i found it very gracious and helpful, and we talked since then, and, you know, in listening to him talk, particularly about his conversations of president obama, you start to see a glimpse that he is having to get his head around what has just happened, and i sometimes ofdered, did he expect course they will say, we always knew we were going to win the evening,y in they did not think they were going to win. It was only after 8 00 that they began to see what the positives were in pennsylvania and wisconsin and michigan that they realized victory might be possible. Nancy so then, you win and you wake up. Is it like the dog that catches the car . Now, i am asked to going to have to be president , and what does that mean, and how is that going to work . The conversations he is having with everyone, this is the next season of the reality show that he has been staging. Charlie it is interesting in terms of the people he is talking to, not only mitt romney saying the things he said about him, but al gore shows up. Peculiar is a how is this between Business Leaders and politicians and private sector activists . This part of his own personal transition, yes, there is the administrative institutional transition, but a personal transition, too. That is what i was struck with, talking to him this time is that he is very much in the throes of that process. Charlie thank you for joining us. See you next time. Working with his hands gave him the freedom that he craved. I feel like a butterfly. I feel like i am flattered around. I work 12 hours a day, 13 hours a day. I was the happiest i had ever been. And you know, he spent six weeks sculpture, obviously that is a beautiful kind of freedom. Anchor asiapacific markets are poised to fall following the worst day for chinese stocks in june. Opec moves production next month despite agreeing to historic cuts. No one wants to lose their market share. Donald trump names and other goldman exec to his team but postpones news of how he handles his empire as president. Considering joining soft things softbanks fu