[Lt. Gen. H.r. Mcmaster , U.s. Army:] Jim, thanks. Great to be with you.
[Sciutto:] All right, so let's start if I can on the news. So U.S. intelligence again indicates Russia is interfering in the U.S. presidential election as well as the broader political conversation here under Putin's direction to help Donald Trump and hurt his Democratic opponent as we saw in 2016. Given your experience particularly with Russia, why does the Kremlin prefer, it seems, President Trump?
[Mcmaster:] Well Jim, you know, despite this report, I don't know if they really prefer anybody. What they want to do is they want to sow doubt about whoever wins, right, and make sure that Americans lose confidence in our democratic process and in our institutions and in elections broadly but really who we are as a people. So anything they can do to divide us, and you know, I mean, Putin and the Kremlin they're always they're always like a step ahead, right? I mean, they're always thinking about what can we do next to make it even worse for Americans in terms of how we view ourselves and one another, and I think that's what I think that's what they're up to, you know? It's what they what they I don't think they really care who wins along as we doubt the result and then and that they're able to polarize us further and pit us against each other.
[Sciutto:] I get that, and I get that Putin, the Kremlin win regardless, right, because any disarray in this country serves their interest, but the fact is they focus their negative disinformation, right, on Hillary Clinton 2016 and now on Joe Biden. Why then that focus if it doesn't matter to them who wins?
[Mcmaster:] Well it well, you know, it's well it's a win-win for them, right, because what happens is if they're seen as actively undercutting one candidate, the other candidate wins. The other candidate's discredited. It's like you know, it's how can they lose in that scenario, right? So Putin's really sophisticated about this. Jim, like in the 2016 election, what I found as we were looking into this is that the Internet Research Agency, like this front organization
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Mcmaster:] For the you know, the Kremlin spies running the sustained campaign against us, well, their activity went like way up right after the election. And they had a campaign like ready to go of you know, hey, Trump should have won, but you know, the election was rigged. But when Trump actually did win, they had to shift it, oh, well, he would have won the popular vote.
[Sciutto:] Right
[Mcmaster:] And so, they're always just trying to sow these doubts about our processes. Hey, what we ought to be proud about though I think and positive about, there have been a lot of adaptations since 2016. I mean, their organizations stood up to protect you know, the election infrastructure, but then also to counter the disinformation and propaganda. This report that you saw, the
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Mcmaster:] You know, that came you know, leaked or whatever out of the intelligence agency, it's just an indicator. The government is working on this hard. And I think Jim, what we need to do is we all need to work on it hard ourselves, right? I mean, because what Russia does is like they take advantage of any division we have, right? And as we we're at each other's throats, you know, from a partisan perspective. You know, Russia is just I mean, they're celebrating. You know, this is
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Mcmaster:] Great, a great situation for them.
[Sciutto:] I get that. I do. And you see it. Listen, Russia as you know better than me dives into every divisive issue, whether it be take a knee in the NFL, right? Or to election disputes. But what has been missing as you know is a unified American bipartisan response.
[Mcmaster:] Right.
[Sciutto:] You know, you look at a whole issue of provocations recently, you know, bounties on U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan, arm sales to the Taliban, you know, the poisoning
[Mcmaster:] Yes
[Sciutto:] Of Navalny, which in any other time, you would imagine everybody including the president would be standing up and saying, Putin, stop it, right? But the president doesn't do that. And I just want to play what he said I'm sure you heard this, but I just want to play what he said yesterday to a
[Mcmaster:] Yes
[Sciutto:] Rally and ask you a quick question about it. Have a listen.
[Mcmaster:] OK.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I get along. I like Putin, he likes me. You know, we get along.
[Sciutto:] But the fact is, Russia doesn't have our interests at mind at heart. Do you have any explanation for
[Mcmaster:] Yes
[Sciutto:] Why the president
[Mcmaster:] Right
[Sciutto:] Won't just utter the simple words, don't mess with us, Russia. I'm on to you.
[Mcmaster:] Yes, right. You know, Jim, I don't understand it. You know, I wish I wish President Trump would just realize, hey, Vladimir Putin is not his friend, right? I mean, he wasn't
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Mcmaster:] George W. Bush's friend when George W. Bush looked into his soul, he's not Barack Obama's
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Mcmaster:] Friend when he was trying to work with Medvedev. He's not Hillary Clinton's friend when she brought a
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Mcmaster:] Reset button to Lavrov. I mean, it's like it's self- delusion. And you know, I wrote about this in "Battlegrounds", it's like this strategic narcissism, right? We define the world as we like it to be and assume that's where it's going to be. And we have to confront the reality. I mean, Putin is the best liar in the world, and he combines this effort to disrupt us, right? To shake our confidence in who we are with these flat denials of even what is so obvious that they've done, right? The poisoning
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Mcmaster:] Of Navalny, using like a nerve agent just like they did with Skripal, I remember in Salisbury, England, you know
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Mcmaster:] In the Spring of 2018. I mean, it's kind of obvious, I mean, these are people who they shot down an airliner
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Mcmaster:] Full of innocent people in Ukraine, and they said, oh, that wasn't us.
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Mcmaster:] What do you mean it wasn't us. There was incontrovertible evidence. So Jim, it's I don't understand it. I think the president should be stronger on this, should be just direct about it, and we should all be direct about it.
[Sciutto:] You in your book, you focused particularly on the threats from Russia and China. And of course, China is a country that the president reversing that
[Mcmaster:] Yes
[Sciutto:] Narcissism if you can say it in terms of our view of the world from previous administrations. One that he's been very direct against. But I wonder, from your perspective, who is the bigger threat including to the elections? Is it Russia or China or they're different kinds of threats?
[Mcmaster:] Yes, you know, they're different kinds of threat, Jim. I mean, China is a huge threat because of scale, right? I mean, the size of their economy. They've increased their defense spending 800 percent. It's the largest I think that I'm aware of, peace-time build-up of a military in history. And we see them becoming more and more aggressive in so many ways. And so what China wants to do is they want to take center stage, right? This is the narrative of national rejuvenation from Xi Jinping. But Russia realize I think realizes that they're weak, right? I mean, they have economy the size of Texas, they have big problems and in the collapse of oil prices. COVID, you know, hit them hard, there's a lot of internal dissension now especially in the eastern part of the country. But well, Putin's standards are lower, right? He just wants to drag us down, right? And that he
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Mcmaster:] And Putin thinks, hey, I'll be the last man standing, right? As I watch the United States, as I watch European countries, right, consume themselves
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Mcmaster:] In their vitriolic, partisan politics, and you know, as you mentioned, right? I mean, and what you've written about, Jim, is that what they do is they use whatever issue can divide us, right? So about 80 percent of this Internet Research Agency's efforts are on race, divide us on race.
[Sciutto:] Yes.
[Mcmaster:] Right?
[Sciutto:] Yes.
[Mcmaster:] And then they go to hot-button political issues like, you know, like immigration or gun control.
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Mcmaster:] And so whenever we have these conversations, we're like we're yelling at each other instead of having civil discussions about these issues. We're just playing into
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Mcmaster:] Their hands.
[Sciutto:] Yes, I get it. I want to ask you about the coronavirus because your successor, Robert O'Brien, according to Bob Woodward's book told the president earlier this year, coronavirus would be his biggest national security threat of his presidency. We just surpassed 200,000 dead Americans. No clear national plan at this point. Has the U.S. failed from a national security perspective in its response?
[Mcmaster:] Well, I mean, we haven't done as well as we should have, and I think what you see in this case is, you see how difficult it is to implement, right? You have to get things done, right? You can't just like write a plan, you have to actually implement that plan. And there are three aspects to this. I'll just go through this quickly which I think is important for viewers to know. First of all, you want to be able to stop it early, right? Stop it where it starts so it doesn't get to your shores. And of course, thank you, China's Communist Party. I mean, they suppressed any of the news of the human-to-human transmission, they didn't they shut down, you know, internal
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Mcmaster:] Transportation before international, all of that. The second thing is you want to mobilize biomedical response. That's where we had the biggest problems, right? Because we have these very fragile supply chains, right? That we were over reliant on China, but they were biased in favor of efficiency and just-in-time delivery, OK? OK, we can't do that again
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Mcmaster:] The pharmaceuticals and personal protective equipment. So mobilizing a response is hard for us, right? Because we don't have like a centralized system, right? It's public and private and it's federal and local. So coordination of the effort. That was the biggest shortfall
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Mcmaster:] I think. And the third area is innovation. How do you get therapies, how do you get a vaccine? Jim, that's actually going very well, you know?
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Mcmaster:] And I heard your reporting, but I really I'm very confident in the vaccine effort. I know a lot of the people that are involved
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Mcmaster:] With it, in operation warp speed. That's going to be that's going to be on the plus side, right?
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Mcmaster:] On the minus side are those first two, stop it early and
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Mcmaster:] Mobilize the response. And that's what we have to work on and get better at.
[Sciutto:] It has moved quickly, just finally before I go. We've seen former military leaders and advisors to the president, Mattis, Kelly, McRaven and others question his decisions, question even in some respects his fitness for office. I know, this is uncomfortable territory for all military leaders, yourself included. Deliberately, in your book, I just wonder from your perspective, given your many years of service to this country as a soldier and a commander. What is the greater duty for military leaders today, to remain apolitical or to share concerns about the well-being of the country?
[Mcmaster:] You know, I think it's both, right? To remain apolitical and share concerns, but don't do it in a partisan way. Don't get dragged down into the morass of partisan politics. This is why I mean, you know, I'm very critical about Trump policies in the book, right? I mean, I'm very critical. But I'm not going to get into these ad hominem attacks and these petty partisanship. What we have to really do is resist any effort to drag the military into the partisan politics. You know, our founders were very cognizant of this. You know, the I mean, George Washington's grandparents fled the English civil war, and so we can never have the military involved in politics. So
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Mcmaster:] I think every political leader has responsibility for those two, because, you know, Jim, I mean, there are many examples of this where you know, if you have a partisan agenda, hey, just get some admirals and generals to sign up, you know, for
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Mcmaster:] Your program. I think
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Mcmaster:] We have to resist doing that.
[Sciutto:] I get you. H.R. McMaster, the book is "Battlegrounds: The Fight to Defend the Free World", I got my copy, it's a smart book, it helps you understand where we're heading these days. We appreciate your time.
[Mcmaster:] Thanks so much, Jim, great to be with you.
[Sciutto:] Bring back Poppy now, of course, Poppy, we have quite a moment this morning. Remembering Ruth Bader Ginsburg at the Supreme Court.
[Harlow:] That's right. Take a look at this. Look at these. What a moment. Just look at that image, live pictures on the steps of the high court as we wait for the casket of the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to arrive. She'll be accompanied by hundred of her former law clerks. You see them there on the steps. Let's bring in our Jessica Schneider, Joan Biskupic and Ariane de Vogue. Joan, let me begin with you on the significance of this moment and this day.
[Joan Biskupic, Cnn Supreme Court Analyst:] It's I can't overstate it, Poppy. You know, I remember being in the Rose Garden in 1993 when President Clinton nominated her. And he referred to her as the Thurgood Marshall of women's civil rights. And she stood for equality, and now, her casket will be there under the portico of a building that says, you know, "equal justice under law". And she talked about how she hoped that during her tenure, she would live up to her mother's aspirations for her. And what you just described on the front steps of the Capitol, her clerks and all those people lined up, mothers, fathers with young children. She's her legacy in the law is one of equality, certainly. But her personal stature spoke to so many, so many Americans. You know, and she became the notorious RBG, someone who went beyond the law to touch them in terms of, you know, social pop culture, and just someone who was inspiring in so many ways. So I would say since 1993 to now, we've seen a transformation in America, but it was Ruth Bader Ginsburg who was trying to keep the country moored to the guarantee
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Biskupic:] Of equal rights.
[Sciutto:] Ariane, I have to say as I watch this image there at the court, I'm getting goose bumps. I have not seen something comparable to that. That show of support. Show of force. A solemn moment. If someone embodied a bridge, right, at the court, it was someone like RBG, was it not? You know, friendship with Scalia but also the respect on both sides of the aisle. Her confirmation by a near unanimous vote in the Senate. Was she to some degree sadly the last to represent that kind of bridge as the court has become more divided?
[Ariane De Vogue, Cnn Supreme Court Reporter:] Well, you're certainly right, Jim. And it was interesting, her relationship with Justice Scalia, but just standing a feet away right now from this army of clerks, you really when you talk to them, they say just what you're talking about. That kind of bridge. Working for her was a lesson in the law for sure, but it was also a lesson in life. She taught them about how to be civil. How to disagree agreeably. Her dearest friend was Justice Scalia. But these clerks right here, they're going to greet this casket. There are a mix of her Supreme Court clerks and her appellate law clerks, and they will greet it, you know, go with it up the steps and then in shifts, they're going to stand guard over this casket while it's here. A lot of them talked about their lessons, and Poppy will remember when she interviewed Ginsburg, one of the things that she said was to some of the female clerks, you know, you can't you can have it all, but you can't have it all at the same time. And that emboldened them through
[Harlow:] Yes
[De Vogue:] Their clerkship and beyond. And right now, you're seeing the honorary pallbearers, here are some of the clerks coming down who will serve as honorary pallbearers.
[Harlow:] Yes, I think about those words all the time, Joan. And her great advice, sometimes it's good to be a little deaf both to your colleagues and in your marriage. It was good advice that she followed. We're waiting for this moment and the casket to arrive, Jessica Schneider, what are your thoughts as you've stood outside that court this whole term, Jess, and brought us the news and the rulings and often heard dissents, right? She is known as the great dissenter.
[Jessica Schneider, Cnn Justice Correspondent:] That's exactly right. Often reading those dissents from the bench, Poppy, in her quiet, yet forceful voice. I'll tell you, I've stood out here many times but usually waiting for opinions. It has been quite a moment in just the past few minutes actually. This entire area has been quiet all morning outside the Supreme Court, but a real hush fell over this building crowd in just the last few minutes when we saw these dozens of former law clerks walking out on to the steps to await the arrival of Justice Ginsburg's casket. There are more than 100 out on the steps here. And actually, as we're seeing right now, we're looking at the hearse that seems to be arriving here with Justice Ginsburg's casket. We've seen a few of the former law clerks step forward near the street, near first street northeast here. These appear to be the former law clerks who will be serving as the pallbearers this morning. So, while they serve as the pallbearers, the other 100 or so clerks, they will line the steps as Justice Ginsburg's casket makes its way up the steps and into the Supreme Court, into the great hall. That's where first this morning, there will be that private ceremony. We're expecting it will be close friends, family, the justices.