tv Face the Nation CBS September 11, 2016 10:30am-11:31am EDT
captioning sponsored by cbs >> dickerson: today on "face the nation," 15 years after the attacks on 9/11, how safe are we, and what challenges face the next president? it's a day for sober reflection about the most horrifying day in modern american history. what happened to the spirit that united the country after 9/11? we'll talk to the head of the c.i.a., john brennan, plus the chairman of the house intelligence committee, devin nunes, about where we are in the fight against terrorism. then we'll unveil new cbs news battleground tracker results about what voters say they're looking for in a commander-in-chief. on the campaign trail, another week of negativity was capped by this comment. >> to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of trump's supporters into what i call a basket of deplorables.
right? the racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, islam phobic, you name it. and unfortunately there are people like that. and he has lifted them up. >> dickerson: just how bad was that moment for hillary clinton? we'll ask our political panel. our battleground tracker update will show whether the presidential race is tightening in the key states. plus a preview of the new african american history museum opening in washington. it's all ahead on "face the nation." good morning. welcome to "face the nation." i'm john dickerson. today the nation honors those killed when terrorists hijacked planes and crashed them into the world trade center, the pentagon and a field in shanksville, pennsylvania. [bell tolls] moments of violence were observed at the three sites and around the world. the names of those killed in new york after the planes hit the
twin towers were read at ground zero. both donald trump and hillary clinton paid their respects. here in washington, the president attended a memorial ceremony at the pentagon. >> we remember an we will never forget the nearly 3,000 beautiful lives taken from us so cruelly. >> dickerson: and we begin our coverage on this anniversary with the head of the central intelligence agency, john brennan. director brennan, what have we learned in 15 years? >> well, good morning, john. what we've learned is that these groups, whether it was al qaeda or isis, can cause much death and destruction as they pursue their mindless agenda. and so what we've learned over the last 15 years is to make sure we do everything possible as a nation to protect this great homeland and our people around the world, as well, from the scourge of terrorism. we've done a lot in terms of making sure that different parts
of government are able to work together, be able to share information, increasing our information technology systems so we can get the information to where it needs to go to so we can prevent those attacks. we've learned a lot. we've done a lot. that's why today i believe it's much more difficult for these groups to carry out this type of attack that they did 15 years ago. >> dickerson: the c.i.a. now nears a new commemoration of the 9/11 attacks. what do you want employees at the c.i.a. to think about when they see and remember 9/11 in terms of when they do their job? >> well, on first floor of c.i.a., we have flag that was taken from the rubble of the world trade center towers as well as a shanitqua girder. it is in full view of our employees as they go about their daily activities. i want to make sure they understand we have a solemn obligation to make sure we do everything in our power with our full authority and capability around the world to prevent these terrorist groups from
carrying out these types of heinous acts of violence and murder. so the agency takes veryer isly is what our responsibilities and obligations are, and i do believe that c.i.a. has been i would say probably the most instrumental agency since 9/11 in degrading, dismantling al qaeda and making sure that that organization and now isis are unable to carry out attacks here in the homeland. >> dickerson: one of the military officers that i talked to about the 9/11 history said one of the things that he thought was that restraint was not talked about as much. there's a lot of talk about actions that are taken here to stop this threat or that threat, but sometimes the actions taken have their own consequences. how much is restraint a part of what we have learned about the response to terrorism? >> i think we're very mindful that the actions we take overseas really need to take into account what the consequences are going to be. we're trying to be as careful as
a surgeon's scalpel in terms of taking out the cancer of these terrorist organizations. we have to make sure, though, that we're not going to damage the surrounding tissue, and whether or not we're operating in the middle east or south asia or other areas and parts of the world, we have to work first of all very closely with the government, this ones we're able to work with, but to ensure that it's being done in a careful manner, that we're able to arrest and detain individuals as we can, that we're able to take advantage of whatever material we're able to seize. and this has to be done in a very deliberate way. >> dickerson: do drones help or hurt in that effort to be surgical, because some people say the drones are a recruitment tool for terrorists? >> well, the drone platform that have been in the u.s. military arsenal for quite some time are tremendously capable platforms that can carry out intelligence and surveillance and reconnaissance, the i.s.r. responsibility we have in terms of collecting intelligence, but
also being able to be exceptionally precise as far as putting ordinants on targets when that is called for. so they are piloted. it just happens to be remotely piloted. >> dickerson: but in terms of that collateral issue, creating more terrorist, what role do you believe it creates as a recruit. tool for new terrorists? >> i think frequently our adversaries will point to it as a recruit. tool, but the facts are that is an exceptionally powerful and capable means of taking kinetic action against terrorists when that is called for. so i think there's a lot of misrepresentation and mischaracterization that a lot of the propaganda spews in terms of how those drones are used. >> dickerson: what's the state of the fight against isis right now as you see it? >> there has been significant reversal of their battlefield successes over the last six to nine months. we have seen that they've within pushed out of a number of areas inside of iraq as well as syria. a number of their lead verse been removed from the
battlefield. they do not have the same type of patrol over territory they had this time last year. so this is all part of the strategic effort that has been under way to try to get the intelligence that is necessary in order to give the coalition the opportunity to take strikes from the air and also make sure that the iraqi forces and other and those elements that are fighting on the ground against isis are empowered and able to do that. >> dickerson: the argument made by the administration that as they lose that territory, the foreign fighters disperse and that's an even greater threat, is that right? >> well, they've been dispersed for a while. one thing isis has done is to develop these franchises around the world. a lot of these terrorist organizations that have raised the isis flag in different parts of africa and the middle east and south asia, they were already existing terrorist groups and they tried to jump on to the bandwagon of isis, but even those organizations have suffered serious setbacks. when i look at nigeria, in terms of the islamic state of west africa, also the heads of these
organizations, whether it be in saudi arabia, algeria, afghanistan, they have been taken off the battlefield. progress is not being made just in iraq and syria, but also beyond. >> dickerson: the "washington post" has reported that the attraction to isis is also diminishing. the number of foreign fighters wanting to join the cause. is that the way you see it? if so, why? >> i think initially when i was able to roll across a number of these ungoverned spaces in iraq and syria, that momentum generated quite a bit of attraction. that's why the foreign fighters were flowing there. they thought it was a winning organization. it's now a failing organization. their narrative has been refuted. their claims of great victory have been debunked. and that's why i think fewer and fewer people are looking to isis as being an organization they want to belong to. >> dickerson: i'd like to switch to ask you about russia now. packing into different parts of the american electoral system -- hacking. what role is russia playing into hacking u.s. institutions?
>> russia has exceptionally capable and sophisticated cyber capabilities in terms of collection as well as whatever else it might want to do in that cyber sphere. so we have known this for quite a while. their intelligence services are quite active around the world. this is something we have to make sure we're on guard for, not just for national security purpose, but also for making sure that our system of government here is going to be preserved. >> dickerson: they have the potential, but what's the real ty? >> they're very active worldwide. in the u.s. the f.b.i. is looking into the hacking of the dn cnetwork, the release of these e-mails. this is criminal activity, and i would defer to the f.b.i. as this continues to look at all of the different forensics as well as intelligence that we might be able to provide the bureau, as well, in terms of execution. >> dickerson: when you think of national security threats, where does russia fit in that picture? >> russia is a world power,
clearly. they are involved in many different parts of the world. they have military capability. they're involved in the middle east right now. obviously in ukraine, central asia. so russia is a formidable adversary in a number of areas. also there are areas that we need to be able to work with russia, specifically in syria. as you know, john kerry and prime minister lavrov announced an agreement the try to move forward once again with trying to bring some sem -- semblance of peace to syria. we'll have to see whether or not the russians will follow through on their commitments in terms of putting pressure on the syrian regime. >> dickerson: and vladimir putin, how do you read him? >> he's very aggressive, very assertive. i think his intelligence background gives him a certain perspective. a lot of senior russian officials are also former k.g.b. he's someone i think we need to be very wary of in terms of his ability to manipulate environments for russia's advantage. >> dickerson: is he manipulating the election?
is that abenvironment you think he's trying to manipulate? >> i think we have to be very, very wary of what the russians might be trying to do in terms of collecting information that cyber realm as well as what they might want to do with it. >> dickerson: is he an adversary? should we think of russia as an adversary? >> i think in certain areas they are adversary, yes. but in ways we need to cooperate with them because they also have a vested interest in trying to bring stability and trying to dismantle these terrorist organizations. >> dickerson: jumping around the globe, north korea appears to have tested another nuclear weapon. what's the danger? they put it on a missile or there is a black market for nuclear weapons? >> i think north korea under kim jong-un is an international concern because they continue to develop nuclear capabilities with the test that was just done last week, but their continued development of missile capability, marrying up those nuclear devices or warheads with
blimps that -- ballistic missiles that can reach great distances is a cause of concern not just for the east asia region but for the united states. >> dickerson: saudi arabia, a bill entered the house and senate which allowed suing saudi arabia with respect to 9/11. how does that affect the work you do with saudi arabia? >> saudi arabia is one of our closest partners on counter-terrorism. i've worked very closely with the crown prince over the last 15 years. they are truly a good example of how foreign intelligence services can work against these terrorist organizations. saudi arabia faces a very serious threat from terrorism. >> dickerson: final question. donald trump has been briefed now, swells briefings. he said that he read through his briefers' body language that they conveyed disapproval of barack obama's policies. what do you make of that? >> i know the briefers that have been briefing the candidates. they are the quintessential
professional intelligence officers. they do their work very well and they know as professionals they are to deliver substance. we don't comment on policy. we don't give policy recommendations. so i am fully confident that they comported themselves with the utmost professionalism and demonstrated their real breadth and depth of intelligence capabilities. >> dickerson: all right. director john brennan, thank you so much for being with us. >> thank you, john. >> dickerson: one positive to come out of the terrorist attacks that september day 15 years ago was the coming together of all americans to grieve, to honor those lost, and the unify as one nation. what happened to that spirit of unity? we went to the voters in the 13 states that are part of our battleground tracker and found that more than half, 52%, said that spirit has vanished. 32% say the post-9/11 spirit is still a little bit there, and only 9% say that spirit is very much there.
as to the war on terror that began 15 years ago, americans are not optimistic, only 15% feel america is winning with close to 75% saying america is either losing or in a stalemate. cbs news director of elections anthony salvanto joins us now. anthony, i want to talk about the voters in these 13 background states and how they see the candidates, but before we do that, how do voters see this question of terrorism differently? >> well, 15 years on, everybody agrees it's still a threat. the differences are how do you approach fighting it. and where you see big splits are is it all just a military approach, and it's not, although most americans say that's at least art -- part of it. but others say it has to be a combination of promoting human right, promoting tolerance. what you don't see much of is any appetite for what you might read as nation building. that is promoting democracy, promoting economic systems around the world.
and i think that's part of the lingering effect of, you know, a little bit of wariness after two long wars that the public has definitely said, but also a resignation that the fight has to continue and big differences between trump voters who definitely favor that more military approach as well as stronger restrictions on immigration here at home and clinton voters who say that should be a part, but just a part, but much more emphasis on those promoting global tolerance, promoting human rights around the world. >> dickerson: and diplomacy. let's look at the two specific candidates. how do voters see them on this question of commander-in-chief? >> up until now donald trump has been lagging hillary clinton on this idea of being prepared to be commander-in-chief. and in fact, that's what we've seen over the weeks has sort of weighed down many of his poll numbers, but we wanted to know what goes into being prepared, and we asked voters about that? one of the things you've seen
over and over is knowledge. do you need to know a lot to be prepared? what we find is it is not always that voters think that a candidate has to have a lot of knowledge, because what some voters, in particular trump voters, are saying is they want a president who goes for the big picture, the big ideas, sets a large course, and then the details they say will take care of themselves. it's not always just judging on total vehicular homicide umass of details and knowledge. clinton voters by contrast are looking for a president who starts with specifics, who starts with fine details, they say, and then they think the big picture will take care of itself. >> dickerson: as we head to these debates and see the two candidates side to side, voters will be looking for different things. what about on the donald trump thing, if he doesn't have all the details that hillary clinton has, what do they think about his ability to learn on the job, have advisers tell him what to do? >> you fill in the gaps with advisers. that's how they see it. both are seen as potentially
going to listen to advisers and experts. trump voters think he will. although there is a core of them, a smaller core, about a quarter, who say they want a president who listens to his own instincts, because experts are often wrong. we see some of that cynicism out there still about what experts really actually know. >> dickerson: bottom line question: who do voters feel more safe with, and who do they think can hand alcrisis in >> right now a majority neither. neither candidate has convinced a majority of voters that they can hand alcrisis well and that they can make those voters feel safe. i think this tells us that although the can cates have been trying to disqualify the other, neither one has connected back home for voters to what it matters to them, to the voters. yes, there may be knowledge. yes, there may be big ideas, but how does that make you, the voter, feel safe. that connection not there yet. >> dickerson: still battling
that out. quickly, where does the actual race stand in terms of the state and the polls? >> a little bit of tightning in florida. clinton is only up by two points. that's down from five. ohio stays about where it was. and just a little bit of tightening across all the battleground states. i do not expect all the polls to move that quickly here. we should just take a look at the big picture, which is a fairly tight race in which clinton still has electoral college edge. >> dickerson: hillary clinton up by seven in ohio. we'll be back in one moment with the chairman of the house intelligence committee, devin nunes. stay with us.
when you ache and haven't you're not you. tylenol® pm relieves pain and helps you fall fast asleep and stay asleep. we give you a better night. you're a better you all day. tylenol®. >> dickerson: we're back. we welcome the chairman of the house intelligence committee, devin nunes. mr. chairman, in june of 2015 when you and i talked, you said you thought we were at 2 -- the highest threat level we've ever faced. what's your feeling about that now? >> i think we're even worse today. i think the threat level is even higher, because the radical islamic problem, whether it's isis or al qaeda, they continue
to add followers. so even though isis is having problems controlling some territory within syria and iraq, they have spread globally now. they have moved fighters into europe, where our allies are having considerable problems, if you notice, on just over the weekend, both the german government and the french government came out pluckily and said that they are concerned about the numbers of fighters there in the country. so the al qaeda... what al qaeda started on september 11, 2001, continues to metastasize. i'm concerned that we're not paying close enough attention to the growth of radical jihadism globally. >> dickerson: is that concern a geographical concern, or do you feel in america... obviously we've seen home-grown, the kind of allure of joining up with isis, even if you're just a lone wolf. is that what worries you? >> i think when you look at the lone wolf question, a lot of
times they will get younger people, people that have issues, and they're more susceptible to the radicalization over the internet. but i think there's another problem, and that is that al qaeda's very, very good at seeding people in and waiting. they're very patient. so if you notice when isis kind of broke off of al qaeda, merged with some of the old saddam baathist les mileses to -- loyalists to put their caliphate together, so al qaeda is much more patient. al-zawahiri is still out there. he's bin laden's number two. they're spreading very, very slowly. al-zawahiri came out in the last few days and issued a statement, a public statement. and i think he's going to continue to this that. so we don't know where these guys are hiding, and it's hard to track them because of encryption now and the internet, it's not as easy as it once was
a decade ago. >> dickerson: moving on the russia, do you think they're trying to influence u.s. elections? >> i think russia is very good at influencing elections all over the world. it wouldn't surprise me that they try to do it here. it wouldn't surprise me they tried the break into the dnc and rnc. i think we shouldn't panic that the russians would try to do this because they always try to do it. they try to do it all over the globe. they tried to do it in ukraine. would they try to do it here? absolutely. if you leave your computers vulnerable, they're going the try to get in and get information off there, and not just the russian, chinese and others. >> dickerson: i guess what i'm trying to figure out is there a entered sense they might do it or is there any specific sense in your mind that they're accurately trying to do it, separate and apart... >> this is where we don't know, and i think we have to be very careful, because we don't want to panic the american people. a as you said, generally
speaking, the russians are probably the number-one service around the "globe" that tries to influence elections. but other nation states try to do it, too. so they're always trying to do it. now, is that anything different this time? is there... do they have more information that they have had in previous elections? it's possible, but at the same time, i have confidence in our system, and i think that the elections will be free and fair, and as long as there is a paper trail, if there is any issue, we'll get to the bottom of it. >> dickerson: donald trump said he thought vladimir putin is a better leader than barack obama. do you have a view on that? >> well, the refreshing thing about donald trump is that he's a first-time candidate, and first-time candidates, when they do interviews with folks like yourself, they can easily get tripped up. but when you look at... let's take what putin has done, right? barack obama said he wanted to work with putin. secretary kerry is working with
putin right now. hillary clinton set the reset button. george w. bush said he saw into putin's soul. so we want to be friends with the russians. the problem is that putin just doesn't seem to be a guy we can trust. >> dickerson: all right. mr. chairman, we're going to have to leave it. there we're out of time. thanks so much for being with us. >> my pleasure. >> dickerson: stay with us. we'll be right back. sting? well, i've been doing some research. let me introduce you to our broker. how much does he charge? i don't know. okay. uh, do you get your fees back if you're not happy? (dad laughs) wow, you're laughing. that's not the way the world works. well, the world's changing. are you asking enough questions about the way your wealth is managed? wealth management, at charles schwab. be the you who doesn't cover your moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. be the you who shows up in that dress. who hugs a friend. who is done with treatments that don't give you clearer skin.
be the you who controls your psoriasis with stelara® just 4 doses a year after 2 starter doses. stelara® may lower your ability to fight infections and may increase your risk of infections and cancer. some serious infections require hospitalization. before treatment, get tested for tuberculosis. before starting stelara® tell your doctor if you think you have an infection or have symptoms such as: fever, sweats, chills, muscle aches or cough. always tell your doctor if you have any signs of infection, have had cancer, if you develop any new skin growths or if anyone in your house needs or has recently received a vaccine. alert your doctor of new or worsening problems, including headaches, seizures, confusion and vision problems these may be signs of a rare, potentially fatal brain condition. some serious allergic reactions can occur. do not take stelara® if you are allergic to stelara® or any of its ingredients. most people using stelara® saw 75% clearer skin and the majority were rated as cleared or minimal at 12 weeks. be the you who talks to your dermatologist about stelara®.
>> dickerson: stay with us. in our next half hour, gayle king will be here the preview tomorrow's "cbs this morning" live from the new smithsonian national museum of african american history. and culture here in washington. it's been in the works for 13 it's been in the works for 13 years and opens next week. ca it was an idea. an inspiration. a wild "what-if." so scientists went to work. they examined 87 different protein structures.
had 12 years of setbacks and breakthroughs, 4,423 sleepless nights, and countless trips back to the drawing board. at first they were told no, well... maybe, and finally: yes. then it was 36 clinical trials, 8,500 patient volunteers, and the hope of millions. and so after it became a medicine, someone who couldn't be cured, could be. me. ♪
you may be muddling through allergies.oned with... try zyrtec® for powerful allergy relief. and zyrtec® is different than claritin®. because it starts working faster on the first day you take it. try zyrtec®. muddle no more®. >> dickerson: some of our cbs stations are leaving us now. for most of us we'll be back with a lot more "face the nation," including analysis on the campaign and the war on terror 15 years after 9/11. stay with us. >> you may be surprised to hear what state is having the most earthquakes, and almost all of them are man-made. >> it must be unnerving. >> it's no way to live.
female teacher: wmale teacher:he and the largest planet?? male teacher: someone we haven't heard from. female teacher: anyone else? through internet essentials, comcast has connected more than 3 million people in need to low cost, high speed internet at home, helping to make sure that every hand in the classroom goes up. male teacher: okay, veronica. amphibian. male teacher: excellent. welcome to a brighter future. comcast.
>> dickerson: welcome back the "face the nation." i'm john dickerson. for more on where national security stands 15 years after the attacks of 9/11, we're joined by cbs news senior national security analyst and former homeland security adviser to george bush fran townsend. steven brill contributes to "the atlantic" and is the author of this month's cover story, "are we any safer." and jeffrey goldberg writes for the atlantic and he's also a visiting fellow at the carnegie endowment for international peace. steve, i want the start with you. you worked for a year on this article, "are we any safer," and i apologize, but can you boil it down into an answer? >> in only 20 words. >> well, we're along stronger because of the work of the people like fran did and tens of thousands of others and the trillions of dollars we spent. we strengthened our defense, but
the nature of the threat has changed and evolved in a way that arguably in many ways makes us less safe. >> dickerson: fran, are we adapting to that environment that steve describeed? >> you'll appreciate, john, what happens is we never adapt fast enough. as you heard from the chairman of the intelligence committee, the threat has metastasized and spread. we have more bad guys in more different places now. that's a significant threat. you add to that the internet and the radicalization that happens over the internet, even very late to that game as a government across two administrations, frankly, and that is a problem. we don't treat the internet as a battle space as we this land, air and sea. >> dickerson: jeffrey? go ahead. >> let me just say there are some old kinds of threats that we could deal with, because the threat has evolved to lone wolfe, people acting 9/11ly, the one thing that one of the
political parties doesn't seem the want to do when it comes to homeland security is do what most other countries do, which is keep assault weapons, military weapons away from terrorists. that is one easy way to adapt that doesn't cost us money and that is logical and works. >> dickerson: jeffrey, let me ask you on this broader question, barack obama came into office with a certain set of challenges. in terms of the "are we any safer" question, what does barack obama leave for his successor on that question? >> so barack obama came in with what he would refer to as a very messy barn. he was handed a global economic crisis, 180,000 troops in afghanistan and iraq, bin laden alive. and he's been preoccupied and his administration has been preoccupied with handing off to his successor a "clean barn." the barn is not that clean, unfortunately. you have vast ungoverned spaces, even though isis is being rolled back in iraq and syria to some degree. you have isis, an organization that didn't even exist when he
became president, new forms of terrorism, on the other hand, you have to say this, and you say this about george w. bush, too, after 9/11 it's somewhat miraculous, but we have not had a 9/11-sized terror attack in the united states. and i do think that's somewhat miraculous given how far behind we were. so he is not handing off a perfect situation to his successor, but it is a manageable situation still i think. >> miraculous, but the miracle didn't just happen. it's because of the work that lots and lots of people did to make it happen. i think we ought to acknowledge that today. >> dickerson: let me ask you, you write in your piece, "our imagination is limited to the day's headlines." policy-makers fight the war that made those headlines, not the war that might come next. you mentioned assault weapons. that's something that's been talked about and debated. but what's not in the headlines
that people should be thinking about? >> let's take something that was very much in the headlines right after 9/11, the bioterror threat. the anthrax attacks. that is if anything more of a threat today than it was 15 years ago, but we have done nothing to develop technology that could really detect that kind of attack because it just happened to fall out of the headlines. >> dickerson: fran, what do you think of that? >> well, i think in fairness, across the w.m.d. spectrum, where you're talking about radiological, nuclear or chemical, we have taken different pieces of that and addressed it. we haven't done it in a comprehensive way that steve is talking about. part of that is the tyranny of the inbox. no president plans on katrina. no president plans on 9/11. so the distraction of the everyday crisis takes away from the more strategic plan that needs to be done. i do think, i come back to this. we can't kill our way out of
this problem, no matter how much progress we've made in killing bin laden and other leaders, the fact is you have to address the ideology. i don't think we've done an adequate job. nor have we spent the adequate resources against that problem. >> dickerson: jeffrey, getting to that question of ideology, we talked about ungoverned spaces. during the immediate aftermath of 9/11, we have to get them over there or they'll come over here. what's the state of that argument? is that still useful? is it still the worry? >> i mean, it's a useful framework to talk about this, but to add to what steve was saying, if you have a lone wolf problem, if you have an internet problem, self-radicalization through the internet, then the people we're fighting are often people in the united states who don't even know at this moment that they're radicalized. they haven't been radicalized yet some going to what fran is talking about, this is the danger. we are safer in a sort of broad bureaucratic way that our
defenses have been strengthened. we spent a trillion dollar strengthening those defenses, but we have no answer yet for the ideologies that ral calize people right here at home. and this is the danger. we are both safer and more unsafe at the same time. it's not a satisfying answer, but i think it's the correct answer. >> glad you didn't write my headline. >> dickerson: sorry. we had a little news here. i'll interrupt. hillary clinton left the events at ground zero unexpectedly today. the campaign says she felt overheated and went to her daughter's apartment and is feeling much better. but a person briefed on the matter tells cbs news that it appears she fainted when she got into her vehicle. we'll keep you updated as we learn more. steve, i want to go back to you on this question of the tyranny of the inbox. you studied a lot of complicate ed systems. let's find some... is there optimism? in other words, in a system where there's tyranny of inbox, you talked to jeh johnson, and he said, you know, we have to
prioritize risks. is there a way to break out of that tyranny of the inbox? >> well, you have to have the capacity to take a step back at the same time that you worried about what is in your inbox. i think increasingly from 9/11 on, the bush administration made all kinds of management improvements as they learned. the obama administration i think has done a much better job of jeh johnson being the one secretary who is finally getting his arms around the management of this agency. but it is really hard because you are dealing with a situation where at any moment you could have an emergency that you have to pay attention to. to have someone writing an article in the atlantic saying, you should worry about dirty bombs because they are a potential threat, you're looking at that morning's intel briefing that tells you exactly what that threat is that day. that's a hard thing to balance.
>> dickerson: finally, on the social media piece, fran, you said not enough is being done. if i were coming in and i were president, what's your recommendation that i do right away? >> look at what we spend on our military and on the physical battle space to go after the ungoverned and fully governed spaces and look at what you're spending to combat it on the internet. the answer is it's so disproportionate you have to really make the commitment that this is a battle space that you're going to fight to control and fight to win in terms of the ideology. if you're not going to spend it there, you're not going to win there. >> dickerson: what would you spend it on? >> it's across a spectrum of things. you have both defensive operations and offensive operations. some of is is covert, some is overt. you need to have the full you need to have the full spectrum. >> dickerson: all right. we'll end it there. >> dickerson: all right. thanks to all of you. we'll be right back with our political family.
brakes are getting warm. confirmed, daniel you need to cool your brakes. understood, brake bias back 2 clicks. giving them the agility to have speed & precision. because no one knows & like at&t. safety doesn't come in a box. it's not a banner that goes on a wall. it's not something you do now and then. or when it's convenient. it's using state-of-the-art simulators
to better prepare for any situation. it's giving offshore teams onshore support. and it's empowering anyone to stop a job if something doesn't seem right. at bp, safety is never being satisfied. and always working to be better. >> dickerson: we turn now to politics. joining us is wall street column fist and cbs news contributor peggy noonan. jamelle bouie is chief political contributor for "slate" magazine and amy walt is the national editor of the "cook political report." i want the read this statement from the clinton campaign. secretary clinton attended the september 11th commemoration ceremony for just an hour and 30 minutes this morning to pay her respects and greet some of the families of the falling. during the ceremony, she felt overheated so departed to go to her daughter's apartment and is feeling much better. now, peggy noonan, i want the
start on something hillary clinton said recently, some remarks that have gotten her into trouble. we played them at the top of the show in which she said she wanted to be grossly generalistic, but some trump supporters call into what she called the basket of racist, sexist, homophobe homophobic, xenophobic and islam phobic. she put out a statement then saying she was wrong to characterize half of his supporters. where are we now? >> she used original language, basket of deplorables. it was memorable, therefore it will be memorable as a gaffe. it was a mistake. you don't write off inemoral and ethical terms half of 2 supporters you're running again, meaning one quarter of the voters in the united states as such nefarious and rather wicked people. she did walk it back. she said she should not have said half, but i think at the
end of the day it was the kind of divisive and embittering language that will be... that will harkin back to two other gaffe, one is mitt romney's 47%. the other is barack obama's bitter clingers. >> dickerson: the question here, hillary clinton on the one hand talks about a better, stronger, together. so her unity has been her message. it's on her plane for goodness sake. on the other hand, she gave a speech, not a gaffe, but a full speech about the connection of donald trump to the alt right. so this is both a gaffe from which she must retreat and also strategy. >> yeah. that's right. >> i'm inclined to see it as strategy and not so much as a gaffe because when i heard the remark, my first question was: well, is this true? right? regardless of how it sounds, what it looks like? what is the case about donald trump supporters, and if you break down the numbers and you look at the real clear politics,
average 43% of them are registered voters, 30, 31 million people. compare that to polls show 65% to 70% of all republicans that say that barack obama wasn't born in the united states or is a muslim. you look at pilot data from the american national election study, and it shows upward of 40% of republicans saying things like blacks are more violent, blacks are lazier, muslims are more violent, muslims are lazier. among trump supporters in particular, 60%, 70% of them agree with statements political scientists categorize as being explicitly racist. so i'm looking at clinton's statement, and half, which is about 31 million people again, doesn't really seem that out of bounds. 40% to 50% of republicans i would say looking at the full spectrum of data agree with beliefs that we would categorize as explicitly prejudice. so regardless of whether or not clinton needs the walk it back, i think she's being correct and
act ratted. >> and i think this gets to the bigger challenge for hillary clinton, which is she has predicated her strategy and the race so much on who she's not, and we haven't really heard a lot about who she is. and so i know there "stronger together" is on the plane. i don't know what that means. what comes after stronger together? what does that mean for me as an average american in terms of what my schools are going to look like? what my life is going to be, what the future is going to be. and so we've spent a whole lot of time in this campaign hearing a lot about how terrible the other person, is how i'm an alternative to that, but it's flipping the page to, and what comes next. this is why you saw the poll today, the "washington post" poll that came out today, hillary clinton up in the national poll, but the enthusiasm gap between trump supporters and her supporters is pretty significant. i think part of that is this sense that even from folks who are democrats who want to support her who say, i don't know where the there is. >> dickerson: the campaign strategically had been
telegraphing she was going to offer some solution speeches. so instead of talking about solutions, she's now talking about a message she wants to get across, but not with this kind of blaring volume. >> i do think this maybe part of the stronger together message, though, because offering yourself as a unity figure doesn't preclude yourself from identifying a portion of the electorate that does hold these views. >> dickerson: donald trump has something to run with here, because there are republicans nervous about the elements within donald trump's forces >> sure, there is an alt right, we've all talked about it, but what i think is really going on in the race is that a lot of people, even after 25 years as a leader in the united states, a lot of people don't like or trust or feel approving of hillary clinton. at the same time, there are plenty of people, as anthony said, who are not confident that donald trump has the stuff to be a president. i think one of the interesting
things going on with the trump campaign is that they must know they've got to start getting a higher proportion of republicans following them. they have about 85% republican support. if you're going to compete in a place like pennsylvania, you need those suburbs that will go for a republican they feel they can trust, but if they think it's a ruffian now, they're the people you have to go for. >> dickerson: it's the suburban eats clinton is targeting with all this talk. on the question of commander-in-chief, that was a part of the conversation this week, it seems pretty clear hillary clinton is has the kind of experience and the knowledge about the various different countries. donald trump has a more improvisational approach. how do you think that sorts out with voters? >> i do think at the end of the day, this is where voters, their hesitancy translates into difficulty voting for donald trump. you see poll after poll that says two things: one, she has a
lead on who do you think will be stronger as commander-in-chief, and, two, who do you ultimately think is going to be president of the united states? who do you ultimately think is going to win. poll after poll shows over 50% of voters show that they believe hillary clinton will win. that's been a more predictive question than who are you voting for today. in the "washington post" poll out today, 58% believe she's ultimately going to win. i think it comes down to that core question, which is that if you don't believe that this person, fill in the blank, in this case it's donald trump, is qualified to be commander-in-chief, is qualified for that position. can you actually vote for them? that's a very difficult bridge to cross. >> dickerson: the question is if he can cross that by just doing more of what he keeps doing. or there are people i talk to, we seed in the survey data, as well, people think, you can have advisers and you can learn in the job. and he's been successful in private business, so he can be successful in this. is that enough to clear that
threshold question for him? >> i'm not sure that it is because those characteristics have always been part of donald trump going back to last year. so it appears not to be enough for voters, even if the trump campaign continues to double down saying they have advisers and so fort. i think there is a danger because as we saw last week in the nbc forum, trump does have a hard time talking about national security and foreign policy issues in detail. he can kind of translate feeling and sort of conviction, but when it comes to details and being able to put forth plans, he struggled. >> clinton's weakness here is she is perceived to have this detailed sense of who the president or the under secretary of defense in pakistan is. she knows that. she knows his name. she's had dealings with him. but she has no perceived strategic vision. people can't really tell you what she would do in the world. they feel they can tell you, trump will be tough. they have an overall sense of
him. they don't have an overall sense of what she would mean in the world as a strategic hillary clinton, this is what i stand for. >> dickerson: mike pence compares donald trump to reagan in this regard. you know from reagan... >> yes, you knew you were going to get that question. >> dickerson: you knew from reagan. >> well, i have written on this, i do not see the explicit similarities that many of trump's supporters see, although reagan was in some respects an outsider in politics. i really can't take that that far. i think... i hate the play the reagan card, if you know what i mean, and say, hey, buddy, i knew ronald reagan, but i do not see a depth of similar late in their background or temperament. >> dickerson: okay. we're going to have to leave it.
>> dickerson: the new smithsonian museum of african american history and culture opens next week. cbs this morning will be there for their entire broadcast tomorrow, and cbs this morning co-host gayle king is with us for a preview. gayle, thanks for coming in on your day off. >> hi, john. >> dickerson: i want to get your impressions about the museum, since you've been, there but i first want the play a bit of an interview charlie rose did for your broadcast tomorrow with senators tim scott and cory booker. they talk about what the museum means to them. >> this is a building that i wish my grandparents could have seen opened. i know it would have given them a sense of legitimacy, a sense that they belong, that america is embracing the african american community in not a symbolic way but in a deeply substantive way. and i thought about it. i joked as i was coming in, but to cross the threshold of that building, that moment of walking into this building, i felt as if my ancestors were rejoicing in that moment. >> dickerson:
>> i hope that one of the beauties of this museum being here will be an understanding and a appreciation of the depth of the pain, agony and tragedy faced. i hope that the weight of the past will slow the gate and bow your head. and as you walk out of here, i hope that the sense of freedom, a sense of expectation will overwhelm you and that you will feel individually responsible for making america the most amazing country for every single citizen in our land. >> dickerson: that's amazing, gayle. really powerful. >> wow. i just got goosebumps listening to both of them speak. shows you how democrats and republicans can come together and unite for a common cause. that was very powerful what tim
scott just said. >> dickerson: now you've been in there, right? >> when i was there it was a construction zone, but i saw it when it was just a drawing on a desk and when there was a replica. so to see it coming out of the ground, i think norah o'donnell had the best description. it looks like a crown. it doesn't look like the other kids in the class. it has its own look that's very unique, starting with the color, starting with the shape of it. but what that building represents is massive. >> dickerson: and what does it help? give me the full spectrum? >> when i look at the full spectrum, we start with savory. that's very unpleasant. nobody wants the acknowledge it. but until you acknowledge it, it's very hard to move forward some in that museum, john, you have the shackles that were put on children. you have people's slave papers. you have an actual slaveship. we have a great story on how they got that, an actual slave slit. the casket of emmett till, a very pivot point in the fight.
all the way up to the election of president barack obama. >> dickerson: also harriet tubman's prayer shawl is there. >> it's bigger than black history. it's all of our history. this is a ku klux klan robe there. nat turner's bible was donated bay white family. when the museum first started, lonnie bunch, who did yeoman's work, they had no exhibits. now they have over 35,000. >> dickerson: tell us who else will be on the show tomorrow? >> tomorrow colin powell, you know him very well, he was on the board, lonnie bunch, loretta lynch, our attorney general will be there, and john lewis, who they call the godfather of the museum, who was very instrumental in it becoming what it is today. >> dickerson: and you're in history. you're opening this amazing thing. >> as you know, when cbs takes a show on the road, it must be a very big deal. so the fact we're going live and
pulling out all the stops means a lot to me personally. i think it means a lot to all of us. lonnie bunch says, we want it to be a place of celebration. we want it to be a place of remembrance. but it's going to be a living museum that's always changing. smiles and tears. >> dickerson: we'll celebrate and remember with you tomorrow, gayle. >> thank you for having me. >> dickerson: thanks for being here. thanks all of you for being here. we'll be right back.
♪ at the 20, 22 15, and 5, touchdown! >> this is toyota sunday kickoff on cbs3. >> you are looking live at lincoln financial field we're just over an hour and a half the eagles kickoff the season against the cleveland browns. and fans outside are ready as mid season forms and tailgating game is strong here in south philadelphia. the excitement for the season