Transcript: Sue Gordon talks with Michael Morell on "Intelligence Matters"
INTELLIGENCE MATTERS - SUE GORDON
CORRESPONDENT: MICHAEL MORELL
PRODUCER: OLIVIA GAZIS, JAMIE BENSON
MICHAEL MORELL:
Sue, welcome. It is great to have you back on the show.
SUE GORDON:
Thanks for having me.
MICHAEL MORELL:
So for our longtime listeners -- they'll remember that you were with us on Intelligence Matters on January 2nd, 2018. That seems like a long time ago. It's a little over 550 days. We actually counted it. So it's great to have you back. When you were first on the show, you were five months into your job.
SUE GORDON:
Uh-huh (AFFIRM).
MICHAEL MORELL:
Now you are almost two years.
SUE GORDON:
Uh-huh (AFFIRM).
MICHAEL MORELL:
In fact, your two year anniversary is early next month.
SUE GORDON:
It's unbelievable.
MICHAEL MORELL:
So, congratulations.
SUE GORDON:
Thank you.
MICHAEL MORELL:
And so I guess where I want to start is by asking you what you've learned in those two years. What are your biggest takeaways from leading, managing, working with intelligence officers in the intelligence community over that period of time? What really stands out to you?
SUE GORDON:
So let's see if I can think of it in several domains. The first is, gosh, this is a crazy world and a really different time. And I'm sure my predecessors would say that, but I'm old and I've been in this business a long time. And I will tell you, this is a different world than ever we're seeing.
MICHAEL MORELL:
Crazy in what sense?
SUE GORDON:
It's so fast-moving. It's a world where every technology's available to everyone. It's a world that is perfectly digitally connected so that changes, how information moves and the relationships between organizations, parties, nations, partners, reach of our adversaries and competitors. And it's a world of data abundance, where the world knows everything and you're trying to figure out what it is. And that speed and difference laid as a backdrop for nation-states' interests playing out is just really interesting to try and sort it out, particularly if you're in the business of intelligence. So that's one. It is a really different world.
The second thing I've learned is, I think that intelligence has the opportunity to be the hero of this moment as much as it has ever been. And I know that can sound different to people who listen to the stories about how the relationship may or may not be with the Administration or what's going on with the Congress. But the truth is, the fundamental craft of intelligence that's about wisdom, insight and clarity delivered so that our leaders can decide before events for them, is just as important. So that's three.
MICHAEL MORELL:
Just as important or even more important--
SUE GORDON:
Way more important.
MICHAEL MORELL:
--Right? I mean, yes. I--
SUE GORDON:
Yes, I think we had to change--
MICHAEL MORELL:
--so, too.
SUE GORDON:
Yes. It is. Three, in order to continue to deliver that as we have always sought to, we are going to have to be really different as an intelligence community. And you mentioned that a little bit in your Foreign Affairs piece, and I hope we talk about that some-- for the intelligence community is better than it's ever been, and it's more of a community than it's ever been, more of a community than it even was when you were there, and you were there a minute ago.
MICHAEL MORELL:
Do you find that to be a struggle to keep pulling it together? Are there kind of forces that tend to pull it apart? Or has that changed? Because when I was there--
SUE GORDON:
Yes.
MICHAEL MORELL:
--the forces were always trying to pull it apart and the DNI was trying to pull it together.
SUE GORDON:
Yes.
MICHAEL MORELL:
Is it different now?
SUE GORDON:
Yes. So, the first thing is, I don't think the community-- I don't think we ever want the community to act as a department. There is something lovely about a consortium of 17 agencies, each of whom has something specific to do and then it tries to play together.
So, and that has led to our relative agility, our relative innovation, is because we have agencies who can make relatively independent decisions. That said, the reason why I think it's more of a community than it's ever been is, 1) we have great leadership, and 2) each agency now recognizes that it needs more than it can do alone. And every agency needs something provided to it so it can take advantage of all the other things. And so--
MICHAEL MORELL:
Provided to it by some other agency?
SUE GORDON:
Uh-huh (AFFIRM). And so, you know, post-9/11 with the formation of the DNI, we really started to talk about the value of integrated intelligence. And so we integrated. Now we have much more interdependence and that is making us be more of a community.
MICHAEL MORELL:
So Sue, I'd love to structure the vast majority of our talk around the big challenges--
SUE GORDON:
Uh-huh (AFFIRM).
MICHAEL MORELL:
--facing the IC, the ones the community really needs to tackle, the ones it really needs to get right if the IC is going to be able to continue to provide to the country what the country needs from it. And so maybe the place to start is to ask you what you see as the biggest challenges facing the community are going forward. You know, maybe what you see as the top two, the top three. How do you think about that? And then we'll go through each one of them in some depth.
SUE GORDON:
Okay, so, backdrop to everything I'm going to say is, this is world where the threats are to and through information. So, both our opportunities and our challenges, I think, are related to that.
MICHAEL MORELL:
What do you -- what does that mean "to and through information"?
SUE GORDON:
Yes. So we'll take the "to." And that's -- we can choose the influence in elections. I almost said potentially an existential threat. I can think of no greater threat to America than actions that would make us not believe in ourselves.
That is national interests of our adversaries using information in order to sow seeds of division and, again, make us not believe in ourselves, or make people believe their votes don't count, or position tools in our infrastructure so they could deny us either information or withdraw information or--
MICHAEL MORELL:
Damage infrastructure?
SUE GORDON:
-- damage infrastructure. Those are all information that are threats to information. Through information is the use of data. So, in a world where it really is about your ability to command data, then the person is going to be able to use it, whether to synthesize information to see patterns that aren't there, deliver information more quickly to achieve action, that's where the advantage is going to be.
So, if you think about challenges for the intelligence community, the first is being able to see the threats coming from adversaries and something as elusive as threats through information systems. And then the other piece is challenges for the community. How are we successful at dominating an information environment so that we have more ability to use the information that's available?
MICHAEL MORELL:
So let's take both of those, Sue.
SUE GORDON:
Okay.
MICHAEL MORELL:
So the first is, seeing the threats, right? So talk about that one in more depth, and how the community has to be positioned in order to do that. And maybe the way I'll put it is that, I don't think we saw two, three years in advance, the potential for a nation-state to go big in terms of using social media as a weapon against our democracy, right?
SUE GORDON:
Uh-huh (AFFIRM).
MICHAEL MORELL:
We were worrying about cyber in a more traditional way.
SUE GORDON:
Uh-huh (AFFIRM).
MICHAEL MORELL:
So this came at us. And it was, like--
SUE GORDON:
Isn't that -- funny you said that? "Cyber in a traditional way"? You know, now cyber is so passé.
MICHAEL MORELL:
Right. Right.
SUE GORDON:
Right? So, yes. Yes. I think that's a really interesting question of, "Did we miss it?" "How we missed it?"
MICHAEL MORELL:
React to this.
SUE GORDON:
I am.
MICHAEL MORELL:
We got the traditional cyber things right.
SUE GORDON:
Right. We did.
MICHAEL MORELL:
We saw them stealing information from the DNC and from Hillary's campaign and from John Podesta.
SUE GORDON:
Yes.
MICHAEL MORELL:
We saw them trying to get into state and local voting systems.
SUE GORDON:
Yes.
MICHAEL MORELL:
It took us a long time to see them messing around with social media.
SUE GORDON:
Yes. So a couple things. One, it probably shouldn't have, because there's nothing new under the sun with the Soviets', now Russians', their doctrine to undermine democracy. And one of the hardest things for people to do is to see the same intent manifest through new technology, new capabilities. So, probably should've imagined that was going to happen because it's a longstanding--
MICHAEL MORELL:
And by the way, I was there when we should've been imagining this. So, I'm--
SUE GORDON:
--so, I think one is, imagining it. We probably should've. And it's a great reminder that the same intent will just manifest differently as technology-- so I now-- I think we see that differently.
MICHAEL MORELL:
So how do we then see what's coming next, right, that we don't see right now?
SUE GORDON:
Right. So, we really have raised our vision to now ask that question. We have no expectation that in 2020 they will stay with the approach that they had in 2018. So I think we already have raised our vision. The question is, over time, you and I as careerists, "How do you keep on being refreshed? How does the intelligence community itself not believe its prior assessments so much that it can't see something else?" But I think we're there.
Two, I think we were a little bit limited. And this is what's so interesting about this time is, because of digital connectedness, our adversaries and competitors can cross boundaries that we believe in, right? So China can go and steal secrets from the private sector, but the federal government doesn't go into the private companies. We don't believe in that.
Or Russia tried to influence elections, and they could go to state and local. In our country, the federal government doesn't do that. So what's so fascinating, what may have contributed is-- and social media is so much about U.S. persons and freedom of speech-- that the threats cross boundaries that we had constructed, that we believed in. And they could go, and we didn't.
MICHAEL MORELL:
Same was true of 9/11--
SUE GORDON:
Right. So keep doing that. So, when you think about what the intelligence community has to do about it-- and I think we already are-- is now the threat surface is disproportionately not controlled by the government. And the people who are deciding about protection are not government officials.
And what that means is, intelligence has to be made available for those decision-makers, whether it's the populace — 'You all are being duped' - or the private sector – 'You all are having your secrets stolen. You need to make different decisions. And we need to give you information so that you can make different decisions.' And that is a big leap for us, culturally. But if we remember we're in the national security business, I think we'll find our way to be able to provide good stuff there.
MICHAEL MORELL:
And but to get there -- and you've talked about this a lot publicly -- to get there, there has to be this relationship, right --
SUE GORDON:
Uh-huh (AFFIRM).
MICHAEL MORELL:
--between the government and the private sector, which isn't as healthy as it needs to be. At least that's my view into it.
SUE GORDON:
Uh-huh (AFFIRM).
MICHAEL MORELL:
I had a lot of interaction with folks in Silicon Valley who openly questioned the value of what I did for 33 years. Right? So, how do you manage that issue, right? How do you get to where you need to be with the private sector, so that they see you as somebody who's there to help them rather than to undermine what they're trying to do?
SUE GORDON:
Well, one, we're learning. As you know, this is culturally difficult for us. But we are producing much more information openly. So, I'm proud of the intelligence community assessment on the 2016 election that was published unclassified. That was a huge leap.
But what it did was, it shared information. And we are doing great things with the private sector to talk about counterintelligence threats. And it's with no ask. It's just sharing it. And it's sharing it openly and being involved in the conversations. So I think our conversation with the American people is really helping the trust.
With individual companies, I think the people who choose not to do business with us are much more vocal than the partners that we have. You know that we are very aggressively in the intelligence community pursuing machines as partners, because we think part of harnessing data is really going forward on artificial intelligence.
We have so many people that are interested in working with us on that. So I think some of our openness is also leading to better possibility for business relationships. You know, we've talked about the Googles before. I think they should do business with us. I think they're a little-- they're misguided about the rule of law and who they can trust. But I will also tell you that I'm grateful that they're part of the American (LAUGH) fabric. And even if they don't work directly with us, the things they're doing are improving society and creating things that make us better. That relationship will come along. I can wait for them.
MICHAEL MORELL:
But one of the things I find interesting-- and this is me saying this, so you can react to this-- is I find companies like Google and some others, I'll mention Twitter, not willing to do business with the U.S. government--
SUE GORDON:
Yes.
MICHAEL MORELL:
--but they are willing to do business with foreign governments--
SUE GORDON:
Yes.
MICHAEL MORELL:
--and help foreign governments achieve things.
SUE GORDON:
Yes.
MICHAEL MORELL:
And so in my case, the trust issue goes both ways--
SUE GORDON:
Yes.
MICHAEL MORELL:
--right? It's not just one way.
SUE GORDON:
Yes.
MICHAEL MORELL:
It's not just their distrust in us.
SUE GORDON:
Yes.
MICHAEL MORELL:
There's a little bit of distrust--
SUE GORDON:
Yes.
MICHAEL MORELL:
--on our side in them. Can you react to that?
SUE GORDON:
Yes. I am at a loss to understand that.
MICHAEL MORELL:
I mean, helping the Chinese--
SUE GORDON:
Yes.
MICHAEL MORELL:
--develop a better search engine that gets the Chinese government what it wants, right?
SUE GORDON:
Especially when we know things about that society and that regime and the control that they want to have of their people and the fact that they scoop up data and they want to be able to use it. And they're interested in not just using information but domination in really interesting ways. I'm at a loss to understand that. We're trying as part of our campaign in counterintelligence to share that more openly so people will make decisions. I--
MICHAEL MORELL:
When you guys do that, is it--
SUE GORDON:
Yes.
MICHAEL MORELL:
--classified or is it unclassified?
SUE GORDON:
Both.
MICHAEL MORELL:
Both?
SUE GORDON:
Both. We'll get groups of CEOs together to share with them information that we think they need to hear. But we also have a massive unclassified campaign called Know the Risk Raise Your Shield, where we're just sharing information so that people can see what's happening.
MICHAEL MORELL:
One of the things you mentioned earlier was--
SUE GORDON:
But I have to tell you, for Twitter and Google and others, if you're listening to us, dealing with an organization that swears to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States, that protects civil liberties and is all about open society and free speech, that's a good choice. (LAUGH)
MICHAEL MORELL:
So, Sue, you mentioned that you're putting more information out to the public, which I think is great. You're also putting data out. And you're letting people do analysis on it.
There're some really interesting things that NGA, for example, is doing in that regard, putting commercial imagery out and letting people go at it. And some fascinating, fascinating analysis is on the NGA website that students and professors have taken imagery and made judgments about what's happening in North Korea or other parts of the world. Talk about that and why that's so important.
SUE GORDON:
I think that is perhaps the best single representation of what I think is good government. So, capability that was developed for the national security segment at the taxpayers' expense, being given back to the public who funded it, for their use, that's awesome.
So, NGA making their years and years of both imagery and earth observations available for study or for the development of new algorithms, new tools, has really made it different in terms of environmental studies. What they've done in terms of releasing data on the Arctic has allowed mapping and elevation studies that have never been done before that just benefit exploration in ways that are not national security but just societal benefit. What they did in terms of Ebola, in terms of hurricanes, is-- the number of algorithms that they developed for use on that data that they make available, like, on GitHub, just so developers can come up with new capabilities that can be used against the new commercial imagery is an exciting advance in governmental benefit.
MICHAEL MORELL:
So you mentioned earlier this article that Amy Zegart and I wrote in Foreign Affairs--
SUE GORDON:
I liked it.
MICHAEL MORELL:
--about the importance of technology and the importance of the IC getting to the cutting-edge of technology and staying there. And when we first chatted about it, you said, "Michael, the answer is transparency." What did you mean by that? Do you remember that?
SUE GORDON:
I do. And I liked the article. I could probably quibble a little bit with your assessment of where we are in terms of pursuing the solution to some of the conditions you mentioned, but I thought you hit a lot of the right articles. But this is a world that is increasingly transparent.
It's a world where increasingly, secrets aren't going to stay secret forever. And so whether we are transparent so that the American people understand our efforts on their behalf, described in a way that we can describe it and still protect advantage, make data available that helps people understand what is really going on in the world or provide assessments that help national security, I think those are all the ways you have to be behave in a world that is increasingly transparent on its own. I also think that in a world that is moving really fast, if we aren't careful, we will burden ourselves with things that slow us down but aren't providing the advantage that they used to.
MICHAEL MORELL:
So, you broke the big challenges into seeing the threats created by this new world that we live in. And then the IC taking advantage of the new world we live in to enhance its capabilities, right?
SUE GORDON:
Uh-huh (AFFIRM).
MICHAEL MORELL:
So where do you think we are on that journey of getting to where we need to be? Are we halfway there? Are we 90% of the way there? How would you assess that?
SUE GORDON:
I think we're seeing the world more clearly every day, just whether it was the Russian influence or The Belt and Road Initiative of China or what Russia's doing in the Arctic. I just think now you see the-- we see the interplay much more clearly.
I think interestingly enough, a president who thinks more in economic terms than political military terms that was our wont, is actually expanding our horizons to think about economic security more than we perhaps did. And that has enhanced us seeing the world and its varied relationships. So I think we see the world more clearly than we did before.
We're at the beginning of recognizing that we need to think about and understand technological advance differently, identifying differential technology developments. How did 5G become 5G? Right? How was that one that was going to be transformative? What are other things like that? Not all the technologies, but which of the technologies that are coming -- I think that's something that we're in our nascence of understanding. The National Intelligence Council is doing a good job on that. And because they have so many private sector relationships, I think we'll get on that. But I think that's one that's really important. Which technologies will matter?
MICHAEL MORELL:
Yes, which ones do you think matter the most?
SUE GORDON:
Probably anything that has to do with data. So, who's gonna win the AI race, telecommunications, technology, high performance computing. Those are the ones that I think-- maybe materials, adaptive manufacturing, the things that will happen faster. So, technologies.
Third is, thinking about how this data world and this technology world will change the rate of developments. So you and I grew up with the Soviet development model, where, you see how missile production goes. That isn't the way it happens anymore. And so we have to do it. And then last, so I think we're coming along there, but that's a secondary thing.
We're doing much better on cyber. Remember when cyber was only what the technical people did? Now with influence in cyber, all our regional analysts are thinking about that. So I think we're doing very well. We now will need to develop new analytic tradecraft-- whether that is because we're going to have to write more openly, and writing for business or writing for the public is different from writing for government-- I also think that we're in a world where we're producing intelligence for people that want to do, not just people who want to know. And those cycles are getting shorter. And that's different craft.
MICHAEL MORELL:
So the world is not only very different than it was when you and I were growing up in this--
SUE GORDON:
I think so.
MICHAEL MORELL:
--business, right? But it's also changing very rapidly.
SUE GORDON:
Uh-huh (AFFIRM).
MICHAEL MORELL:
So, I would imagine that the next five years of technological change is going to be more dramatic than the last five.
SUE GORDON:
Yes.
MICHAEL MORELL:
Right? So, it's not only a question of getting to where you need to be. It's a question of keeping up.
SUE GORDON:
Right.
MICHAEL MORELL:
How do you think about that? And you were talking earlier before we went on the air about new ways of thinking about the workforce and how you employ the workforce. So, how do you think about all that?
SUE GORDON:
Yes. So, I was going to answer your question even before you prompted me to say, if I had-- if the community has decided we need an initiative on using machines as partners; the other one is, we really need to focus on the right workforce. And I will say, if we deal with our workforce issues right, we won't have to worry about solving any of the other problems because our people will. And here's what I mean. We need to be able to attract, develop, move and retain talent differently.
We need to be able to get people in faster. We need to imagine a career that isn't going to be our 30-some year career, but they're going to be able to move in and out. We need people that are-- we're going to focus on having expertise, not being experts. And the difference there is, we used to hire people and they did the same job for 30 years.
And so staying in the community was the right thing to do because we're different, and so that we wanted them to be experts. No. I need them to have the kind of expertise that they will be able to apply that to whatever changed world that comes. And the way you develop expertise is not going to be in a straight line. And that's moving in and out of the government. So we have to do security clearance reform.
I have to imagine that I want people to be able to work anywhere, inside or outside the SCIF. I have to develop the technologies so that they can. You know, the people in Silicon Valley would love to work for the intelligence community, but they're not coming to Washington to work. So I have to break that paradigm.
MICHAEL MORELL:
Right, right, right.
SUE GORDON:
I've got young people that live in Fredericksburg that I make come in to Washington, D.C. Why in the world do I not let them stop in Springfield? So, everything from who we attract, how quickly we get them, how we reward them, how do we develop them, how we move them, what we allow them to do and the tools we give them when they're there, if we can do that -- Straight up, we will challenge anyone for any talent, because our purpose is so great and the opportunities to do different things -- we just have that in spades.
MICHAEL MORELL:
So Sue, we just walked through some huge issues. And we could finish up with just some random questions.
SUE GORDON:
I'll try and answer them.
MICHAEL MORELL:
So, you work for Dan Coats.
SUE GORDON:
I do.
MICHAEL MORELL:
He is the only core member of the president's original National Security team who's still in his job. Every other key position on the National Security team has changed.
SUE GORDON:
Uh-huh (AFFIRM).
MICHAEL MORELL:
Once, at least once, if not more than once. What is Dan like? What is it like to work for him?
SUE GORDON:
So, my gosh. Dan's a great solid American who's answered his nation's call several times, many times when he was ready to retire. And he came back. And there is something lovely and amazing about that. So that's one. Number two, he's just a straight-down-the-middle guy.
I believe that the intelligence community is strong in part because of the way Dan has conducted his job. And here's what he's done. He has played intelligence straight down the middle. And he's done it in a manner that is quiet, except when he has to correct the record. And he's been willing to do so. And because of that, the intelligence community has been able to keep its eyes in the boat, because he plays it down the middle, even when it's unpopular. But I will tell you that the American people believing in the independence of the intelligence community is great for this nation.
The second thing is, is he provides tremendous benefit because of his history with the Congress and his respect therein. No matter whether the Congress is mad at us or happy with us, whether we're on the side of goodness or the side of vexing, that they will call Dan Coats, believing that he can help navigate that, that has been tremendous benefit. I don't know any DNI could've done in this time what Dan Coats has done. And I'm proud to be a member of his team.
MICHAEL MORELL:
Yes. This is an editorial comment by me. You know, I think the intelligence community and the nation has been extraordinarily lucky--
SUE GORDON:
I agree.
MICHAEL MORELL:
--to have him at this place at this moment in time.
SUE GORDON:
And absolutely. I don't know anyone else could've done it the way he's done it. I think we have a very strong community because of the way he has played his role.
MICHAEL MORELL:
Second question. Second kind of random question is I want to ask you about-- and I want you to be honest about this--
SUE GORDON:
Now, Michael--
MICHAEL MORELL:
--and I said that -- I said that because I'm involved in the answer.
SUE GORDON:
Okay.
MICHAEL MORELL:
Right? So I want to ask you about former senior intelligence officers who are out there talking publicly.
SUE GORDON:
Uh-huh (AFFIRM).
MICHAEL MORELL:
And I'm one of them, right? And they talk about three things. They talk about substantive issues
-- you know, Iran, North Korea, and sometimes it gets into policy. They talk about intelligence-related issues, right, things going on in the intelligence community and--
SUE GORDON:
Uh-huh (AFFIRM).
MICHAEL MORELL:
--how the public should think about it. And then some of them are actually out there talking about politics.
SUE GORDON:
Uh-huh (AFFIRM).
MICHAEL MORELL:
So how do you think about that as an issue? You know, do you think it's the right thing for us formers to be doing? The wrong thing? How do you think about that? How does it strike you?
SUE GORDON:
So, with the massive caveat that I've never been a former, so that kind of disqualifies me for having, you know, a real opinion. And I'll tell you how it feels now. Number one is, I think formers can have tremendous advantage. You can speak about issues in ways that we either can't or we aren't yet comfortable talking about.
There's a really important thing that's going on right now with the openness. And when I talk transparency is, these are issues that ought to be talked about. If we learn nothing else from Snowden, to only have one set of voices on issues is just not right.
And there is something great about people who understand the world in the way intelligence officers understand the world. Sharing that view with the American people, I think that has tremendous benefit. So I think that's great. Where it has gotten difficult in this time is, this is a hyper political time. And it's difficult because we are all serious people who are just trying to solve some really serious issues. And there's so much chaff around that.
When the formers weigh in on politics, it has not helped us because you impute back to us. And then for those who would believe we have opinion other than the pursuit of truth that is our wont, that is difficult.
On a personal front, you guys, what made you think that we weren't able to do what we have done for my whole career, which is -- it is every policymaker, (LAUGH) every president has wanted us to be able to say something we couldn't say.
There is nothing new in that under the sun. And we know exactly. You knew. Your predecessors knew. We know how to do our job. So when you all weigh in and suggest that somehow this world is so-- this administration is so weird that we don't know how to play it straight down the middle or that we aren't valued, it's weird. Like, when did you lose confidence in us? But it's both, right? Because it's nice to have your voice.
MICHAEL MORELL:
So Sue, I want to finish by getting your reaction to two questions. And this is not just about the IC. This is about the country, because I think you are so thoughtful. What makes you the most optimistic about the future of our nation? And what makes you worry the most?
SUE GORDON:
What makes me the most optimistic is what makes us America. The fact that we vibrate, we vibrate with innovation, we vibrate with competitiveness, we vibrate with opinion, we tussle back and forth. The fact that our adversaries come here to steal our stuff--
MICHAEL MORELL:
Should tell us something.
SUE GORDON:
Should tell us something. And when we compete, when we participate, when the government focuses, there is just nothing that beats this. And there is nothing that I have seen that says the foundation of America, the strength of America-- whether that's our industrial base or the ingenuity and energy of our people-- has changed. And we are actually alive right now.
There's some days when it (LAUGH) feels overly negative. But there's an aliveness to us believing that we should have-- fight for this or fight for one another. So I think that's what makes me the most optimistic. And like I said, intelligence is going to be a hero in this story.
The thing that worries me the most is when we somehow think that our institutions have stopped being derivative of the founding principles of our nation. Whatever version of us not believing in ourselves, that is troubling to me. Questioning ourselves? Aces. Being dissatisfied with what we're doing on any front? Yay. We should constantly be dissatisfied because that's part of our greatness. But not believing that there is honor in our institutions, I think, is what troubles me. And then when that happens, it promulgates to not understanding that we have great partners.
Part of the greatness of America, if you want to talk about a contrast between us and some of our competitors and adversaries, it's the partnerships that we have. And they are disproportionately alone. And we are disproportionate together. And that is worth maintaining.
MICHAEL MORELL:
Sue, thank you so much for being with us.
SUE GORDON:
You're welcome.
* * *END OF TRANSCRIPT* * *