>> Another behind-the-scenes book about the Trump White House from an insider who left, but this one is different, this week on "Firing Line."

>> You've made America great.

You're gonna continue to make America great.

>> The daughter of a governor of Arkansas who ran for president, Sarah Huckabee Sanders became a household name herself when, at just 34, she became President Trump's press secretary.

During more than 100 briefings, she faced crisis... >> The memory of those who displayed the ultimate expression of love in the midst of an unimaginable act of hate will never fade.

>> ...chaos... >> Hey, guys, one at a time.

>> ...and controversy.

>> Were you lying to us at the time, or were you in the dark?

>> The President has denied and continues to deny the underlying claim.

>> It's been more than a year since she left the White House.

What does Sarah Huckabee Sanders say now?

>> "Firing Line with Margaret Hoover" is made possible in part by... ...and by... Corporate funding is provided by... >> Sarah Huckabee Sanders, welcome to "Firing Line."

>> Thank you so much for having me.

Great to be with you.

>> So, you have written a book entitled "Speaking for Myself: Faith, Freedom and the Fight of Our Lives Inside the Trump White House."

And it is -- no surprise -- a pretty glowing account of your time working for President Trump, to whom you remain deeply loyal.

So, tell me, what was the part that was the fight for your life?

>> Well, I think we were under just a constant attack, and everything was on the table, whether it was our weight, my appearance, my makeup, my fitness to be a mother.

Certainly, I think most of us who went into the White House fully expected that policy would be challenged, legislation, the agenda.

But personally, as a staffer, have those challenges, I think was something that most of us didn't expect.

I know, certainly, I didn't.

As you know, I was the first White House press secretary to ever need Secret Service protection.

And so, as a parent, that's a pretty terrifying realization to have.

And, certainly, you want to protect your kids and do everything you can to protect them.

And so that added a whole different level of difficulty in holding that job, was knowing that, as a parent, that level of protection was something that was a much bigger challenge than I ever anticipated.

>> I mean, the attacks on you were grossly unfair and personal.

I mean, in a way that I hadn't seen before, personally.

I mean, you took head-on attacks to your face at the White House Correspondents Dinner.

You were insulted by Mika Brzezinski of MSNBC as being, quote, "rotten to the core."

Others, as you said, questioned your fitness to be a mother.

You had a terrible "SNL" parody.

How did they make you feel?

>> Certainly not my favorite part of the job, but thankfully, I had a family who was very supportive.

I had a very good group of friends.

And frankly, the President empowered me and defended me and was one of the people that gave me confidence to take on that job day in and day out.

And it's one of the reasons that I made it through 2 1/2 years is knowing I had his trust and his confidence when I stood up at the podium.

Made all the difference in the world.

But certainly my faith was a huge part in that, in carrying me through those difficult days, knowing that I didn't need anybody else to define me or to validate me.

I had somebody who had already done that.

>> So, given that the President was so supportive of you, let me ask you this question, because there are women to whom he has not been so supportive, mostly women who disagree with him, but he has been quite vociferous in his attacks against their looks.

I mean, calling Rosie O'Donnell fat and Carly Fiorina ugly and even the wife of Senator Cruz, Heidi Cruz, commented disparagingly about her looks.

So, how do you square that with the fact that he actually can be part of this culture of negativeness and nastiness towards women at times?

>> You know, I think we should all look for ways to build each other up instead of tear each other down.

I encourage the President as well as anybody else to do that more often.

Women, in particular, I think, are so hard on each other.

I think that was one of the things that probably surprised me the most in the White House in my time there.

Some of the people that were the meanest and most aggressive attackers of my looks and appearance and things like that were other women, all in the age of women's empowerment.

And so you would've thought those would be the people, despite the fact they might disagree with you politically, but it would at least be glad to see women moving forward, particularly.

I was only the third woman, the very first mom, to ever hold that job.

And so that, to me, was more surprising.

Certainly, I think that everybody can take a step back, we can lower the temperature, and have more positive exchanges with one another, and I think that goes across the board, both sides of the aisle.

>> Did you ever tell President Trump that he should tone it down with respect to his comments about women?

>> There were certainly moments where we might disagree on a particular matter.

And because I had a good relationship with the President, I didn't have a problem being candid with him when I agreed, when I disagreed.

And sometimes he listened and took my advice and sometimes he didn't.

At the end of the day, he was the one who had been elected president, not me.

And so it was his decision to make.

But I certainly felt comfortable in voicing my opinion with him in those moments.

>> You write in the book that sometimes you agree that his rhetoric went too far.

Do you have any examples of that?

>> [ Chuckles ] I'm not going to relist moments.

I think most people can figure that out for themselves.

But I do think that the unfortunate nature of politics has gotten a little too aggressive at times, certainly.

>> Let me ask you about the tweeting.

Because you're on record as saying that, you know, you wished -- there's an example in the book -- that you wish sometimes he would spend more of his time in a secure location where the tweets didn't get out.

Clearly, they created a headache for you in the job from time to time, and they create a headache for his supporters, people who defend his policies but really can't defend the tweeting.

So what is it?

Why can't he quit the tweeting?

>> Well, I think in some ways it can be refreshing that we have a president who is so accessible to the American people.

You know where he is, you know what he's thinking on a number of topics at any given time.

I think one of the reasons Donald Trump won in 2016 is because people were sick and tired of scripted politicians that seemed more like robots than human beings.

They definitely don't get that in Donald Trump.

They get somebody who speaks from the heart, speaks from the cuff, and I think a lot of people find that refreshing.

I think that's one of the reasons he won in 2016.

I actually think it's one of the reasons he'll continue to do well in 2020, because he is -- I think he puts it all out there and allows people to make up their mind about him.

>> And that's certainly true in many ways.

But there are things he puts out there that, I mean, as you know, are blatantly false -- conspiracy theories, multiple references to QAnon, even one this week about Joe Biden as a potential pedophile.

You know, what's behind the conspiracy-theory tweeting?

Like, do you think that's refreshing to the American people?

>> Well, I certainly -- like I said, there were certainly challenges as the White House press secretary in those moments.

But at the end of the day, 63 million Americans came out and voted for Donald Trump.

They wanted his agenda.

They wanted somebody who has that fighting spirit, somebody who pushes back against some of the norms certainly of Washington.

They wanted a disrupter.

They wanted somebody who didn't do business as usual, and they've gotten that in Donald Trump.

And I think he's lived up to what he said he would do when he ran in 2015.

I think he continues to do that.

He's the same person that he was when he first ran for office, and he still won.

>> Yeah, for sure.

For sure.

Let me just ask you then, as Sarah Huckabee Sanders -- do you agree that QAnon is a baseless conspiracy theory?

>> I'm not aware of anything that they're pushing that I would say is accurate.

I haven't spent a lot of time, to be honest with you, digging in to a lot of what they're into, but from the parts I -- >> You're sparing yourself?

from the parts that I know, I wouldn't say that I would believe any of that is accurate.

>> I would just counsel you to stay the course.

[ Both laugh ] Listen, as White House press secretary, you gave more than a hundred briefings, and you write in your book... Why do you think the briefings became must-see TV in the Trump administration?

>> I think there's a lot of reasons.

I think there was -- you know, because it didn't become as much about the news and it became more about the back-and-forth between the press secretary and the reporters, which frankly, I don't think it's productive, but it made for better TV.

And so, at the end of the day, most news outlets are still trying to make money.

They're a business.

And I think they felt that was entertainment and less about news.

I think that's one of the reasons the President, for a while, discontinued the briefing, because it did become more about entertainment, more about everybody having their moment and less about getting information out to the American people.

>> I was actually going to ask you about that.

Because the briefings did stop for some time under your tenure as press secretary and then also your successors, was that a decision of the President, or was that your decision?

>> It was a decision of the President.

He didn't like, again, that the briefings had sort of lost its purpose.

They were no longer providing good and accurate information but more about everybody having a viral moment or a gotcha moment.

And he didn't like the way that he felt a lot of the press treated his staff, myself included.

And so he took a step back.

I think one of the things that's made a big difference in the briefings coming back is that you have fewer people in the room, so you don't have 150 people yelling over each other and talking over one another, trying to get a question in.

Some of that separation, I think, has allowed for a little bit more...respectful.

I don't know if that's the right word, but maybe... >> This is one of the silver linings of coronavirus is that the White House briefings are more civil?

>> Yeah, maybe that's a better way to put it.

>> As you think about your role as press secretary and you reflect, what was the most important responsibility of the White House press secretary?

>> I think the most important responsibility is to try to communicate the White House position and the White House agenda and what is taking place there, how decisions are made.

And, you know, I think one of the big misconceptions about the press secretary that a lot of people have outside of the building is that the only time the press secretary and the press interact is at the briefing, which is not true at all.

I mean, hundreds, if not thousands of reporters had my cellphone number, my e-mail, and access to my office.

And so there was a constant communication between the press office and the press itself.

>> You write in the acknowledgments section of your book, quote... Who are the "real journalists"?

>> I would name them off, but I'm afraid I would probably ruin their careers.

But I think the characteristics of a real journalist are -- And there were many in the White House, and I tried to make that point throughout the book that there were several people that I worked extremely well with.

I didn't always agree with them.

Doesn't mean I liked their stories.

A lot of times, I didn't.

But they were fact-finding, and fact-focused journalists.

They were people who weren't injecting their own opinions into their news stories, but they were simply trying to put information out.

I think one of the worst things that's happened to journalism is the blurred lines between news and opinion.

It's very difficult these days to find shows and articles and social media that are strictly news versus that of opinion.

I think they both have a big role, and they're important, but they should be completely and totally separated.

One of the most difficult parts is that you may have a news story that's perfectly fine, but then a reporter's Twitter feed is filled with opinions and thoughts and commentary, and you cannot separate the two.

And a lot of times, their Twitter feeds can actually drive significant amount of news, even more so than their stories, and there's no level of editorial process.

When they're posting something on Twitter, no one's checking it, but it still has the ability to drive a news cycle, sometimes even more so than their story.

And I think that's a very dangerous thing, that we don't have that check and balance in place because it has blended news and opinion so much these days.

>> You know, and then on the flip side, the President has been known to call the press the enemy of the people.

Right?

So how does that play into the back-and-forth?

And is it helpful?

>> Well, I think bad information masqueraded as news and misleading information masqueraded as news is dangerous.

And it is, I think, a detriment to our country.

>> What about the White House press secretary?

Do you view it as your role, in that role, that it was imperative that you tell the truth?

>> Absolutely.

And I spent every single day working diligently to make sure we had the best information at a given time to provide.

That doesn't mean we were free of mistakes.

We certainly are all human, and we're going to make mistakes, and that happened.

But I tried to learn from those mistakes and make sure we didn't repeat them.

>> Is there ever a circumstance, Sarah, where it's acceptable for the White House press secretary to not tell the truth to the American people?

>> I don't think that they should certainly be dishonest at any point, but that doesn't mean they have to tell every single thing that they know.

Sometimes there's national-security implications and economic reasons why you can't maybe share everything you know, but I certainly think that you should always strive to do your very best to give fully and complete, accurate information.

>> Are there any briefings you regret?

When you were White House press secretary, did you have any briefings that you regret?

Or would've done differently?

>> I don't, and again, it goes back to, "Did we make mistakes?

Absolutely."

But we learned from them.

I think we got stronger in those moments.

The difficult moments are, I think, when you learn a lot more about yourself.

So I don't regret it.

Does that mean I might not have done things a little bit differently in some certain circumstance?

Possibly, but I don't regret it.

I'm very proud of the work that I did, the job that I did, and the administration that I got to work in.

>> Yeah.

So, one of the events you write about is about your predecessor in the job, Sean Spicer.

Let's take a quick look at his first briefing.

>> This was the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration, period, both in person and around the globe.

These attempts to lessen the enthusiasm of the inauguration are shameful and wrong.

>> Okay.

So, you write in your book that that was a disaster.

Why?

Why was that a disaster?

>> Well, I don't think we were fully prepared for him to go out that day, but we did, and I think it could have been done better.

Certainly, I think that's one of those moments where we learned something from that day and tried not to repeat those same mistakes.

>> So, what would you have done?

>> You know, it's really hard for me to say.

I had the advantage of going second.

I've said that many times.

Sean had a really difficult job.

My job was extremely hard, but I got six months -- almost, not quite -- of on-the-job training, and this was a new world for all of us to step into.

And so I think there was definitely a learning curve.

There were a lot of things that we learned along the way and we got much better at.

I was much better by the time I left than the day I came in.

And I think Sean learned a lot during that moment and during the course of his time as the White House press secretary.

>> Because, I mean, right there, national security wasn't at stake, but he clearly didn't tell the truth.

>> Well, I think the point Sean was trying to make, and I know that this has been looked at and litigated many times over, and I would refer you to his comments about his own personal feelings, but I know the goal and the point he was trying to make in that moment wasn't just about physical people at the at the inauguration itself but the totality of people who had tuned in to watch the inauguration.

>> Listen, there's another journalist who covered nine presidents who appeared on the original "Firing Line" with William F. Buckley Jr. in 1974 to talk about his reporting during Watergate.

And I wanted you to take a look at this clip.

>> The story has gone way beyond what we ever really wrote, predicted, or had any notion of.

And we have no real stake in an eventual outcome of establishing the guilt of the President.

>> You mean as individuals.

>> As reporters.

>> As an institution, I think The Washington Post -- >> Reporting isn't about that, establishing guilt.

>> All right.

So, there you have an earlier Bob Woodward and an earlier Carl Bernstein.

Funnily, his voice sounds the same.

But on the substance of that point, he says reporters have no stake in proving guilt, that they're just after the truth.

Or at least that was how they approached Watergate.

As someone who's been in the trenches, I mean, is that your experience, do you think?

Is that what good reporters do, and is that what most reporters do, that they're after the truth rather than an outcome?

>> I certainly think that's what a good reporter does, but I don't think that's what we get a lot of now.

Going back to what I was saying earlier, it's -- it's not just about the truth.

Certainly, that has to be a top priority for them.

But it's also about not tainting the truth or swaying the way that a reader looks at a story one way or another.

They shouldn't be pushing one version higher than another.

>> Let me ask you a different question about Bob Woodward.

This is the quote heard 'round the world.

President Trump said to Bob Woodward, quote...

If you are White House press secretary during the coronavirus at the outbreak, as it went, would you have advised that playing it down was the right strategy?

>> Well, I would advise that keeping the country calm and not creating hysteria is a good thing.

I think he has had an unprecedented challenge, certainly something we haven't faced in modern history, and I think he's done a good job of trying to find the right balance of protecting American livelihoods while at the same time protecting American lives.

>> To this question of whether playing it down versus panic, right?

President Trump has likened himself to Churchill and has talked about Churchill at the beginning of World War II.

And I mean, if you look back at what Churchill did -- right?

-- Churchill didn't try to play down the threat of the Germans, right?

He didn't try to play down the threat of the enemy.

What he did was he told the truth, and he earned credibility in his communication.

That seems to be an area where President Trump has fallen down, in terms of developing credible and sincere communication with the American people during the coronavirus.

And that's, I think, why this quote has gotten so much traction.

Rich Lowry, even, from The National Review, who supports President Trump's re-election, says that President Trump "has fallen down on a key aspect of presidential leadership in crisis, which requires serious and credible communication."

What do you think about that?

>> I think if the President didn't take it seriously, then he wouldn't have been willing to shut down one of the strongest economies we've seen.

He wouldn't have been willing to place those restrictions.

He wouldn't have been willing to mobilize U.S. companies, get the government out of the way, provide the resources that first responders and hospitals needed.

I think his actions clearly show he was taking it serious.

He did a daily briefing to, I think, heighten the awareness.

And that in itself shows the seriousness of which the President took.

>> The question is, did he communicate honestly the seriousness of the virus?

>> Again, I think the President was trying to find that balance between not creating panic and protecting livelihoods as well as making sure we do what is necessary to protect American lives.

I don't think everything has been done perfectly, but that is, I think, human nature.

Once again, none of us are perfect.

It's an unprecedented challenge.

It's not like there's a great manual for these types of events.

And I think that he's done a good job of trying to strike that correct balance.

>> Looking at 2020, the President's done a couple of now rallies.

He's doing indoor rallies again, even though they are in defiance of his own White House coronavirus task force guidelines of not convening groups of 50 or more.

If he came to Arkansas for a rally, would you go?

>> It would depend on the circumstances, but if I was able, I certainly would, and I would take precautions.

I would wear a mask.

I would limit my interaction directly with other people.

I think it's important or people across the country to hear from the candidates before they vote.

But I would be making that decision on my own.

I wouldn't be forced to go.

At some point, people have to take personal responsibility.

I would have to make a decision on whether or not I was willing to take that risk.

But I think he's pretty safe in Arkansas, so I don't think we're on the top of his -- >> You're not gonna get a rally.

There's no rally coming your way.

Listen, the 2020 -- the election is coming up.

There are people on both sides of this equation, Republicans and Democrats, who say that whoever wins, there's a real chance that they will refuse -- the other will refuse to concede.

What do you think the country is going to look like the day after the election?

>> Well, I hope we have a clear and decisive victory, obviously.

I hope it's for President Trump and that we don't have to have a battle-it-out.

I hope that we know who the winner is in a freely and fairly conducted election and that there isn't a lot of confusion.

And my prayer for America is that we have a free, fair and decisive election on November 3rd.

>> And you also write that we need to come together as a country.

And I'd love to get you back to hear your thoughts on how we're going to do that.

But I can't leave this one be, which is that we all know you've gone back to Arkansas.

Your father, Mike Huckabee, was the governor of Arkansas.

You grew up in the governor's mansion.

It is widely rumored you're thinking seriously about a run for governor.

And you grew up watching your father as governor.

You write about in your book that your father, as governor, oversaw more than a dozen executions, and you call them "dark and painful days."

Like your father, you're a person of faith who believes in the value of every human life.

If you became governor of Arkansas, would you allow executions to continue?

>> You know, I would have to take each case, case by case basis.

Certainly, I watched my dad go through that decision process.

He read every single page, looked at every file, talked to people that were involved in the process before he made the decision whether or not to weigh in.

And I know he says the very hardest part of his job and the most difficult part, because it's the one thing that you do and that can never be undone.

And I watched the toll that it took on him, and I watched him go through that process.

And so right now, I'm trying to make a decision about whether or not I'll run before I would make a decision on something like that.

>> So your views about capital punishment haven't changed.

>> Certainly, I think that we have to make a determination of what is just in those moments.

And I don't take that lightly.

I think that if there is a way to provide grace and redemption for people, we should look for that.

But at the same time, we have to remain a country of law and order.

And so I would have to look at the individual cases and moments before I could make a hypothetical decision on something.

What would it mean to you if your children ended up growing up in the house that you spent your teenage years in?

>> It would certainly be interesting, to say the least.

But I loved my childhood.

I loved getting to see my state in the way I did.

I thought my dad did an incredible job of really moving our state forward but doing so in a way that put people first.

And, you know, I think I probably learned from one of the best.

I know the challenges and the responsibility but also the great privilege that comes with people trusting you to be the caretaker of your state.

And so as I go through the process to make that decision, it's not one I'll take lightly.

>> Sarah Huckabee Sanders, thank you for coming to "Firing Line."

Thank you for your time.

>> You bet.

Thank you so much.

>> "Firing Line with Margaret Hoover" is made possible in part by... ...and by... Corporate funding is provided by... >> You're watching PBS.