Transcript for One-on-One with White House National Security Advisor Lt. Gen. H. R. McMaster

one of the few people in that meet. He's our exclusive guest this morning from Saudi Arabia with the president. Thank you for joining us today. First, questions about the meeting you all had with the Russian foreign minister. The New York Times reporting the president said -- I just fired the head of the FBI. He was crazy. Real nut job. I faced great pressure pause of Russia. That's taken off. Is that what the president said? Well, I don't remember exactly what the president said. And, the notes that they apparently, have I do not think are a direct transcript. The gist of the conversation was that the president feels as if he's ham strung in his ability to work with Russia to find areas of cooperation because this has been obviously so much in the news. That was the intention of that portion of the conversation. Did you know he was going to report that to the Russians? What did you think when you heard it? Report what, George? Hat he said about James Comey, that he fired him and why? The firing had been in the news. I didn't know in advance that the president was going raise it. He raised it in the context of explaininging that he has been feels as if he's been unable to find areas of cooperation with Russia even as he confronts them in key areas where they're being disruptive, like Syria. The subversive activities around Europe. Did you understand how this might look to an average American right now? The president of the united States telling the Russian foreign minister in their first meeting that the pressure sauf because he's fired the FBI director investigating Russian interference in the campaign. Does that seem appropriate to you? As you know, it's very difficult to take a few lines, a paragraph out of what are -- what appear to be notes of that meeting. And to be able to see the full context of the conversation. As I mentioned last week, the really purpose of the conversation was to confront Russia on areas, as I mentioned, areas like Ukraine and Syria, their support for Assad and the ir Iranians. T that was the intent of that conversation was to say, what I would like to do is move beyond all of the Russia news so that we can find areas of cooperation. The president, did he confront them on their interference in our election? This was their first meeting? There already was too much leaked from those meetings. One of the things I'm most concerned about is the confidence. The confidentiality of those meetings. It's extremely important. So, I am really concerned about ese kind of lea because it undermines everybody's trust in that kind of an environment. Where you can have frank, candid, and often times unconventional conversations to try to protect American interests and secure the American people. I understand your concern about leaks. I can see the -- feeling of perhaps someone likely on your staff or in your community who leaked this thinking they had a duty to leak it because you have this apparent contradiction. The president disparnling the person who was investigating the Russians but not confronting the Russian who is interfered in our election. Well, as you know, the initial leak that came out was a leak about conservcerns about revealing intelligence source and methods. Information not part of the president's briefing. So in a concern about divulging intelligence, they indicated to a newspaper? It doesn't make sense, George. I take your point on that. There's the question of whether or not it was right for the president to give that information to the Russians. But I guess that's a direct question. Did the president confront the Russians on their interference in our election? Well, I'm not going to divulge more of that meeting. Those meetings are supposed to be prif lenled. They're supposed to be confidential. They're supposed to allow the president and other leaders to have frank exchanging. One final question. Sean spicer has spoken out. He said by grand standing and politicizing the investigation into Russian's actions, James Comey created unnecessary pressure on our ability to engage and negotiate with Russia. Do you agree that the former FBI's grand standing and politicizing, Sean spicer's words, hurt our ability to deal with Russia? I think what's been hurting our ability to deal with Russia many that are any other factor has been Russia's behavior. Since president trump has taken action in Syria, we think there may be opportunities to find areas of cooperation in places like Ukraine, places like Syria in particular. After your first press conference on that meeting, your friend and former colleague, retired general John Neagle said you're in an impossible situation baz the president expects you to defend the indefensible. What's your response? I don't think I'm in an impossible situation. What is my duty is to give my best advice. To give my best, candid advice. Nobody elected me to make policy. What my job is is to give the president options, to integrate the efforts across all of our agencies and departments. And then once the president makes decisions, to help him execute those decisions to protect and advance the interests of the American people. So, I find no difficulty at all serving our nation and serving the president in my current capacity. If the president put you in that position as you wrote about with president Johnson and Vietnam, would you resign? Would you push back? Well, you know there was middle ground there during the Vietnam period. What occurred is many of the president's senior advisors, civilian and military, didn't give their best advice. They concluded that what would be appropriate for them to do given what president Johnson expected was to tell him the advice he wanted to hear. I don't think the president expects that from me. Certainly, I don't think I would be fulfilling my duties and responsibilities unless I gave him not just my candid advice. That's not my job either. To integrate and coordinate to give him the best advice from across our government and with our key multinational partners. It sounds like one of the difficult tis of the meeting, when the president disparaged James Comey, apparently did not confront the Russians over this, he didn't even ask your advice? George, what I would like to talk about is where I am right now. I think I answered the questions concerning the media. I would like to move on while we still have time. We will have time. Did the president ask you your advice about this before he talked about James Comey? The president always asks our advice before these sorts of sessions. The subject of that FBI investigation, to my recollection, didn't come up. Really, that conversation, though I don't want to talk about any more of the specifics from within it, covered a broad range of subjects. Most of which had to do with areas in which we think Russia's behavior has been unacceptable and is an increasing risk to the international security is supporting those helping to create a humanitarian crisis. That would be the Assad regime. But looked for areas where we can cooperate. Begin to move to a resolution of conflicts in Ukraine and Syria. And cop rate more effective-- -- What do you want to accomplish on this trip? Three main things. The first is to advance the security of the American people. To recognize that to do that, America needs allies and partners to deal with the complex partners we're dealing with. In this region, those are two main and interconnected problems. Some like ISIS control territory and populations and resources. But then, how that problem is connected more broadly to the problem of islamist extremism and the brain-washing of an Irr religious ideology that is meant to foment hatred. And Iran actions, aimed at keeping the the world mired in civil war. You see it in Syria. You see it in Yemen. You see it in a certain exticket in Iraq. Security, cooperation. Counterterrorism. Counterextremism is a big part As you know -- The second part doctor. Go ahead. The second part is economic cooperation. Being able to get better access to markets. Develop trade relationships. Create American jobs. A lot of important signings happened in that connection. And the third is to foster, this is just for this leg of the trip, better defense cooperation in the region and to encourage additional burden-sharing. Responsibility-sharing. So Americans don't foot the full bill for security in this region and globally, as well. The Saudis have been, in the past, consistent backers of extremists around the region and Arnold the world-- around the world. Are you convinced they're ready to change? We're going to ask them to convince us. There are very good first steps being taken. With the establishment of the center for combatting terrorism extremism. We'll have to see the results. Willingness to talk about it is some what different than the past. As you know, the record is poor. Back to the '60s and '70s and beyond. And to today. We need to convene leaders. Across all religions. The big theme of the trip is toll Lance and cooperation across all religions. We need to identify the terrorists for who they are. They use a perverted interpretation of religion to advance their agendas. That's the tone and tenor of the korver sagss that happened today. Funding has to be cut off to these groups that are fomenting hatred and intolerance. Effect I ha effective -- we have said we expect that of each other. That will be a big part of the conversations tomorrow when the group of leaders expands dramatically to not only include the gulf cooperation council but 50 nations of predominantly Muslim populations. Thank you.

This transcript has been automatically generated and may not be 100% accurate.