>> from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. >> turning now to politics, hillary clinton's campaign hoped the fbi's decision not to recommend prosecutions would have closed the book on her use of a private e-mail server. it may have opened a new chapter instead. the state department has reopened its investigation and a new round of congressional

hearings began thursday with fbi director james comey. anne has more and joins us from the "washington post" where he is the paper's chief correspondent. director comey on the hill testifying. dan: it didn't play very well for secretary clinton. director comey got a series of questions from republicans. i think there were some telling moments in that but overall, it was a reminder that this is an issue that will be with us and certainly with secretary clinton through the duration of this campaign. in no way did the lack of prosecution close the books on this. >> director comey was speaking of the language of the law and politicians were speaking politics. one of the members of congress said if the average joe did what hillary clinton did, he or she

would be led off in handcuffs. and mr. comey said no. walk us through that, if you would. dan: if you look at the totality of what she did and then it question of whether there was willful and/or malicious intent, there is no precedent for prosecuting her under the statute and as he examined similar cases and other outcomes, there was nothing to suggest she could or should be prosecuted under this. one of the interesting moments was when he was asked and did compare this to what happened with general petraeus and outlined a series of things general petraeus had done when he handed over classified information to his biographer and knew what he was doing was wrong.

at another point, lied to the government about it. and he said this is different than what secretary clinton had done. he made clear many of the things or some of the things that secretary clinton has said over the last year and some months were not accurate statements about her use of private server. whether she had moved classified material act and forth. it was classic jim comey. miles: as i understand it, she had to know what she did was breaking the law. in this case, ignorance is a defense? dan: it is certainly a partial defense and enough certainly that the fbi director and the career prosecutors, who led this

investigation, came to the conclusion that no reasonable prosecutor would take this case forward. the attorney general loretta lynch had already taken herself effectively out of the decision-making process. she said she had made that decision some time ago. was ultimately was one that all in the hands of the career prosecutors and jim comey. >> there is little doubt at this juncture that classified material was e-mailed through that server. that is a fact? dan: that is a fact. some top-secret and some confidential. three different levels of classification. >> so reckless is the term that has been used but not illegal. how does this play in the court of public opinion?

dan: part of it is for partisan divisions, there is, as the republicans put forward in session with director comey and many of the things they had to say outside of that arena, there is a belief justice was not being done in this case. the director said that was certainly not the case but the average person or the average person who is not a fan of hillary clinton will believe it one way or another that she did get special treatment. that she, in one way or another, was above the law. jim comey went to some lengths to knock that down but i don't think that will change a lot of minds on that. the idea that this was kind of

an inside deal from start to finish. >> donald trump tweeting, instantly this gets injected into the political discourse. in some sense, the facts kind of get lost, don't they? dan: the facts will certainly get lost. but this was an issue that was bound to be a centerpiece of donald trump's campaign no matter how the fbi came out in its judgment. i had a conversation quite a while ago with an official in the trump campaign and we were talking about this. their conclusion from the start was that this is in many ways a win-win for trump. the first one would be if she had been prosecuted, which would have potentially cost her the nomination. even in the absence of that,

they could easily describe this as a whitewash where he will continue to press that and people have been arguing about the facts of this case and will be arguing about the conclusions of the fbi between now and election day without any let up. >> bernie sanders said last winter, our people tired of hearing about hillary clinton's e-mails? dan: some people are and some people aren't. but i think that reflects the deeper division we have in our politics right now. it's not just hillary clinton's e-mails, it's a variety of things to which people come to conclusions in part on the basis of where their partisan leanings stand. this is one example of this. this is a very high profile example, a very controversial example, but it is not a singular example and i think we

will see that in a variety of ways as we go forward. miles: let's look ahead for just a moment. members of congress asked director comey to launch an investigation into whether hillary clinton may have lied to congress and the state department announced it will begin its investigation now, which waited for all of this to transpire. what issues will we see dropping do you think? dan: i think it's possible with a word from congress, there will be an investigation into what hillary clinton testified to in the benghazi hearings last fall, and it is contradicted by the evidence. the director said they have not looked at that, they have not had a referral from congress and the chairman said you will get a referral quickly. that will be one possible avenue of continuation. the second is whether the state

department will continue to investigate. and theg we know, director said this a number of times that others who were handling this classified material in an unclassified environment on the private server could have their security clearances reviewed and these are senior advisers to hillary clinton. if there clearances are eliminated, that puts them in a totally different situation and their ability to advise her simply during the campaign and if she were to become president. there are some potential consequences yet to happen on this. paul ryan, the speaker of the house, has said she should not get classified briefings as a

candidate because of this. i doubt that will happen but you can see where the drumbeat from republicans will increase and there should be some kind of penalty to those that have been found to be engaging in this extremely careless handling of the material. miles: i'm going to put you in the role for a moment as an advisor to hillary clinton. what would you tell her to get in front of this? dan: her sense is that this will be an issue no matter what she says. she has been grudging at best with coming forward with information throughout this process. she has only done it when it has been politically necessary. i remember late last summer when the e-mail issue was clearly hurting her in the campaign, she finally began to talk about it in a more contrite way but it has been remarkable that she has had nothing to say about this. it seemingly demands some answers from her but she has not had a formal press conference in

months and months and months. she has done individual interviews on television but not a general press conference. miles: this controversy is a lot like my e-mail box, it keeps filling up. thank you very much for your time. dan: thank you.

miles: the dallas protest was one of several nationwide that have been called following the shooting deaths this week of alton sterling and philando castile. with me now is jelani cobb. you talk about the layer cake of horrible issues involved in this. the first thing that comes to mind is race. the governor of minnesota said it wouldn't have happened if that had been a white person in that car. do you believe that? jelani: i do. at least far less likely to have happened. we have a large number of police shootings and the majority of people who are shot fatally by police this year are white.

it means we have a twofold problem. one, there is a great deal of police shootings that have been in this country and a disproportionate number of them have been people of color. but we took all the african-americans and latinos out of that shooting, we would still have violence happening at rates that would horrify most western democracies. in the short-term, it's much more likely when there is a person of color in the vehicle. miles: you mention the word horrifying and it is. there is a sense of inertia here. how can we possibly at this point start working towards some kind of solution, a conversation? you wrote about that idea of initiating a conversation. jelani: i think we are having a conversation.

it seems to me that's all we are doing is having a conversation. had there been an attempt to create some groundswell on the floor, reform around guns, reform around police training, now it seems in the wake of what happened in dallas, that conversation will change dramatically. miles: how much does dallas change the whole equation? black lives matter is a movement. does that stop it? jelani: i think dallas is catastrophic and for a lot of reasons. certainly for people who are interested in having a conversation, it becomes infinitely more difficult to have that conversation because, now, we are much more inclined to think about the dangers that police face, something we should be thinking about but something we really talk about is the

danger involved on the other end of that interaction with police and that will not happen for a long time right now. miles: by all accounts, dallas police we are told were judicious in their use of force, racially sensitive, all the things we would hope to expect out of a big city police department. there's a bit of irony here. jelani: there is. when we look at the castile situation in minnesota, he did what a motorist was supposed to do, followed the best practices. when he's pulled over, he tells the officer he has a licensed firearm in the car and from what we know, it led to him being shot fatally. miles: which compounds the horror. jelani: he was doing the right thing. hearing from people during the march before the shooting broke out, people were saying there was a heavy police presence but

there was a pretty good rapport between the demonstrators and police. in both cases, you see people following what might be the best practices and you still wind up with the worst-case scenario. miles: where do we begin? with guns, retraining police, with condemnations of violence? anonymous seems to work. jelani: it doesn't. when we were looking at what happened in baton rouge with alton sterling, who was shot fatally by a police officer, possibly by two officers on tuesday and looking at the situation with philando castile in minnesota and in dallas, the common thread is guns. when police talk about the dangers implicit in their work, they are talking about dealing with a heavily armed public.

when people say this person overreacted, the fact is they are confronting realities in which they are much more likely to be dealing with an armed person than a counterpart in most other countries. on the other side of it, if we are going to have a second amendment, this is almost an object lesson in applicability to other communities where in the idea of that, a person who has a weapon generates a fatal response from law-enforcement. i think it all points us in the direction saying we need to have some meaningful reform in our relationship with weapons. another point i will a about this is if this is correct, if there was one shooter involved in dallas, we have to ask ourselves is it reasonable for the average citizen to have access to a firearm that can hit

12 police officers, 12 trained law-enforcement officers before they have a chance to respond? miles: it's a difficult question given the constitutional protections and i've got to say, we talk about a groundswell and you can pull people and there is an expression of willingness to change the status quo when it comes to guns but we don't see anything like that in congress. jelani: we don't. we saw just before the fourth of july vacation that there was a congressional sit in and we mustered a great deal of moral standing and john lewis, the former civil rights advocate hero of the civil rights movement, was involved. the demands were really pretty tepid considering.

what's interesting here is when we talk about major gun reform bills in recent history, a 1994 bill, we talk about it as a high water mark in terms of gun reform, but when you look at the language used in 1994, both from journalists who were covering this and from politicians advocating voting for it, they use that bill as a starting place, not a finishing place. miles: and of course nothing has happened since to continue that conversation. that is kind of a long-term issue. let's talk short-term for a moment. you get the sense that we have got a bit of a tinderbox in this country. how concerned are you about what will happen in the near term future and what can be done to calm things down on all sides.

jelani: we have a lot ahead of us. any reasonable person would be worried that these tensions could become further inflamed. if we had a trench of division between us previously, we have a canyon now. i think in the short term, there has to be some sort of gesture from the top that people are serious about doing some in relationship to guns. there is also importance for people to make it clear that we are interested in continuing these efforts toward police accountability because there was feedback here. the public feels jeopardized by police officers who may be too quick with a firearm and the police officers feel jeopardized by a public that is heavily armed. it has a loop we won't find ourselves outside of. the president, congress, the senate, the house, they all have

it within their capacity to do something. cautious optimism is appropriate. we have the capacity to make change. it doesn't necessarily happen quickly. you don't have any optimism, there's no reason to get out of bed in the morning. miles: good point. let's talk for a moment about the media's role in this. you talked about the way it's covered specifically on the cable networks. one network was comparing it to 9/11. there's a great deal of hyperbolic language. that's not new. it's still troubling. to compare what happened in dallas, saying this is the worst assault on law enforcement since 9/11, it does a number of things. it leaves you with the impression 9/11 was meant to attack law-enforcement officers

and it was a general attack on america itself on every aspect of the population. beyond that, it places us in the context of external terrorism happening on a grand scale. it is completely within our power to have done some think about this before it happened. it is in some ways a self-inflicted wound from a really inert political class that has not done anything about guns in this country. miles: when you talk about 9/11, what happened subsequently was the war on terror. in those terms, it's scary. jelani: we tend to. there's is a tendency, a temptation to forgo the constitution in exchange for the feeling of security and safety, which is exactly what you are not supposed to do in these times. miles: that gets ejected

immediately into the political process, gets amplified by certain candidates. jelani: we saw this in orlando. there was about five minutes of grief and then it became a political fight. even the way it was just discussed by the current republican nominee, in a way that exacerbated the divisions we were seeing. i think this is something we should be better at dealing with by now. miles: black lives matter, but words matter too. do you think we are a little reckless with our words collectively? yourself excluded, of course. jelani: one thing that is interesting is, i just read a statement that came from black lives matter. i was on my way over here and they were very stringent in

their denunciation of what happened. i think there is also a dynamic we have seen in the media, that -- my nephew attended a protest and happened to be concerned about things donald trump said and attended a protest at his college and he said later on the news, it said black lives matter protest donald trump. he said i had no idea we were part of black lives matter until the news station told us we were. i think there is a consolation that happens in this conversation. and a rhetoric going on in lots of corners of the country. it's hard to open a one to one relationship between what is being said and what is being done, especially people who are troubled love access to firearms, you don't know exactly what it is that pushes them into action but i think the rhetoric doesn't help.

miles: what we are watching is horrible, tragedies unfold before our very eyes, live streaming capability in our hands. on the other side, police with the body cameras. we are seeing something that has been going on for a long time. to what extent do you think its altering reality? jelani: it does. i think it is complicated. when we were working on the documentary we did on frontline, policing with police in new york, one of the things that came out of where there were a number of officers looking forward to having body camera because they thought that would resolve instances where they had been wrongly accused of excessive force or someone said they did something they didn't do and thought having a body camera would be a protection for them. at the same time, the visuals we receive most recently in baton

rouge and minnesota, i think they have a kind of exacerbating effect. these are things that have been happening for a long time. they have been able to be disputed for a long time. we cast doubt on the credibility of people bringing claims for a long time but there's something different about having a video witness. it almost transforms the general public into a collective eyewitness. in the case of mr. castille, this horrific vision of this woman who with utter calm and composure is narrating what happens while there is a police officer holding a gun to her and her loved one is dying in front of her. miles: and she is calm and the officer is not. jelani: the exact opposite of

what you might expect in that situation where someone sees their fiancee shot and they become hysterical and the professional person, their training kicks in and they become calm but that is not what happened. and even more terrible idea here is that perhaps she was driven by a concern that she not do anything that might trigger him to fire again and also there is a four-year old girl in the car. all of it compounds into something too horrible to really think about. miles: let's talk about the political system. the fundamental lack of faith in the system. donald trump frequently talking about the system being rigged, reinforcing peoples believe that the system is not in it for them. the fact there is a so little faith in the system, how much does this add to the toxic nature of this? jelani: there are many people with legitimate grievances about the way that our economy works,

the way our politics work. after the great recession and the recession in the housing crisis, there was a justifiable loss of institutions. something going back generations. we have seen this erosion of trust in institutions. that is one problem. the second problem is you can use that skepticism and siphon it off away from the possibility of substantial change in two directions where in the u.n. doled the worst ideas. we go back and read madison or any of the people who looked at this country on the outset, this is something they were really concerned about saying when you have a representative democracy, you have to have a population wise enough to discern between the actual problem and the

actual course of action and what is being presented by figures taking advantage of that. miles: how dangerous is it if nothing happens out of this? where do we go next? jelani: that is the most dangerous possibility of all, that we acclimate ourselves and bequeath to our children a world filled with these type of dangers when we had it in our capacity to address it and we did nothing. i'm a historian so the history will not look kindly upon us. miles: thank you very much for your time. jelani: thank you. ♪ charlie: the issue of guns, policing, race have come together to dominate the news this week. one suspect is dead and three others in custody as the investigation continues in dallas where police were ambushed following a peaceful black lives matter protest.

five officers are also dead and six wounded. here now from dallas is my colleague, hari. there has been a lot of confusion in the wake of this understandably about whether there was one person who acted alone or whether there are multiple suspects. >> right now, jeh johnson says there is no reason to believe this was part of any larger international terror plot or even if this individual is connected to any black nationalist organization. the dallas police has in custody a few more suspects and they haven't actually given us any more information on how those suspects may be tied into this. >> any indication into whether there will be further arrests? hari: they haven't said that

yet. they just wanted to say they are trying to follow up every lead. they are not completely convinced glover they have are innocent or guilty. they just want more information. miles: the suspect demonstrated quite a bit of capability presumably from his military training. hari: when they went into his house, authorities say they found a detailed combat manual in his home among other things. this is something this individual has planned out for such a long time. miles: the protest itself was not planned out for a long time. does it appear he was waiting for an event? hari: that is a possibility because he said to the police yesterday that he was interested in killing white people and specifically police officers. perhaps this was an opportunity to know that police would be on

the streets walking with the protesters and protecting them. police yesterday were not in writing a gear. most of them were in their standard uniforms, this was not an event where they expected the protester turned violent. miles: that fact is part of the way the dallas police department operates. it is well for being racially sensitive. there is some horrible irony here. hari: there is. this is a department that has been working on this. they didn't have that great a track record. really in the past five or six years, they have on as much community oriented policing as possible and they have made measurable gains. they decrease the number of complaints over excessive use of force stand for arrest. they decrease the number of officer involved shootings. miles: you've only been there a

short time but you are a former resident of dallas. what has it been like being back under these difficult circumstances? hari: it's a very strange thing. i lived here for a few years and just behind me, downtown is essentially one large crime scene. there is an enormous set of blocks where you would normally have the financial center of the city, it's all but empty right now. really there are more reporters than citizens. you drive by any street corner and reporters with cameras pointed at them talking about how empty things are. miles: watch for his reporting throughout the weekend from dallas. thank you. we will be right back. ♪

miles: elie wiezel was 15 when he was sent to the auschwitz concentration camp in poland with his family in 1944. he was ultimately freed in 1945. in 1958, he wrote about that painful experience in his first book. in 1978, president jimmy carter appointed him chairman of

commission on the holocaust. his efforts led to the establishment of the united states holocaust memorial museum in washington. in 1986, you was awarded the noble with a committee calling him an important spiritual leader. he was a guest of charlie's more than one dozen times over the years. here is a look back at some of those conversations. >> the last thing we remember, what about the things we don't remember? for every word i want to say, there must be 10 i don't say. nobody could ever know it ever existed in my mind.

charlie: is it a powerful emotion in you that the time will come in which there will be no one who lived through the holocaust? >> in my case, it is truly the most profound anguish i ever had. we are here, we are alive and already today, many people don't believe us. charlie: many, you think? >> many. anti-semites say it never happened.

but even other people say a human being does not do this kind of thing. they think a human being who is normal cannot believe that this is normal. charlie: you created this character. tell me the story you wanted to tell to bring these profound ideas to a novel form? >> the novel is between a father and a son. charlie: obligation, responsibility to each other. >> to communicate something. the father's joy, happiness, memory. charlie: he wants his son to go back to romania.

>> he sends his son back. i wanted to end it with something good, something positive. there is nothing past our memory. a person cannot explain what he wants, what she wants. in this case, what i found is the only redeeming possibility is for you to remember for me. you receive my memory. it means you will be a continuation of my life. charlie: so i want you, my son,

to burrow into my life and you will receive my memory, you go to romania, you meet the people who were part of what shape to me and part of my memory and passed. and that will help you to find yourself? >> you cannot be what you are unless you know what i am. charlie: the message for all of it beyond the holocaust. why do we all define you that way? does it make you angry, frustrated? >> i say to myself, i wish i had written more.

i was waiting 10 years before i began writing. charlie: you said before you waited -- >> i was afraid. charlie: there were no words that can define the horror. >> there are little words for that experience. charlie: why did you go back? what did you find? >> i found violence in me.

and outrage. my father died there. and between the death of my father and my liberation and the liberation came. i go back now and i see -- i will give you an example.

there were two camps in the beginning. almost a political camp. jews and non-jews. at the end when auschwitz was evacuated, we were taken to a small camp and a large camp. we were in the small camp. that camp that i was is no longer there. it simply vanished. going around seeing nothing but trees, grass, sky. and it disappears. everything disappears. the anguish, the agony, the pain of thousands and thousands of human beings, what happened to

that pain? they are now building a kind of memorial to the not to prisoners of the russians. because afterwards, the americas of the russians stayed, and they maintained a camp for former nazis. many of them died. now, it somehow doesn't fit in my mind. a place that was immortalized by the victims of nazis now is iconic also the place honoring the memory of nazis, victims of others. there is something wrong there. charlie: do you worry that the memory of the holocaust is being

lost? at the same time that we have -- >> you and i were together at the inauguration in washington. all these memories must be kept somewhere. therefore, the archives are very important. however, deep down, i am not sure whether we are not losing the war of memory. soon to be decades and centuries. i am not sure we want people to remember. charlie: how do you preserve the memory other than in ways, measures that have been taken?

>> i wish i knew. usually, pictures, art. it's not all there. for the first time, we are trying to remember something that defies memory because we are using tools that were adequate for other tragedies but not for this one. i have written books and i can tell you each time i finished a book, i felt the taste in my mouth. it's still not it. what i wanted to say, i didn't say. charlie: do you think because it's an comprehensible? >> the diaries written by the prisoners, ordinary diaries are found in the ashes. maybe they do convey a certain fragment of the truth about we cannot.

there are no words. all we can do is try. i hope it will be made. i don't compare. nobody should ever do that. i went to six or seven camps. there were tens of thousands of men, women, and children and what they have to say break your heart. there's something about the way they tell the stories, especially those who were tortured. psychiatrists say a tortured person for all of his or her life remains tortured. it is a scar. they begin talking and they stop in the middle of the sentence

because they are looking for the right word and didn't find it. i rarely see so many adults weep like children. children don't cry. the children were laughing and playing. i collected stories after stories. i listened and listened. i asked people questions. i try to make them talk and one of them says one out of 80 prisoners were shot.

two men survived. and he said my son was among the others. he began crying. a young man, a volunteer working for the ifc, he had seen the murder of his brother. he began talking about it and stopped in the middle. tragedy is too painful, too deep. for some reason, words are failing us. we cannot find the words so the tears become words. charlie: you listen to the stories one after the other and you see a wife that saw her

husband ripped away and never to be seen again. >> the prisoners suffered most. the last time they saw their families or when they were taken to prison. and for them, that is the worst torture of all. one man said he had a two month old baby and they took it away and dropped it to the ground. he never saw the child or the mother again. he doesn't know, are they alive? charlie: why do you think this happens?

>> i don't know why. it is about a human being causing pain to another human being. charlie: are they showing their fear? >> maybe they are trying to show something. essentially, it is human to be inhuman. >> you look at that kind of cruelty and obscenity and it is in fact in human and a rage that takes you beyond all rationality. >> i would not like to think of them as human beings except for the fact we must fight and condemn them. charlie: you say you are reluctant to talk about the past. >> i don't know how. it's difficult.

i speak about philosophy, literature, history, but not about my past. charlie: what do the people in your town say and remember about the coming of the nazis? >> i was too young to remember everything. i was two years old. i didn't pay attention. later in hungary, we had it good this by the anti-semitism that existed. charlie: people know exactly when everything changed.

harmful. he's of watching the synagogue being burned and people standing around not doing anything mainly to prevent the fire from spreading. >> we didn't know about auschwitz. people i admired, they knew but we didn't. if we had known, half of my family, maybe more would have survived. ♪

mark: i'm mark crumpton. let's begin with a check of your first word news. home secretary theresa may will have a new title -- prime minister. her rival for the conservative party leadership with drew from the race today. she told reporters that she is honored and humbled. david cameron says he will offer his resignation to the queen after a final ashen of questions and house comments. fears fighting continues in syria with a massive rebel offensive in the city of aleppo where a cease-fire is supposedly in effect. eight ybor killed and dozens wounded after rockets and shells pounded syria largest city and former capital.