to understand that we needed an agreement with the republic to make sure that we can move into the future. russia was i would not say rewarded but it was engaged from the very beginning. what about the billions and billions of money as yeah i to support russian economy. during the financial collapse i am an alone to help russia to escape. and you know. by the end of russia who was on the verge of recovery. and highs in the year. year 2000. and then putin comes in. and that was probably the greatest mistake ever made. nine years after the collapse of the soviet union and reserved that for those that had ears to hear and along term agenda a and during this year.

and a total collapse of the democracy, and into one party dick take or ship. and the most unstable form of governance. it is the legacy of the regime. and charisma. and able to resolve the audience and the propaganda machine. and we know from history, that after running out of enemies in side of the the country. he will turn elsewhere. into 2005. i stopped playing chess and i turn today something that mistake russian politics. when you think of politics you think of political parties and funded and debates. and russia's television and public debates. you think about fund-raising and many other things. elections. so, i knew i knew that it was an uphill battle. and my experience could not help at all. and unpredictable in putin's

russia. it is all happening within an engagement. looking at the pictures 2006. putin was hosting g-7. i never called it g-8 it was g-7 plus one. it was given to yeltsin as an advance. it is was like a reward. not a democracy or an industrial power. and china never made it. and never made it to russia so how can we attack the democratic values and you know. being embraced and by those so russian propaganda would work. and would work that for that. and of course you know. talking about the foreign aggression. you know. i can't escape the ukraine.

and undermine. undermines of the nato. and united states. an excuse to stay in power forever. ruling for life. everybody understands it. and needing an aggression as he did in georgia 2008 and now it is ukraine. let's not forget. ukraine has been disarmed by the united states and united kingdom. memorandum. and few people know that the ukraine had the third largest nuclear arsenal in the world. more than u.k. and france and china combined. if someone of the warheads were aiming at moscow. today, so if [applause] that was a signature of bill clinton and under a document that would ends up by the way. disarming nuclear arsenals that is very important. because it will create a nuclear free unit and it was done next change for

territory and integrity. and a regional affair that we are wrong. the message of it being sent to every country in the world. will you want to protect the certainty. get the nukes. that is why the whole thing. the whole thing. ukrainian war and tragedy. this is an issue that affects everybody on this planet. and i hope that eventually, it will rob recognize that this is not just about isolating russia but putin's regime. will you not engage the virus it. will need to be contained. thank you. [applause] strong opening statements for the great debate. we would like to give the tunity for rebutt of what they heard. and you have to reflect of

what you have hear from gather eecht and also to you stephen after. and hear from the other side. reporter: >> you can stand. walk. sit. take a stroll if you like. >> the problem for me is that the majority of the people in the audience if we are honest do not know very much about russia or the ukraine. so you can say anything billions and billions. you have to be kidding. not true. billions and billions were not invested. what was invested was invest today make money. all of these thing. putin's cronies. why are they cronies? why are they not his comrades? this is all about the wording. this is not about the facts. facts that we are here. if indeed the ukraine had nuclear missiles. can you imagine what we would have?

there would be nobody left to play it. thank heavens they do not have missiles in that country. and the fewer missiles that there are in the world the better it will be. so i am not going to get into this you theyed wrong. nit-picking kind of stuff. to me the really basic thing is do we want a russia that is pushed out of everything doing whatever it is doing. and no way answering for what it does not under any pressure from outside because it is not engaged. or do we want engagement. is it good for the west or is it bad? is it good for russia or is it bad? it is not about putin. russia has always been in the crosshairs of the west for a long long time.

that is for good reason. and if you take that to putin it is a big mistake. this is not about putin but a much more basic relationship. i did not know that he was stalking me. on the upper west side. and i am hope that can it will end up in the coffee house there. for a friendly talk. it will stay in the united states and in this debate particularly. the discussion of putin. this, henry kissinger ger. who is 91. and not thought to be soft on anybody wrote in miss apple bomb's newspaper in

march that the demonization of putin is not a policy. it is an alibi foreign having a policy. i would say that dr. kissinger could have gone further and said the demonization of putin is an excuse to abandon analysis. to obscure facts with faces and to make statements about an evil mafia state. a hitler. it is not true. and alongside of that. it comes. and this romance. 1990s. and maybe it was great. and maybe it was great for poland and eastern europe. i don't know. when mr. yelt son was forced from the office as he was. they lived in poverty. and billions and billions of

american and western dollars thinks were sent to moscow would be collected by friends and sent back to the bank of new york. where a criminal case was brought against the bank for that. so when russia was on its knees ruled by the unique ruler. pillaged by the mafia, and brings no indignation. it is all putin. let's chick think about our problems in the world and the security. please. the current regime as it is right now is the result of the failed policy. is this isolate and humiliated russia.

no? not only was the post soviet russia humiliated they were given did he fact out status. and soviet nuclear weapons from the ukraine in the terms of the budapest memorandum. and from the beginning the series of the american presidents have sought to build up status. president clinton and bush invited by the gate and was invited for the council of europe and not a democracy. and russia was invited for those that it violates. and you know during that same period and engaging in russia and inviting them and attempting to create a russia. what was russia doing. putin invaded he invaded

ukraine and he built up the military system. last month he held a military exercise in the arctic involving troops and aircraft and ships. and earlier this year he conducted the vast exercise in the baltics and he conducted military practice run for warsaw this. is a country with while engaging with the west. and incidentally. you cannot have it both ways and say that putin was laundering money in the western banks and isolating him. no, while we engage with him and included him. and left them use the banking system. while we will enrich them what were they doing? re-creating soviet style nuclear arsenal and a military that they want to use against us.

willing to learn that the first time. and could prevent stalinist terror. i believe that the criminal regime by lennon and stall inand others and whatever was needed in the 20s was irrelevant and it was lennon that said we will use them as useful for those that would hang them. um i am not here to tell them yelt since's regime was a perfect democracy. there is criticism. russia will need great opportunities to be turned into a proper democratic state with an established institution and normal check and balance system. it did not happen. and there is a lot of criticism to yeltsin that is justified. again.

we avoid the yugoslavia that could have happened if we had somebody like putin there. and yes, i agree that there was massive corruption on boris yeltsin. when they were of the country. and people convinced them. to protect them. they did not want to deal with the democracy. they were still around. when we talk about putin's friend that is great you know. so lucky to share this same to put. and now you are on the forbes list. with that said by the families this is ironically so many people that are close to putin and the power. and fighting for survival. and this is the only item in the putin agenda a stay in power. he will do whatever. he has no other choice. and every crime to make sure

that he can stay in the kremlin. ladies and gentlemen. of the debate is set. the table is set so to speak. now we will get into the exchange with the debaters on the variety of the topics related to the subject. and vladimir. since you spoke first in the rebuttal. i will come to you to pick on something that ann made in the comments just now. a lot of people in the audience are wondering you know. obama's rehe is. the famous reset, the degree of which this administration previously had attempted to roll back a series of policies. they are seen as exclusionary russia. how do you respond to this failure. fufrts all it didn't. the novel russia is so poor that they misspelled reset in russia. we would have to correct

them for that. this did not lead to the crimea at all. if you want when talking about whether or not russia was humiliated. russia is a perfect example. and when russia would beg not to do it. begged. that was in yeltsin's sign they were told to shut up and since he would not condone it. nato did it and of course they were able to leave serbia. it had been apart of serbia for a hundred years. why was that possible? why were the russians ignored. that is the type of humiliation that is led to the greatest anti-american sentiment another russia that i have ever known. since soviet times the average russian for the day. is avenue absolutely anti-american. and that was not the case. anti-bush. anti-reagan and not anti-american there. is a reason for that. not just propaganda a there is a propaganda a a lot of

propaganda. my mother was raised unstalin. she heard hatred 24-7. >> why you are yelling? have i good hears. >> i am russian also. i know russia. >> he don't care. [laughter] they drink vodka, dance. and all of that. russians are regular normal people. what i am saying is this. your mother had her experience. and i this i that i am older than your mother. and i lived in the soviet union. you don't know anything about me. it was far less suffocated because russia was totally isolated. it today it is more suffocate and dangerous. so i am not saying it didn't isn't but average would you

not interrupt. i say to you sadly is anti-american. let's have you reflect on that. policy of call it whatever you want. containments. isolation is stoking the empowerment that will be the ruling. we have created putin and the ruling. our bank. our banking system lawnered and for tax haven that's create it had and stop acting like you know. there is a reaction to the isolation. and we created it. we kept putin on board. we invited him to the meetings and we tried to make him apart of it and in the beginning with good intentions we wanted putin to be apart of the west. and this is an if nice enough they will join. and what we have discovered

is that it has involved into something quite different so it is not nazi germany either. these are the bad an allergies and a new type of very suffocated propaganda-run state this. is the count reef which every single newspaper. and every single internet website with tiny exceptions are controlled by the state. in away that they appear to be slightly different. this is not every day this. is a wide spectrum of the different media. and they say the same thing in the tabloid way. a suffocated way. and they are telling people the same stories that putin wants them to hear. the stories they are telling for the last many months now, is bitterly anti-american. and anti-european.

warmongering in the way that i do not remember from a year ago. the hatred towards ukraine. and americans. and symbolism and the people marching and angered face this is is something very very new and different. wow! this is impossible. there is no partner to reach across to. i am having a hard time. i thought that we agreed or i tried to sign a contract dealing with facts. [laughter] >> i read ten russian newspaper as day. >> how many ukrainian i read ten, across the spectrum. and it is true what miss apple bomb says. will you hear what she says that you hear. and you don't hear them in

the other 7. at least three are pro european. and pro mernl. critical of putin. and so that is an untruth. what is he is astonishing for me. and to learn that the states launder money offshore. i had no idea such things happened. we know what is going on in the united states because our justice department is bringing suits against enormous preparations for doing this. what i will see is a bigger problem in russia. yes, i would. because of the way that the economic in the 90s what it would have to be is reformed. it is the right to tell russia or force russia to do that. absolutely not. what is for us to decide is

when we will need aparter in in russia. and whether it is putin. and successor. as the security partner. for us to be safe. and i would end with this point i do not ever recall and i have been around a long time i have been around a long time. and ever hearing people. who they represent. and speaking like this. personally a soviet communist leader. when i listen to them there is a repressed nostalgia for the soviet union. and the vendetta against putin's russia. with whom we cooperated for our security. when giving the first interducks. i wrote down on my note paper. you spoke with the nostalgia about the days when the soviet union was here and could help to regulate the

world this. is what you dream of. that in the cold warrer a that is something that i have no new nostalgia. and you know. to totalitarianism and have you this idea that once again if only the u.s. and russia could work together we could create i mean an idea of stability. russia does not want stability. russia is a country that is interested in chaos. and they created chaos. who are russia's frenlts and i mean gary some would point to the recent iran deal. and russia a greig to enrich that with that conflict. saving the bacon on the red line. a syria over chemical weapons. and how do you respond to those examples of russian

cooperation and that you can make the consessions and they will hope hold your unrests in order to bowl stewart cooperation with aparter in. in those cases you can see russian interest. you know. russia has been is up liechlth nuclear technology. and then let's not forget that the uranium will go to russia and will hold a key so. this is enhancing putin's position and the negotiation went forever. and putin's interest will hold appreciate new the region. and it will help to also push up the oil price that's are vital to the putin's financial survival. as for syria, putin's priority from day one was to save bashar al-assad and he succeeded. so there are many other reasons you know for him doing that one is dictator hood. and after so many dictators you know. washed away. by the public anger. and the arab wealth. you know.

he did not want to allow that to be it was always a negative affect for the people to see dictators also were vulnerable. and putin is always watching you know. and very important because in europe. demand that can europe could do this and that. and otherwise they will have the supply. and potentially syria is vital for syria. turkey. and which would make them so putin played the role of a savior. and the 11th hour. and was a great beneficiary. how do you react to that? saying that putin stands up for russia's interests. and i guess that he does from the certain view point. and i read your interview opposite mine of the newspaper. and where you laugh at the

putin population that the people are honest people. and these are not government sponsored but this is a respectable organization that showed that over 80% of the russian people support putin. these are not stupid people. by then this propaganda and the people that lived a long time. know that what propaganda is. and what they see in putin. i am not defending putin but explaining a situation. what they see in putin is a man who is brought russia back. and russians no longer feel their second place. that there really not a great nation. and have been told by others to just get out of our face. this could have to be understood. good or bad it is a fact there. is a reason for it. this is not just because it is an autocratic state.

when there is russian media. there is an a lot that says like what she is saying. and you know. there is you know very well what it says. and you know you want to say those things and coming. that says so, so. you have those that say something else. and what i am saying is. excuse me. this is all about. this is all about as different as abc and nbc and cbs. about as different. name one television station. it is exactly. name attell vision station of propaganda on both sides. yes. no moral equivalent in a long time of the people here do not read ukrainian

newspapers perhaps they do. but russia they do not. so they don't know what is happening in russia. you are telling them. and they accept it. when was the last time that were you in the keys? you know. i was in keefe, two years ago to receive the honorary title of man of the year of the ukraine. [laughter] [applause] >> let me bring stephen into this. i hope that you noticed that the chess master just got check mated. did you notice that? look, look. i dig what they are all about. and i understand this fixation on putin. i rally do. and personally. i do not care very much about putin. i hope that i live long enough on the historian. 20 years to see how historian left side evaluate the role as a leader of russia. and i this that i it will be

a big debate, and pluses and minuses i don't know how it will come out. that will be an interesting debate here today. the elephant in the room we have mentioned. the embracing of russia in the 1990s and all of this wonderful thing that we did for them, and weren't we also expanding nato towards their borders? and you say so what? so i will come over and find out where you live. and a military equipment for the story. and i said i am here for your security and making sure that nobody will break into your house and i notice that you brought a few other folk along. they have got their military equipment here. and my backyard too. and then you are suddenly in my soft under belly in the south. from georgia. and don't worry this. is for your security. and by the way nato is about democracy, and you will need democracy, all right. let's be serious. we will be warned and warned and warmed by the russian

when we liked in russia. and the liberals even and gary knows this. we are worried about this. and came to washington and said you're pushing too far. eventually. eventually. wait a minute. and do not use my time. eventually, right or wrong, but perception is everything in politics. the russian political elite, decided that this expansion of nato was away of making sure russia will forever be a subservient state to the west. and that the brass ring well. the silver ring was georgia. and that there was a proxy war there. because of this in 2008. and the brass ring was always been ukraine. it is spoken openly. and in washington. right now. be honest if you think that this is a good policy. if you believe that we can

push our power as close to russia as we can. to bring ukraine into the western security system because it is good force, then say so. let's debate that issue. let's don't go on about the demon putin and the rest because the reality is that the russian understanding of what ukraine is about is what nato expansion has been about from the beginning.

i remember because i was in warsaw. why did the central europeans wonder? they were afraid of russia. this i what russia was becoming. very reluctantly the united states agreed to expanded security zone so that a hundred million people would be able to make a transition to democracy and begin economic development and growth without fear of invasion's command it worked. it was unbelievably successful. it worked for the central europeans. a hundred million people

were safe. a region that had been a source of two world wars has not been a source of conflict since then. how do we do it? it was a manner designed to reassure russia from the beginning. no nato bases wherever placed in the knew member states. until 2013 no exercises were ever conducted. in response to russian objections both ukraine and georgia were openly denied nato membership in 2,008 and that has been repeated every sense. what what are you looking at me like that? in 2,008 there was a nato meeting. they said they said they would be no membership plan for ukraine and georgia. since then it since then it has not been on the table and is not an issue. >> they said something else at that meeting. >> we seem to remember it

differently. >> i don't remember differently. let me finish the sentence. they said however nato membership remains open to georgia and ukraine if they qualify. >> it remains open to russia as well's. the.is. [inaudible conversations] >> i no you feel strongly. [inaudible conversations] >> what has been happening since then russia was rebuilding us military while it has been invading one neighbor after another the american army army is drawing down its european forces so much so that by 2013 there was not one single american tank in europe. this is an aggressive policy there is no way that putin believed in a genuine military threat from nato something he has been using at home as a way to consolidate power. [applause]

>> the nato discussion in no way consolidate his power in no way. as far as far as the people are concerned it has nothing to do with his power but it does have to do with the russian psyche command perception is important. let me remind you what happened in 1962. fifty-two. >> 1952. were you around? [laughter] well, if you are not in 1962 to independent countries one call the soviet union the other call cuba agreed to have soviet missiles placed on cuban soil. there were american missiles and turkey. the soviets decided it's a good idea to have our missiles closer to the united states. the height of the cold war. two countries have the right

to make that decision. when the united states found out that this was happening it said, no it would not do this. and if this. and if we have to sink your ships we will sink them. and if as a result world war iii happens it we will happen. these are facts. >> one of the things -- [inaudible conversations] >> yes, i can. thank you very much. it is not okay. it is not okay. [inaudible conversations] and that is not the way you debate unless maybe it is can i don't know i we will repeat that did not happen. rightly or wrongly the way russia looks sees it as a threat why was nato created? to protect western europe

from possible soviet invasion. there there is no more soviet union, has not been for over 25 years. the warsaw pact was kind of the soviets nato answer. make our gorbachev who i tend to trust told me three times that james baker who was then secretary of state told him if you agree to the unification of germany take down the berlin wall. i tell you that nato will not move 1 inch to the east. you may say he is lying, but i don't think he is. i think you saw the truth. the thing is that during the soviet time nato did not move to the east. it moved east. it moved under clinton. and when the russian star saying what's going on here now, we have no agreement

with you. we had an agreement with the soviet union which is no longer there. you are russia. and so in 1991 czechoslovakia became members of nato and then it follow later on. >> 1991. >> ninety-nine. it was followed by romania. >> ninety-eight. >> it's not about dates the facts. [laughter] all right. i right. i may have gotten the dates -- [inaudible conversations] finally nato found a cell phone russia's border in estonia and latvia. now, again you may say that there is nothing dangerous about that. i am telling you a cold war mentality. nato was seen as a threat.

with the russians upset about ukraine rightly or wrongly is it will not allow nato to be on our border in the southwest. well not allow. as america as america did not allow the missiles, we will not allow this. you cannot you cannot condone it. that is the reaction, the way it is seen. nato is not dangerous. fine. [applause] >> a couple of points. there is no russian elite making decisions. and by the way this russian elite as a combined entity knows exactly where to put their money fortune. all the way. probably this country as well. that is why the whole idea

of the russian elite being afraid of the west is not true because they know that they can say with the fortunes command another that i here repeatedly come up putin is very popular. i don't want to argue about the integrity. i give them full credit. somebody calls you and us what you think about mr. putin. that is a pole. 20% of 20 percent of people say they don't like put. [applause] and also, what i hear is you get used to being a cold war warrior, warmongering warrior, warmongering places, but we want to live in a 21st century. i hear america, russia russia america sometimes germany.

what about countries in between? i believe these people have the same rights. >> i agree. >> not two years ago two weeks ago. the corrupt regime. and. [laughter] and -- [applause] and i believe it is their right to decide what we will happen with the country. the support for nato membership in ukraine, nearly 60 or 70 percent. it has quadrupled. and it is not just russia and ukraine. people who fought on the eastern front. the eastern front most of them are ethnic russians. russians fighting putin's invading armies. this is the rush i want to say. [applause]

>> pruden again. i mean,, are we going to have a discussion of what is in the best interest of the west? because that really is embedded in the question isn't it? should we engage russia or should we have a debate about how we're going to get rid of? if you want to have that debate you can bring in different points of view. ms. applebaum who wrote a wonderful work of history called the gulags and i strongly recommended if you have an interest. master historians or work there. as she knows, now comes the however. [laughter] i understand that for one reason or another she views

this whole saga through the perspective of central and eastern europe. europe. i understand that. but the story she told nato expansion is nowhere written in the histories we now have that have resorted to the archives looked at the club and administration, look at other things. there was tremendous pressure in the united states on clinton to go back on the word that have been given to gorbachev that nato would not expand. we know the story. recently in foreign affairs, young woman produces dissertation command examination of his archives. the whole history of nato expansion that is the fairytale version. we had to save the number of democracy along the way. but it is not the true story the reality is there is

another debate to be had. some of you won't like the question. does any nation have the right to join nato is a technically qualifies for nato membership? it is always said that is so. i disagree. nato is a security organization not the junior chamber of commerce. i don't know if you have that and canada. in canada. it is not a nonselective sorority or fraternity. you get in if we like you. it is a security organization. the only criteria that matters is, does it enhance our security or not. nato has brought the greatest crisis in international affairs is the cuban missile crisis. a lot of people are rethinking this. by the way some of those countries to which ms. applebaum is so devoted are also rethinking it. read

with the czech president says, read what is being said and hungry read what is being said and the others. there are a lot of fundamental questions about whether or not this really enhance the security of europe. that is debate. you don't get a debate with opinion. you you get the facts. these are the facts. [applause] >> defined by his own. his own government. the czech republic. >> i want to be conscious of our time for the sake of debate and end with a topic that a lot of people find and you and i spoke about this earlier. it is the presence of nuclear weapons in this conversation, a large nuclear arsenal that russia has kind i am sure many people would naturally feel a tendency to come over to the accommodation

compromise camp on the basis that we just can't get this wrong. we cannot risk the potential for an escalation that can flow from a policy of isolation more assertive stance toward russia. >> first i wanted to -- he did not let me correct them. in fact, one of the other elements of nato expansion that was important was an agreement not to move nuclear was -- nuclear missiles. that is one. this is why the cuban missile crisis analogy is completely wrong. >> it is not wrong at all. >> fear there is. what is the answer to the question? fear of nuclear weapons is very central to this issue. issue. actually explains why we are more enthusiastic about helping ukraine. if ukraine were being invaded by belarus we might give it some radar weapons and not worry about it. we are afraid of the russian

nuclear arsenal. we are afraid also as one of my opponent said that this is irrational country. we don't know what it might do. it might run off the ranch and do something crazy. what is the way in the past in which we have dealt with a country like that? deterrence. the deterrence the deterrence argument is if you bomb us we will body back. it it is very unattractive as a policy and no one likes it. mutually assured destruction, doctor strangelove, or will thought given that this given that this is the only policy we have in the only policy we're capable of using now was putin's russia which pumps out propaganda in all kinds of different ways in countries whether it's funding the czech president

election the funding the far right in france a country that does not want to be part of our system anymore and has made that clear. we can make sure that pruden knows that the russian regime the word cronies is an important one. rich friends. somehow very powerful. what other word do we have to describe them? way to make sure that they know that we would respond. that is the only thing we can do. we don't have a better policy command i am sorry. in some ways it is one of the great tragedies of my life. i wrote the history of the soviet union, what the transition happen and now we're back to exactly the place i would never have wanted us to be. [applause] >> i think i think we are in a much worse place than we were quite frankly.

back then they're were two ideologies. now there is no ideology in russia. for most people there is an. they don't even know to what it's so what is the future, the promise, what are we working for? in those days different issue. for our children's, terrible days but there was an ideology. the red scare was about ideology. you know as well as i do. in this particular case it is no longer ideology but geopolitics. >> it's put us in a more dangerous position. >> it is less predictable. another thing has happened which is interesting. back in back in the bad old days there was real fear of nuclear weapons. children hiding under desks movies like like the day after. people were aware.

today people are even talking about nuclear weapons. it is as if they weren't they're. i think it is very dangerous. i look very carefully. they carefully. they are not present the way these to be. >> going to give you the last word. >> i was no one would talk about nuclear weapons. russian television for the last year has been talking about it. the radioactive ash. publicly. >> one person saying that. >> channel to. >> and vladimir putin publicly said he would use nukes if the west was stand in crimea. he already said it. >> he did not. he did not. >> let's be truthful.

he did not say he would use nukes. >> he said they talked about going on high alert. >> the united states has been on high alert. come on. let's be a little more precise. christian says we will bury you. okay. so when some idiot -- what he said. >> he keeps talking about it. >> we heard him say. we talk about reality you listen to rush limbaugh on american television. look with the americans are saying. this is this is a jerk, you'll excuse me saying what he is saying.

it is not a russian policy and it is not an american policy. it is separate people. >> that's the difference. >> let's give you the final say on this important topic. the threat of nuclear weapons flows into the discussion of isolation versus engagement. >> nuclear weapons. >> yes. >> i we will take the rabbinical view here that both are right. talk of nuclear weapons has reemerged. not in the same way that we were conscious but the discussion has reemerged. ms. applebaum wrote a column recently. i don't think she put the head on it but the ethos of the column essentially said we should rattle on nuclear weapons. when people start talking like that when she echoed

that on-air today, i think i think we know we are in dangerous territory. i would i would go even farther in alarm and say we are in a new cold war by whatever name, name command it is potentially more dangerous than the last one's. this is where the nuclear weapons come in. for several reasons. the epicenter of the last cold war was in berlin. this one is in ukraine right on russia's border. imagine the possibilities for publication, mistakes to my know the rest. secondly, and this is really worrisome during the last cold war 40 years, the great powers developed a series of rules of conduct hot phones, hotlines, constant discussion i kept us safe. this is a fact. this happened. there are no rules of conduct a. that is why anything can

happen. a 3rd reason is there is no opposition. there was a lot of opposition before. but you will remember that one of the great achievements of reagan and gorbachev was to eliminate the only time a category a category of nuclear weapons have been laminated ever intermediate cruise range missiles. i i think it was 1987 if i'm not mistaken. that was an enormous achievement that made everyone safer. those missiles don't need but for five minutes for alert systems to proceed whether it is a siegel and missile coming in. a lot of misconceptions. now both sides not one side, both sides are talking about reintroducing intermediate-range missiles. the russians are talking about putting them in crimea i think kerry would agree with that.

in the united states is talking about putting them back in western europe. that is how dangerous it is because my two opponents really hate. you want to go they're? >> we's. >> we're going to go to closing statements. gary 1st. you have three minutes. >> forgiveness. yes. the difference in all the bad old days. it's the politburo, and even if you have people in the world they's they can make a more balanced decision the one man. now again there is no way out. he presents himself as a strong man. and i said in the very beginning i am a russian

patriot. i want want to see my country free and strong. i i don't want to hear the same jokes. this is not the image of russia that i want to project. it is hard for me to argue for isolation but this is not the isolation of russia. this is isolation of a dictator. it's like a mafia boss. audited to copy. and he keeps power not because he is elected, not because you know, he has know, he has some, you know, right as a monarch but because he protects everybody is invincible, no one can go after them. he prevails.

is getting more and more arrogant. because their provocations to undermine nato. it is all about domestic politics. nothing else to offer. and talking about we talk about the cold war. i was a kid but i read the stories. 1974 there was a debate. bipartisan support. the administration. a great man my role model. was under exile who spoke

for isolation. that was the way to weaken the regime. very important that we send this message. the promise of engagement will no longer be in place. will think not about putin's russia for the future of my great country. >> i was going to begin with a lighthearted remark.

a big debate in russia. but when he said that he thought sakharov was going to be on the side today i suddenly felt i would not say angry but disappointed. it absolutely would not have supported the isolation of russia. the father of the soviet hydrogen bomb driverless and from that. the same thing. i am not pro- putin. i have no sentimental attachment to put in whatsoever. he is a subject as a historian to me. but. but i think if you would read what he actually says

cannot read his speech on the annexed crimea read what he says. we have nowhere to retreat to. what do you mean? had of we drag you into a corner? is talking about nato, the encroachment on ukraine. no more virtuous. we come back to this issue to isolate his to exacerbate those distorted perceptions. if you think they are distorted. let me end by returning to it is time to have an astonishing trend. i don't do shorthand. putin's russia does not want to be a part of our system any longer. if russia wanted to be but hundred and he no longer wants to be. it is a strange statement. in english and read every major speech is given.

pleading to be part of the west. been driven from the west. on the ukrainian crisis. but there is one other thing. russia was never part of our system. i said facts, not opinions. the fact is with this fairytale that nato expansion excluded russia from the post-soviet european system of security. russia was excluded. how can they not want to be part of a system?

>> a very confusing evening. you have just heard two radically different accounts of contemporary russia. a little bit difficult. i don't want to supported. continue to divide up the world. on our side you are at an argument that this is a different kind of nation. a nation that thinks differently. these are not just politicians.

they use their businesses, use the media inside the country, inside ukraine that inside all over the west in order to achieve their own end. their hands are to remain in power. build up his nuclear arsenal, carry out military exercised claiming that they were shot down by martians. whatever it's going to be. maintaining his power. forced to talk about him because he is so dominant. what you have not heard of the people who have been the most important victims of the west policy of engagement somehow. somehow. these are the young and

energize ukrainians these men and women -- [applause] creating a television stations from scratch, and from parliament and one on anticorruption tickets, set up organizations designed to promote transparency and good government. they may well not succeed. the me will not succeed, but the goal is to create a more democratic warfare and less corrupt world the 21st century. putin's russia is trying to stop them. i repeat, ukraine is not his only target. he he was to undermine our societies, corrupt politicians. he hopes to persuade europeans to succumb to the old temptations of the fastest far right.

to stop this from happening to stop destroying ukraine way to isolate russia in this sense enforce our own corruption laws, disentangle ourselves from the drug of russian money and reestablish the western solidarity. [applause] [applause] >> last word. >> i refuse to play this game. i care about russia. and i'm going to ask you for whatever the consequences of isolating russia? as i i count them, there are minimum depth of ten. first, it plays into the hand of the chauvinist anti-western forces in anti- western forces in russia that dream of bringing down the iron curtain again. it plays into the hands of

the traditional anti- western orthodox church it reinforces the feeling now shared by 73% 73 percent of all russians at the west led by the united states is the enemy. it turns russia eastward into a partnership with communist china. it makes russia ever more unpredictable. it plays into the hands of russia's military-industrial complex. it reinforces the traditional russian desire to circle the wagons and deal what seems as a hostile environment. it minimizes any and all outside information for the russian people who presently do have access to western media, western movies, and the internet. it cuts off travel for all average citizens including tourism, exchanges educational opportunities, and it leads to the birth of a generation hostile to the west.

engaging russia. opening its russia. opening its doors to as many russians as is physically possible easing visa restrictions, or waving them altogether. all russians to visit, work, send their children to schools and universities development contacts. it will achieve a profound change. this will fundamentally change the country. politics and policies. it will not happen overnight but it will inevitably happen. in this beyond the question of the tao will be a huge positive for the west. by the same token for russia and for the russian people. and finally, if as ms. applebaum once wrote the russian president dreams of sitting down a new iron curtain this is her

article. isolating russia is friend right into it. >> ladies and gentlemen, we gentlemen, we have been treated to a superpower have to be read. [applause] [applause] >> thank you to the foundation for making this possible. thank you. [applause]

>> let's review where public opinion was at the beginning of tonight's debate we asked you to vote agree disagree on the result of the west should engage in now isolate get that up now. try to do it from memory. 43 percent. very close. how many will be open to changing your mind. 89%. this debate is very much up for grabs. all of you have a 2nd ballot in your program.

please use that to vote on the way out. we will have the results in the reception a little bit after 9:00 p.m. again, thank you all for turning out for tonight's debate. let's go vote. [applause] >> pres. obama criticized the senate today for delaying the nomination of loretta lynch to be the next attorney general. she was nominated she was nominated last november making her pending nomination timeframe the longest in 30 years. the pres. made the remark strike a joint news conference with the italian prime minister at the white house. >> will we still have these this crazy situation where a woman who everyone agrees is qualified who has gone after terrorists who has worked with police officers to get gangs of the streets trusted by the civil rights community a good manager.

nobody suggests otherwise. otherwise. been confirmed twice before for one of the biggest law enforcement jobs in the country has been now sitting there longer than the previous seven attorney general nominees combined. no one can describe the reason for. on on an issue that is completely unrelated. this is the top law enforcement job in the country. it is my attorney general who has to interact with his italian counterparts. dealing with counterterrorism issues.

what are we doing hear? there are times where dysfunction just goes too far. enough. call loretta lynch for a vote, a vote get her confirmed. put her in place, let her do her job. this is embarrassing. thank you. >> watch the full news conference with the italian prime minister tonight at 11:00 o'clock eastern on our companion network.

>> on c-span saturday morning live all the coverage of the new hampshire republican party 1st in the nation leadership summit. speakers include texas sen. ted cruz, wisconsin sen. scott scott walker, john kaysix, and rand paul. saturday book tv is live from the university of southern california the los angeles times festival of books with panels on journalism and publishing and author: programs throughout the day. some of the authors you will hear from include best-selling biographer scupper and radio talkshow host hewitt. live coverage sunday afternoon at 2:00 o'clock.

authors we taking phone calls throughout the day. saturday morning at 845 eastern for an all-day event on the end of the civil war speakers include caroline ginny, james macpherson, and barbara gannon. sunday at eight am and again at ten pm eastern the 150th anniversary of pres. lincoln's 50th anniversary of president lincoln's assassination for the ceremony lincoln's college. the creation from ford's theater. take a tour of peterson house. >> ponce de leon may or may

not have been searching for the fountain of eternal youth. a lot of people have said that he was out for additional property for the king of spain and colonization attempts and gold which is very decidedly true. we do know that juan ponce de leon came ashore after searching for good harbor took on water and would. this this area presents one of the few freshwater springs in the area around 30 degrees. the 1655 before the the 1655 before the settlement of jamestown and 55 years before the pilgrims landed. >> the hotel was built. flagler is a man a man who is very little known outside of the state of florida. it was one of the wealthiest men in america. he essentially have been a cofounder of standard oil company with john d rockefeller.

a man who always wanted to undertake some great enterprise. as it turned out, out florida was it. he realized that he needed to on the railroad between jacksonville and saint augustine to ensure that guests can get is out of immediately. clearly the dream was beginning to grow.

announcer: "washington journal" continues. host: it is our regular spotlight on magazines segment. "black ves tter," the >> it is a regular spotlight this week. black lives matter. take a look at the shooting that took place in south carolina. walter scott. joining us in new york of "time magazine." good morning. guest: good morning. host: could you tell us the latest of where we are on the shooting of walter scott? guest: we really have not seen too much come out since the day the video was released. the agency that took over the

investigation is a state law enforcement agency in south carolina. they have been pretty mom, as -- they have been pretty mum, as you would expect. it might be days or weeks before they handed over to the prosecutor. we heard soundbites, that perhaps it is not a case where they would be pursuing the death penalty. but we really do not know. the case is still in the hands of the investigator the state law enforcement agency, and they have not said much. host: how would you describe the relationship between the police department and the community? guest: i think there is a lot of tension. the police department has changed a lot in the last decade or so, and in 2002 they brought in a new police chief who came in to crack down on violent crime. he did a great job of it. violent crime declined by about half during his tenure.

but at the same time there have been a lot of allegations of racial profiling, profiling, and some other measures that have led to, may have allegedly have led to police brutality. there is a lot of of tension. having said that, i think most people in the community are pretty satisfied with what they have seen in the last week or so , sort of immediately after the video was released -- or rather, immediately after the shooting. it is a state agency, and they were told take over the investigation. we do not want to be in charge of investigating our own officers. and the officer was arrested and charged with murder right after the video was released. most people are pretty satisfied with what they have seen thus far. host: we will continue with our guest on the shooting in south carolina. justin worland is joining us

from new york. host: as your story shows, it is the video that made the difference. we have the chance to talk to walter spot -- walter scott's brother. set up that story for us. guest: we talked sort of right after the murder charge came about. he told me about how he first saw the video, which he was at a vigil for his brother. walter scott's brother said he never really bought the story as it was told to him originally. he did not think his brother would be one to confront a police officer, so he was sort of skeptical at that point, and he was approached by a man who said he had something to show him, and he pulled him aside and

showed him the video that is now infamous. at first the man did not want to go public with the video. he hoped the police would tell the full story themselves. and then walter scott -- excuse me, anthony scott -- stayed in touch with him and he did release a video. that is sort of how he came to secure the video. but the interview, he was still shocked by what happened. as you would expect, he remembered his brother as sort of a good family man. yeah. host: the man who had the video -- why was he hesitant to release it? guest: he told -- anthony scott told me that the man with the video basically was hoping -- he did not want to be thrown in the spotlight. he was concerned about

retaliation, potential police retaliation. it is hard the state law enforcement agency saying we understand if you witness something like this, you might understand -- you might be scared of what the police might do to you. host: did the law enforcement division conduct its affairs of what happened afterward, based on what happened in ferguson, missouri, and new york city? guest: i absolutely think it did. i think the mayor and the police chief in that city did not want to have another ferguson on their hands. they did not want to have protests and violence in their city. that is why they handed it over immediately to state officials. i think they were absolutely aware. i do think it is different. different from the other cases we talked about -- ferguson, or

even the case of eric garner in new york -- just because of the video. it is hard to imagine that this video would not have prompted this kind of outcry, even if they had -- even if it had come out before ferguson had happened. host: justin worland, your first call comes from andre in georgia. caller: i wanted to make the comment in regards to the shooting -- the black community we realized that these things are happening. not all officers are bad, but it is these kinds of instances that happen. because of the video, i think we feel like there are much more instances where there are no videos. one of the news agencies was there to report, and they said how they would have to report these incidents if the video had not been released. i think that is what happens

much more often in the black community, when there is no video and then the officers wind up getting off, and we have to rely on forensic evidence. sometimes those things can be adjusted to make it beneficial to the officer. definitely glad that the video came out. definitely glad that the leadership, they went ahead and charged the officer. now we just need to see what is going to happen as far as the trial. as the trial goes on. thank you. host: mr. worlan?d? guest: you make two good points. we have to wait and see what happens. a video is a video, and it is sort of amazing that the video came to light in this case, but we do not know what will happen until it goes to trial, how things might be spun differently.

when i talked to anthony scott he said that he is happy with the way things are going, thus far, but he is skeptical until he hears "guilty as charged." of the other thing to say is you are right, there are not a lot of videos in instances that could be similarly tragic. one of the things police departments are doing as a first step to address the issue is police body cameras. that is something that we saw just this week. the killing of eric harris in oklahoma. this was caught on police body cameras, and the officer was immediately charged. this is something we might see going forward that hopefully will address what we are talking about. host: donna from washington state, hello. caller: the whole police department is responsible or culpable because before the

video came out, everything was just as this as usual. when they bounce the facts he said he was fighting for his life. but when you look, the distance from when the bullets hit him does not match the police report, but they did not say anything. that means the police department supported -- and a shooting that police do without checking the evidence. they should look at every file, every police shooting and match it with what they said, what the police report said compared to the evidence. if someone had shot from that distance in the back and you say you are defending yourself, it just does not match up. because of the video, they have to deal with it. so they are responsible. they should all lose their

positions, all the higher ups and redo the whole police department in that area. and probably any other police department. there should be a second party looking at it and the evidence, compared to the original report. guest: i think that is a very good point. the interesting thing in this particular case is, as i noted the investigation was taken over right after the shooting. even before the video reemerged -- before the video emerged they saw these inconsistencies between what the police report said and what the officer, michael slater said -- michael slager said, and what the evidence was. i think you are absolutely right. i hope that they do when there is clear evidence, that they make that effort. it is difficult to say what goes

on across police departments across the country. host: have we heard any reaction from the justice department on the shooting? guest: the justice department has opened their own investigation. they are not commenting on it at this point. the role of the justice department is an interesting one. it is a role for the justice department to play. by nature and after the facts, i think they are looking into it and i am not sure what they can do because of their role as a federal organization. host: from princess sand, maryland, got that from princess anne maryland, go ahead. caller: when we look at what happened in south carolina, this is an ongoing thing in the last 30 or 40 years in america in black communities.

in various areas of northern virginia, there were incidents of police misconduct. in all of these cases, the wrongful death suits. wrongful death is not justice. as a citizen, if i shoot somebody in the back, regardless of what is going on, i am charged with murder. a man of 73 years old was too old to be on the police force. we talk about terrorism in the country, the disenfranchisement of people and how they are treated -- nobody talks about the casual killing acts implemented in virginia in the 1700s that stated if a white person shoots and kills a negro

he will be exonerated of all charges based on the corrections of the negro. but you see white police officers, they get off on all of the charges. we need to go back and rework the criminal justice system. host: mr. worland, go ahead. guest: i think you make an excellent point. there is an entrenched problem in the criminal justice system. the question is, how do we deal with that? that is tricky. naturally, there is going to be some leeway for police officers who work and discharge their weapon in the line of duty if the evidence is unclear. that is what they get for putting their lives on the line. but absolutely, there needs to be change, and there are too many incidences where we see the

instances where we see situations like this. the question is what can we do to reform? we will see. >> host: national, tenn. hello. >> caller: have a couple points i want to make. first of all the mantra of black lives matter is getting old because all lives matter. i don't understand why in certain communities, particularly the black community there is little respect for the police and the law because in my generation we were brought up that if the policeman stops you for any reason you are supposed to be submissive because they are the authority. they were put in place to protect us and to serve us and know where was i ever talked to charge of police officer and

tried to go to their weapon or try to run away. and my feeling is if you do those things, if the police shoot you, you deserved it because you haven't submitted to the police's authority and the second thing i want to say as far as black wives matter, it has been proven in statistics that the majority of babies aborted in this -- do they matter too because those are lives just as well as people who are born. thank you. >> i appreciate i got through quickly. the point that "black lives matter" is making is there are a disproportionate number of black lives being taken by the hand of police and that is why the

slogan, the cover story is called "black lives matter". of course all lives matter because a segment of the population is disproportionately losing their lives and with regard to the question of what submitting to the police. the bottom line is nobody deserves to be gunned down when they pose no threat to a police officer. that is the bottom line and to say otherwise is simply not true. i don't have much at this point. >> host: byron in minnesota, you are next for our guests. >> caller: thanks. i just had to call in and say i agree with the woman who was on who just said completely, black lives matter slogan is completely inappropriate in this day and age. there has been a role reversal

with minorities and everything in this country and there are white people who are murdered every day and no publicity whatsoever. everyday in the news, there are asians, all lives matter why focus on one group get over the stereotypes? is the new age. that is basically all i have to say. >> i would agree, the black lives matter slogans sort of speaks to disproportionately affected. the media does cover black lives in addition to lives of every shade and the media what every

out what looks that is black lives because that is in the national mind. >> there is a piece taking the fall of look at the washington post's. some police officers who shoot people rarely face criminal charges. the law allows considerable leeway when deciding how to use legal force if lives are at risk. does your reporting expand on that? >> absolutely. that is in leave the case. for one thing it is hard to get a sense of what the numbers really are because of reporting requirements. -not required to report these numbers. for a while there was a report in the state newspaper 209 shootings, discharge what panetta suspect. and were actually convicted, that is absolutely the case.

there are two reasons for it and prosecutors, the criminal justice system, reluctant to take on colleagues at the police department. that is tricky really that people are reluctant, part of a grand jury or a jury which is the lesson to take any side but police officers and a part of that is fair. we have asked them to put lives on the line and we do want to grant them some we wait but it is pretty clear, what we have seen recently there is too much leeway, things of gone too far. that is a fair point. >> host: here is john from bristol, va.. you are on with justin worland of time magazine. >> caller: i am a conservative republican and i tell you something. i was watching fox news this morning and i saw someone run a

guy over. he was just walking. he stopped him, some of them need to be -- i don't think the government should get involved with this too much but i think no evaluations on these cops, some of these cops are out of control. you don't shoot a man in the back for no reason. is stupid. what the hell is he thinking? i have seen that cop, the mud shot he had no remorse in his eyes. if you ask me, get out of business. i don't know what is in the man's mind but he did out of vengeance. then he comes over trying to help cover it up. i heard that on fox news yesterday, helping the guy cover it up. there is something going on and i don't think body cameras i the answer. mental evaluation. lot of these cops, i am not

white man and then i have been pulled over because my hair is black. i got cherokee indian in the. i have been pulled over for nothing in this town. thank you, sir. >> body cameras are not necessarily -- thinking about who you hire and how you evaluate them is without question. it is something police departments are thinking about right now as well. >> host: charles windsor, ohio please go ahead. >> caller: good morning. as far as this guy getting shot in the back, you have to wonder is this an isolated incident or does it happens so often, is it so common that it was inevitable and sooner or later someone was going to catch this on tape? i also feel taking money on whether this cobb would be convicted, smart money would be

that he won't be. in cleveland, ohio, a year or so ago 50 some cars chased down an unarmed couple and executed them in a parking lot and one cop who is on trial for manslaughter shot 49 times, stood in the windshield of the car, emptied the gun and reloaded. they charged some of these other cops with dereliction of duty and doing other things wrong and as soon as this happened they put all these cops working together. if somebody else commits a crime they separate them. they put all these cops together, get their story straight so now they are trying this guy in cleveland and all these cleveland police departments, all these lieutenants and capt.s are charged with dereliction of duty. and they don't have to testify

against this guy. the other one did get charged with these smaller offenses they got overturned. they all got paid vacations for their trouble. >> let our guest respond. >> guest: there is a question which is how often do these things happen and how often do they come to light, would it be here without a video those are good questions. the cases, body cameras are 1-way, there is also the justice department in some cases, the police department is not functioning, is brutal or doing things it shouldn't be doing, they can either su or get them agree to make substantial changes committees that things that are happening and hopefully

-- it is hard to say. with or without video evidence it is hard to know. >> host: what is the trend as far as police departments switching to body cameras in light of these shootings? >> guest: it is definitely happening. a lot of police departments are making that effort. in north charleston, 150 more. a lot of people have been convinced by this. the new york police commissioner had this video, changed his mind about body cameras. you are seeing that across the country. at the same time there are a lot of reasons why they wouldn't. one of them is the privacy issue. another one is the cost. body cameras are expensive. you don't just buy them, you have to store data. in south carolina they estimated they cost $20 million, all the

officers with body cameras. that is just a bias not to store the data. definitely things are moving in that direction but there are reasons things are not necessarily going to change overnight. >> georgia, go ahead. >> caller: good morning. i wanted to ask how much transparency, do you think there is in the training of the police force. what is it they are being trained to do in these situations and in that training mirror, the way they perform their jobs that is one question. we can look into that. the police force is trained to treat all stops, particularly in

the african-american neighborhoods as potentially dangerous and all of the black men that they encounter could be harmful to their life but not all of them i thugs. just as not all police officers are bad. not all police officers are bad, but not all people are thugs. we need to look into that. i wanted to get your response to that. >> guest: those are two really great questions. on the first it is worth noting, no police officer is trained to shoot someone who is fleeing. the supreme court said that is unconstitutional since the 80s. no one is trained to do that and treat a fleeing suspect the way walter scott was treated. i do think that oftentimes what you hear is not so much the

formal training but what is being exchanged between police officers, in formal training conversations they might have about the way they conduct their job. that is a little harder to grapple with. absolutely you could go in and look at the formal training and see this is not something they are being taught to do. i think you make very good questions going forward and things that we should look into more. >> host: louisville kentucky, go ahead. >> caller: i was just calling, the woman who called earlier, what we have been talked about police officers who are younger because i would never say someone deserves to get shot by a police officer. i would say, where is responsibility on the individual who has committed the crime in the first place that they are being stopped by at police

officer like michael brown? no one wants to talk about the fact that he went into that store, he stole, rob the clerk in that store, so your guest talks about the disproportionate number of blacks being shot by police officers what about the disproportionate number of crimes being committed percentagewise by the black population. i know in louisville, ky the percentage of crimes committed in the black neighborhoods is unbelievable. you cannot go and live in the zip code area and see where these crimes are being committed. what is going to happen next? are we not going to get to the point where people want to go in to law enforcement because they will have fear of, are we going to be, vigilante type mod the we are going to gang up on police officers and they won't be able to do their job for fear of

that, fear of retaliation? what about these individuals who are committing these crimes in the first place? if they don't want to be stopped by police officers why commit the crime? don't do it. >> guest: i think i can't speak to what is going on in louisville but i do think the job of a police officer is to apprehend a suspect. the suspect is innocent until proven guilty, they take them, they are charged, sit before a jury of their peers, their job is not to take, to make a ruling on what has happened in this execute situation where it is a petty crime. police officers, somebody who is

fleeing or someone who committed a petty crime is all of a sudden free to be shot sort of a bad roads to go down. >> guest: from georgia, this is al. >> caller: hi. i just wanted to let people know that there is an article on the internet two weeks ago roughly that the police in california begetting tattoos for every shooting end it was a skull and bones, the barrel of a gun and did you killed a suspect then you got smoked coming out the barrel. when you have people like this here on the police force running around with guns and badges you got problems. know ifs, ands or buts. i don't care if the people are guilty or what, you are taking

pride in the fact you are shooting these people down in the streets like they are nothing and you are going to be wrong about some of the man some of the my going to be just like this guy walter scott or the other guy in south carolina. who was murdered in his driveway for not pulling over at a traffic stop. for no reason, no reason to kill these people. >> guest: that is a great point. it goes back what i was saying earlier, sometimes, not always i don't want to color the police community in any way. there are sometimes awful examples of cultural things that lead to problems. what you point out, i wasn't aware of it but it is a sad

example. sometimes police community sort of encourage behavior, sometimes. i say that, with a lot of big caveats. >> host: there is a line in the piece you wrote that the troubled relationship between police department and black citizens is national in scope but relatively little the federal government can do to solve the problem. can you expand on that? >> guest: sure. it is hard in a piece as local issue, it is hard for the federal government to come in to thousands and thousands of police department and do anything. they don't have the authority, with the justice department does that is by doing an investigation like they did in ferguson and the agreement with the community, the local police department and this is what you

have to reform. this is a costly process, a process that takes a long time and the process the federal government, justice department can't reasonably be expected to do, thousands of communities. it is pretty unusual that a place like ferguson got this treatment, something that happens in los angeles, cincinnati, new orleans places where there have been consent decrees, it is not something you can expect the federal government to do everywhere. that on top of the fact that many people are resistant to having the federal government in their backyard telling police what to do. >> host: for justin worland, charles in tampa fla.. go-ahead. let me push the button. sorry about that. go-ahead. >> caller: yes. just want to make the comment we are sick and tired of the media itself making african-americans look bad.

it doesn't make any sense what is going on with the police department. >> host: do you have a response? >> guest: i think there are a lot of questions that raises. i think it is something we are thinking about. i don't have a concrete response. in situations, absolutely in situations where people are covering crime, somebody mentioned this earlier it is hard when you don't have a video like we had in this walter scott case to write about something. all you have is the voice of the police officer who will say walter scott beat him up or did whatever, fire that taser. there are people, it is hard to write about that without having both sides of the story. you raise a valid question. >> host: helen, you are up next.

>> caller: i am helen, i am calling about "black lives matter". i have two sons. i have lived with the fear that someone is going to shoot my kid and they are grown men and they are good guys that they have been stopped multiple times. also on the issue with south carolina the police department, the mayor, i felt they did the right thing. if the video did not come forward, the story by the police officer would have vindicated him. he seems to be reading from a script. these officers seem to have a script. they all say the same thing, fear for my mic, reaching for my gun. if someone is reaching for your gun that should tell you that person does not have a weapon on them. multiple officers choose to beach, shoot and kill these

black children of hours where there are multiple police officer i see they could have restrained that person. they have him down on the ground chokehold in, beating them in the head. what happened to the handcuffs? you also mentioned the judiciary system. if there is a crime committed by the person, they have a long record, that should go back to the court system and the court should be doing their part. a person calling in who don't realize you are not only losing your child, you are losing your family. the whole family is caught up in it. i feel sorry for the people who are shooting that children and they move forward and the next thing you know they have shot another person. please stop destroying our family units. thank you. >> guest: i think what you said makes a lot of sense and a lot

of people feel the same way. what we see when we see a case like the walter scott case is tragic and i don't know that i can say much more. you said it perfectly. >> host: let's hear from jared in michigan. you are next, go ahead. >> caller: i wanted to comment mostly on the woman from tennessee who calls. basically saying to be submissive to police. it is real easy for some one to say that when you are white. the concept of white privilege. when you are a white american you generally are not profile by the police. and other callers want to link all this crime in suppose the abortion statistics to the black population, the black population in this country is 13%.

we are supposed to believe from these people that 13% of the population is committing the majority of the crimes? more than white people? i find that hard to believe. it is embarrassing for me to hear that. is an empathy gap. this vengeful, emotions we get as americans a lot of times and these people to me are nothing more than red coat loyalists. those are my comments thanks. >> caller: i think sometimes hearing those sentiments is startling to me to be honest. right now we are talking about a case where a man was shot eight times, we make this a conversation. and that is out of touch as well. >> host: ron from springfield,

va. coin. >> caller: the solution is to expect police to follow all walls from traffic laws to murder. we as a society, so much tolerance for police, we all see police every day running red lights speeding, parking illiterate, all that kind of stuff. we have a broken -- just as i come from l a the police do it it is universal, there are so many bad cops because the wrong people are hired to be police, and a lot of good cops but to stop abuse at all levels, thank you.

>> guest: you are absolutely wright. most people would absolutely agree we stop the abuse levels, it is a question you mentioned you are from l.a. it is one of those cities where the lapd is notorious at one time for some tragic sort of cases of police abuse, the justice department comes in and they read and and take over. that is a case of how things could move going forward in other places if the justice department is more active but it is hard to see how you get to where you are going or where you say you would like things to go. >> host: the story is "black lives matter," takes a look at the shooting in the carolinas. justin worland our guest for this discussion joining us on this story. justin worland, thank you. >> guest: thank you. >> this weekend the c-span

cities for has partnered with comcast to learn history and literary life of saint augustine, fla.. >> ponce they leon may or may not have been searching for the fountain of the eternal youth. a lot of people said he was out for additional property for the king of spain and colonization attempts which is decidedly true. we do know that he came ashore after searching for good harbor took on water and would. this area prevents -- presents one of the few fresh water springs in the area around 30 degrees 8 minutes. it is also the location of the 1565 first settlement of st. augustine 42 years before jamestown was founded in 55 years before the pilgrims landed on plymouth rock. the hotel ponce they leon was built by henry morrison flagler. flagler is a man who is very

little known outside of the state of florida but he was one of the wealthiest men in america. he essentially had been the co-founder of standard oil co. with john d. rockefeller. he was a man who always wanted to undertake some great enterprise and as it turned out florida was it. you realize he needed to perm the real road-rail road between jacksonville and st. augustine to ensure that guests could get to his hotel conveniently so clearly the dream was beginning to grow on flagler. he was a man who had big dreams. he was a visionary. >> watch all of our events from st. augustine saturday at noon eastern on c-span2's booktv and sunday afternoon at 2:00 on american history tv on c-span3.

>> here are a few book festivals' we will be covering on c-span2's booktv. this weekend we are live from the university of southern california for the los angeles times festival of books with discussions on science, biographies, american history and crime. we will have conversations with authors and be taking your calls throughout the weekend. on the last weekend of the month we will be in maryland state capital 40 annapolis book festival hearing from authors like attorney-general alberto gonzalez and james risen. in may we will revisit maryland for live coverage of the gaithersburg book festival with john davis as well as former senior adviser to president obama david axelrod. we will close may at book expo america in new york city where the publishing industry showcases their upcoming books. the first week in june we are live for the printer's row lit fest including our three hours live in that program was killed

surprise when dr. lawrence wright and your phone calls. that is this spring on c-span2's booktv. >> coming up tonight on c-span2 panel debate whether the u.s. is becoming a police state. then a debate on how the west should deal with russia. after that china's finance minister talks about the impact of his country's economy on the world and later a discussion on the stage of working women in the u.s.. >> now a panel discussion on police and raise from the university of colorado's 67 annual conference on world affairs in boulder. gillick surprise when journalists authors and academics discuss whether the u.s. is becoming a police state in light of ongoing controversies about police shootings around the country. this is an hour