teefour nick back . .

i wondered if you could encapsulate your mother for us. >> i think you want my grandmother. sorry. >> i never knew her before

the white house. she was very gracious a diplomatic very well organized. but there was a sort that came after the white house. and after the white house after being with her did not have car heaters. and i would be sitting in the back of the car. why she was doing this. something always moving. and having to be still.

she had to back up everybody very poignant letter that she wrote on the train coming back from washington to her two sons. i have the letter. never once did i ever here her or did she ever criticize anybody. she was always positive even when things were going very bad. she was not pollyanna. i do not mean that. never hurt her criticize invited to breakfast. [laughter] given. and she was a lovely dog. my family was very fond of animals.

always at the white house. set up. and she was tall. a chow dog scotty. i have a scotty. and i could not say norwegian. i was sweet. ouija. he had his own chair. sat at the head of the table. and he learned how to set up at appropriate moments through the mail. [laughter] the hysterical part came went to california. two sons joining the table. except at breakfast. artichokes very nicely.

and new depending upon the dressing soup was a no-no but it could be hair-raising. and never once had my grandmother say don't do it they agreed. here. one was here, one was there. and it was highly polished. the puppy was the other. [laughter] and you would think that most housewives would have had convictions with what was going on. always the view of a lady. [applause]

>> all right. >> zero, to ms. johnson. your date picks you up and comes to the front door. pick you up. >> let me give a little preamble. a mother of five children. my own children, wonderful stepson. thirty years old before i i ever went out alone on a date with a man. for children. so i had a very strong adolescents. my children have said to me as children have said since cain and abel you do not understand. absolutely true. i have a desire.

the only mother that you have. you are stuck with me. doing the best that i can. so in the white house. the diplomatic reception room, the same room that they would stand. a commensurate amount of pressure. on our eyes beyond belief. i feel very, very respectful for those members of the press who had chosen to have some understanding toward chelsea clinton. i am giving her a chance. i really had no privacy in my life nor did anybody i have ever met. and that was a change.

worried about someone going out with you. because someone was going to try to take advantage of you you could have spent your life never going out because you were fearful. you when some, you lose some. similar in the sense that except mine would come up the elevator. of course they called and said, so-and-so is here to come and get you. i would i would try and bypass my parents to the best ability that i could because they live on the 2nd floor and i lived on the 3rd floor. so the thing is the is, the secret service, your parents can find you wherever you are.

even if you use the back door you will get a message that says call home, your mom wants to talk to you. the parents are out almost every single night. it is not a reception from five to seven or a dinner from seven to nine. they are out around all that much unless you carve out weekends. totally protected and secured and can do almost anything. that was the wonderful thing about david. the other advantage of having secret service agents parking in georgetown is difficult to do. we rode with them while you went in. >> glad you figured that out. >> i think -- and i have to make two statements i had a small dinner party for my prom with my best just

friends from high school and year to date. one of the neatest we had ever done. the other was celebrating my 18th birthday on the white house lawn with my friends. of course my parents were criticized for serving beer. i drank beer the day before i turned 18. that is the kind of criticism. you come on. give us a break. >> thank you for coming and be sure to enjoy the exhibit. [applause] [inaudible conversations]

>> a look at featured programs for this weekend on the c-span networks.

>> coming up next on c-span2 lieutenant general michelle johnson talks about the future of the air force.

>> good afternoon and welcome. our breaking news desk in washington president of the national press club the world's leading professional organization for journalists we are committed to our professions future through programs just like this command we fight for a free press worldwide. for more information about the club visit our website. to donate to programs offered through our journalism institute visit

press.org/as to do. on behalf of behalf of members worldwide, i want to welcome you to today's lecture and i would like to welcome our c-span and public radio audiences. you can follow the action on twitter. use the #in pc lunch and remember, the public attends our lunches. applause is not evidence of a lack of journalistic objectivity. after our guests speak we will have a question-and-answer session command i will ask as many questions as time permits. our head table includes guests of our speaker and working journalists who are members of the national press club. let me introduce them to you now. i ask each person to stand briefly as names are announced. from the audience is right well watson, vice commander of posts 20 of the vfw

former newspaper editor and 20 year national press club member. us air force special advisor to the superintendent and guest of the speaker. patrick host, correspondent for defense daily. cindy dawson us air force aid to the superintendent and guest of the speaker. vice chair of the club speaker committee. skipping over our speaker for a minute u.s. air force retired and the npc member who arranged today's luncheon. thank you so much. lieutenant kassie amber now u.s. air force section commander as as squadron and guest of the speaker. jeffrey simpson, editor for stateline.

michael bruno, business editor for aviation week magazine. [applause] lieutenant general michelle johnson joins us to mark the 60th anniversary of the air force academy which she leads. she is the academy's 1st female superintendent and that is one of a string of firsts that she has achieved at the school. the 1st female cadet to become a wing commander the 1st women's mask -- 1st women's basketball team member to score 1,700 points and the 1st female graduate to be chosen as a rhodes scholar.

selected by then defense secretary chuck hagel dealing with scandals involving sexual assault cheating, drug use and religious intolerance. johnson replaced the head of the athletic department five months ahead of the schedule requirement and order changes to fix an athletic department culture not align with our core values". to deal with issues that could move from science fiction to real-world threats. the academic program now includes classes in cyber warfare and a major ink computer network security. johnson was the deputy chief of staff at nato headquarters.

ladies and gentlemen, please give a warm national press club welcome to attend the general michelle johnson. [applause] >> thank you for including me in this amazing historic institution. a free press part is important to democracy and the history of this building is extraordinary. i appreciate it very much. it has been a wonderful week. we came out a couple of days ago with the football team. [applause] held out more about that later.

in the morning we went to arlington cemetery. the tomb of the unknown soldier. a couple of breeds presented by middle school kids. just seen from the 70th -- 70th anniversary. extraordinary chirp in mind chert mind the cadets will we are part of what this means. updike about this in a moment. think about the people that

sign up and are willing to serve. it encompasses all of this. it is by law, by the constitution. always good to be in washington. people say that. we are not as well-known east coast. they have to allow the geographically easier for academics and government leaders to go over to annapolis to make their way to colorado springs.

we have to invite people to know the opportunity to serve. the talents of our country and to have them understand that that is a possibility. each one of us has a role in these things. there is rotc reserve officer training. service academies for your undergraduate institutions that issue bachelor science degrees regardless of your major. one of the 146 or so hours needed to graduate. so much foundation and stamina humanities that everyone has a bachelor of science degree.

that is our job. we can have a more long-term effect. that is why we exist. one or two officers over half the general officers have been academy graduates. self-fulfilling his people come with the intent to stay for a long time. providing the foundation for undergraduate with which the other commissioning sources can integrate actually, just

like you would want in the brochure. up to a high standard. at the same time we faced ricardian budgets situations. it was not me directing. leadership and character development. the military officers, but

from the faculty athletic coaches, airfield instructors, even the support system and our air force wing the ones return the electricity on in the water and make the buses arrive on time. all all of those people interface and the cadets ever responsibility to instill character and leadership development. whether they go on to fly or not to understand how works the discipline and soaring.

the material to make it all work with you are the expert in cyber or the it part of it or just the practitioner trying to make it work. something that will require cognizance of cyber. internalizing the effort to have air force it does. you want us to be resourceful. it was not just then but the flanders fields. they had to figure out a way to go over that and try to find a solution. so we have evolved from there. and so part of being in airmen being creative and

prepared. and stay focused on the mission and the balance we strike. we don't just where uniforms on thursdays now that there is anything wrong with that. and we find the interesting areas with a knew generation the millennial's and out to work in this if those in this immersion in a world where you are connected. so how should we. or is adjusting that part of making it relevant to the

century and the knew profession of arms. and promotions. we celebrate the promotions of others. they are happy that person got promoted. yes. and there is a goes with it yes. the best in each other is the best in all of us part of our culture as well. as part of that as well. the attention to detail the show and doing the pageantry

goes people confidence he can do the other things with this about teamwork and attention to details well. a balance curriculum. but also with the humanities. were meant to lead humans. humans, not on that. not technology, not science. try to see how ancient writers on modern poets

address the human conditions of that we can deal with abstract problems that we will not have created leaders that you want from us. the education and also to compete and not just athletics. perseverance, tenacious thought and tenacity. ted carter was waiting in the wings. he could bring a cyber squad.

harder and harder to maintain when the budget constraints and the dod. see whether as the conferences. hopefully be a nexus for outreach and that people come and share with us their we need to protect our precious cargo out there. is this what you want us to do.

good work. because frankly numbers thrown out in washington a huge. we don't even make the backup slides. it's important. education. we know what we're supposed to do. the idea is you don't always have directions. how will we how will we have

them solve problems that do not have a picture on the box. create minds innovative enough and creative enough and disciplined enough to solve intractable problems better than we have. einstein quoted as saying we cannot solve a problem. and that is the world we face. with the changing input signal a 1st class graduated with 1300 men. eighteen days we graduate 674 men and a hundred and 89 women. as the change. 7 percent minorities.

and we also have over 50 students from other nations partners around the world, international students. some stay out for years. the western european nations make sure that we look and know the people we defend the the people we will ally with down the road. i'm told by the historians the civil war, it came to the attention they are a lot of people in the south.

it may not always happen in that process and it takes about a phd to figure out how the rules work. that is the nature. but these are amazing people that command. the average high school gpa is 3.85. 150 points higher than the national average. one in ten requires presidents, one in ten were salutatorian. so very high-caliber people command our duty is to make sure we offer in a way that challenges them and ensures that they are ready for a complex interconnected future. one of my stresses was to

innovate and we want to do that by how we deliver. in this great that he is now a graduate of the air force. we try to have some circulation to make sure that we are relevant looking at a core curriculum to make it more interdisciplinary than multidisciplinary. throw that away and go to the next one. we get together. we want the management major to be aligned to say someone has to manage the program. cyber, we want people focusing on law and political science to say what are the other consequences how are we

thinking about that? and new majors, computer and network security and nuclear weapons a strategy as well. ensuring every graduate has experience within the broad definition of airspace in cyber space. freshman going on eight or nine rides not like the old they. these actually do acrobatics. positive forward and negative two geez. i realized i was not ng shape. the student with the instructor pilot but the cadets participate. they jump hard flight and remotely piloted aircraft. the logistics and what they need to be aware of astronautics cadets and getting ready to do six catch a ride on someone else's rocket and work closely with space command they maneuver it to try to

make sure they are ready to go get an understanding of what our missions in the air force are. they are all learning more about cyber as a connective tissue command we are working to develop and fund a knew cyber innovation center based on the highly successful center renovation that we do and partnership right now. now, that is on the academic side. the military training site is 24/seven. when people visit us they are surprised. you are doing it. you don't just talk about it in class. right. that is what i am supposed to do. we try to live it. they come up with things. i like to tell them that a lot of the things they are doing are not weaker not worse, different. so in the squadrons are competing they each have about 100 cadets.

instead of just you know, more persistent they also were able to do competitions they would include some courses. a little bit of rolling in mud and running and push-ups but using a software used in national catastrophes for tracking victims tracking teams. not quite blue force what a technology that is in use in haiti after the country was so devastated and are learning how to do a control room. tracking how is being conducted command you can clearly see that as an analogy for something in the real world, tracking and operation and exercise. heaven for bid they can use the software to do it better than we did and understood that they will be ready to go and no more than generals

will. the other thing is take into account. that thomas paine wrote. these are the times. , that was that part. but at the end of that paragraph he says what we obtained cheaply we esteem too lightly, the dearness that gives everything value. you need to have skin in the game. i remember when i was a cadet 35 years ago and on faculty 20 years ago and see it again now if we are over managing and scheduling people especially in 2015 how are we helping them learn to be adults to be able to walk out the door ready to go and not have to find themselves for a couple years? how do we balance the emerging and discipline with relevant leadership and approach it differently?

where letting go and saying to the seniors you do not have to sign in. just beware you need to be and do everything •-ellipsis the rules but manage time and know that i could run downtown right now what i have three papers to do and start making priorities. it sounds simple but those are the thought patterns you need to learn. and it is working. we have to be brave when they scraped their knees and know the difference between scraping your knee and crossing the line. and we are trying to at things like absences which sounds crazy but if you have a chance to plan ahead the whether has been bad, if i bad if i can mr. class i could get my last parachute jump in i i have three tests tomorrow. i am doing okay in your class but if i could

mr. class i could focus and do better and start making choices. simple things institution of higher ed and want to help them make good choices so that they have the skill set, looking at the schedule calls 53 minute classes. does that sound like college to you? so we are looking at the way we do classes, a longer time for labs maybe evening classes, already doing some so that you get the lecture at night. use some classes online open courses. we're trying to think about how we deliver the essence of a relative way to prepare them for this new world. athletically every cadet is an athlete. a tough test to pass command our teams can be great ambassadors for us. they do committee service

projects, the baseball team they do a committee service project, help clear out fire, floods, help and soup kitchens because they want them to have a service heart and a habit of thought of service. they do so in colorado springs. but a committee service especially in a place that have been devastated by wildfires and floods. they spend a lot of time downtown and do stem outreach with local schools k _-dash 12. the black engineers of the year the time they spent downtown with kids that need to be prepared for the future as well. so many ways to contribute and sometimes athletic teams, groups of cadets every cadet is an athlete, the trials that you do you have to jump off the 10-meter board and swim

under a bulkhead and clear the water their survival swimming things that does not come easily to a lot of people but face your own fears organize programs and do the logistics to make it work. so those are the things were trying to do differently. in terms of in terms of culture and climate, we look forward to opening this new building which is representative all across the academy, but this is a place where people can gather to work on that. it started with an honor code. a lot of colleges have an honor code but ours is a foundation command we realize that it is not sufficient to follow. you have to live honorably. what does that mean? as of the kind of things we are trying to address them out to live honorably and to live up to the core values

of the air force excellence service integrity. we're trying to think about the knew profession of arms. more moral courage and social media that physical courage, how do you measure that proximity to harm, proximity to danger do we value on the value -- valor, or that is there something else. network interconnected joint global. and you can hear i i spent a lot of time in coalition with nato command we need to fit these things together and help people think that way. we know we need to work with the cadets and moore has come out on this as well just as there is scholarship about grip we realize that even the philosophers have started saying, you could have pristine character but if you're in a toxic a toxic environment the best you can

do is maybe not budge them. the worst thing is become a part of it. bad apples versus the bad barrel and i do not think we have a bad barrel, but i do not think we're paying attention. talk about professional development for faculty and staff how are we doing? it is easy to blame the generation. at how are we doing? focusing on the professional development. and a. and a climate of respect includes the points that the president pointed out religion, sexual orientation, diversity of thought, background that is what we mean by respecting people. it is not easy to balance this out. southern colorado's interest in place with kaleidoscopic outlooks on life and politics.

we have religious headquarters across the highway. colorado has legalized marijuana, not for us an interesting place to be and also on the issue of sexual assault a plague on campuses nationwide screening the new documentary the hunting ground which lays out a lot of the issues you may know. just read john krakauer's knew book command i assure you that we are working hard to figure out how best to discuss the issue with the generation. our generation did not talk much about this and i don't know if your parents, we did not have strong conversations about what a healthy sexual relationship is in the boundaries that you need to observe and the things that you say and social media have consequences in the physical world.

you cannot be two different people. trying to be more frank when i talk about these things but we need to talk about boundaries and how to eliminate key enablers like pornography and alcohol. a dynamic lawyer in denver says high school boys see 60 views of pornography per week. not loving, beautiful artistic pornography but giving them ideas about what is expected and what you are supposed to do and what he is supposed to like command it is dangerous. we need to understand and have talks. and i've been working with the superintendents of the other academies. we put together a paper that has just been published. here is all we do. call that in an op-ed layout

how much we do report in the department of defense so people can know where we are and next week i will have the department of defense biannual survey come out. in alternate years they do anonymous surveys sanderson the prevalence. and in the ultimate to the alternate years we measure against reports. it sounds counterintuitive but we want reports to go out. but we want reports to match the incidence and we want them both to go down. we we are all working on that and have laid it out in our article. we tried to refer to the experts in the field. and we want to make sure we

hold perpetrators accountable respecting everyone's rights which is great about a democracy, respecting victims rights and the accused rights. it is difficult, as you can imagine. even though their expectations about the word rape and sexual assault it is about being penetrated without consent frankly, in short. about 1/5 of our reports are that. a continuum of behavior were someone crosses the line and two lives are damaged. once they go to the system they say we have all these agencies and protections. we don't investigate it. we take care of you. able to prosecute if we can examine the crime.

more and more are becoming unrestricted so that we can try to prosecute. three fifths of the assaults are in the area of unwanted touching unwanted sexual contact in an area we really have not addressed as a nation that much which is where the conversation needs to go to what is really happening. i cannot listen to the soundtrack because that scene at the end of the summer when the boys are out asking what happened over the summer the line that says, did she put up a fight? really? that was funny? that is the area we are end. getting the 2nd base.

so they do not feel like they are prisoners you. in this in this day and age, the difference in life between a regular college student. very constraining. so we have done some things just to show we are serious we started rotc exchange. three cadets 18 university of south florida, arizona state, ut san antonio.

coordinated with coordinated with the faculty to make sure that the majors can be pursued but the leaders and rotc units. we take strong students. what will you find out about your own maturity and learn to bring brack. we will invite about six rotc students next year in the fall. the free civilian world. some incredibly important. industry of the holocaust the ncaa, diversity, all kinds of experiences with industry to expose them and so that they can learn to cook for themselves and go to a meal on time without someone telling you.

other skills, and the schedule that we are working on. so we think that it is working, repeatedly recognized for success in academics and research. forms put us best number three 34 out of 650. number five in undergraduate engineering number two and arrow and astro engineering 27 of 200 plus schools insiders, mostly standardized tests than ever for the number four smartest college. the guys at west point and an apple is think that our tests are more rigorous than theirs. [laughter] so types of amazing things. the community service trying to get ready to be leaders in the air force that we want to do but do differently. air superiority, global

strikes rapid global mobility which is where i wrote heavy aircraft, jumbo jets and cargo for 20 years. intelligence surveillance reconnaissance and commanding control the enduring missions of the air force but now with the same platforms. we do them within platforms. and so honored. thank you. [applause] [applause] >> thank you so much. we hear so much about budget challenges, sequestration, the military talking about composition reform sort of in a time of austerity almost in the military in some regard. how does this affect the

view from the cadet? does it make it more difficult for you to attract cadets to this type of environment? >> we all face different challenges. we try to go back to basics and have discipline in our system so that will be asked for money it is justifiable and make sense. the bigger impact is not on the cadet because we can double down and work harder to make sure that we take care of there experience, but it is difficult to maintain a faculty if you don't have stability. how do you give confidence? this is the challenge of sequester, stability. we are labor intensive and institution of higher education. i don't have a lot of when them funds as they say. so if this has happened in the past it disrupts the

flow of faculty which is where our challenge comes. >> last week at the same podium we had sec. ray maybe to talk to us about the navy's future lying in drones and unmanned aircraft such as robotic submarines. if that is true what is the future for air men and women if a child born today was to be a fighter pilot will there be a job for him over 21 years now? >> the way it goes with our airplanes is that we do not retire them until they are 50 or 70 years old. [laughter] i think that is a fair bet. one thing i would offer is that we so often think of these things as separate, and it is not.

remotely piloted aircraft do not act in isolation. the reason we don't call them unmanned is because it is 40 to 50 people to support command lists, analysts, technicians, to be able to get the pictures connectivity, it is a network. for someone to be in rapid city south dakota and have a target at risk in afghanistan linked to a satellite being driven by someone in colorado springs and then a coalition aircraft onto the rpa and then in support of ground forces it is hard to take any of those things in isolation. we try to look at this modern profession of arms to see people see it as networks. a fantastic colleague and great leader he and i talked about this and f3 five is not just an airplane. it is a node. it is a know, a part of the system. when you look at the fighters more than ever they are linked. that is why it is not just

the stealth but the other things that they are linked to. for air men they're will be a place for a pilot -- piloted aircraft, especially and heavies. we have not made the leap. decisions have to be made that humans need to do but more importantly, think of it as a network the conversation we have had. cyber is not a separate thing. we are vulnerable because that is us. every time we pick up a smart phone, you may not do it -- i am geeky. which tower, which satellite college network, which fiber-optic cable, which different ones in my tapping into. think of it as a network that is a challenge. knowing how we fit into that network.

>> several questions about cyber. you mentioned it just now and whether the programs have adapted fast enough at the academy to meet this new challenge but the interest from cadets in this area is something that they are coming in. julie still need to recruit and persuade people to be interested in cyber security? >> recruiting and explaining is not as much the topic of cyber as dressing like this and marching. no, seriously, when i talked to the candidates they talk about that a lot. we are probably all behind a little bit but there are wonderful things happening in our research. nineteen -- 19 research centers. a couple of guys in the server but some of it is phenomenal. one of one of the things

that they have done is come up with a way to map command this is for cyber defense math the incidence of malware in a particular network cyber forensics. it looks like flowers from -- crazy flowers from the 60s. ..

>> >> how is the victim doing? what type of care are they getting? not to have reprisal but what type of help does this person in need? at the same time lawyers try to work with investigators to prosecute if we oh the eric jurisdiction which we normally do to see if we can take it to court and because that is also linked wish that we can account for our choices and in our case it is disciplinary militarily and it does not rise to the level of the of crime we're still disciplines.

i feel we have then accountable more transparent as we get best practices that we are inspected and and surveyed the commander of was it to that organization but i don't know if that is a panacea to have commanders be responsible for that. >> if you have the cadet for your experience what would you do know that you didn't do that and? anger and what wasn't like in the late '70s as a woman? how was that treatment at

the academy's improved? >> to one of those differences i was in the third coed class i think the difference is people say we just don't want you here. why are you here? we could see it coming but it is as you change. then you get these catch-22 that women can do that. there is something wrong with you but the good news is i don't see that. that isn't the issue for a boy raised to go to mint on the competitive threat environment that is the

issues to reject that but they are much more open minded for the cadets who were openly gay or bisexual some people cannot go home because they're not out but they feel safe with us so there is that mutual respect but it was not easy it toughens you up a bit but it i cannot presume to know what it is like with a different color skin or from another country or specialty but of lack of diversity of thought that is the kind of thing is that we work through but in that way

there has been a great change. >> the air force had trouble contacting minority pilots. what have they done to address that problem? >> it is a funny thing. department is concerned for what they can have more and more to connect with graduates to say you can ask for help the sometimes and you are in a minority sometimes you don't want to ask for help. but everybody needs help so think about this.

it is though kay. trying to reach out to the youngsters here is are there not aware of the academy or the military portents of 1% are served washington is very plugged didn't many americans don't know somebody in the military. i am not the same as the army private. we tried to do as much out reach because we cannot target protective glasses but say this is possible we have some cool cats we have one from the captive of the chess team the one playing jazz piano and he was

homeless but an american and success story. we know there are kids out there who have the capability but even in the black in, jr. of the year awards what did you fly? big heavy jets. 130? >> bigger than that but that is all they knew because that was in their game 130 and helicopters. [laughter] they only know the military from movies. so this is a challenge and though it is possible and helps to know that i have been married 25 years this summer we have twin boys who are 12 it helps to stay in

touch but really you can be happy? and you can have an amazing contribution so we tried to reach out more and more. >> before asked of final questionnaire want to remind our audience about upcoming speakers the ceo of america and delta into knighted airlines will appear together one week from today friday may 15th at a luncheon. author and host of the prairie home companion will address the press club on may 22nd and the coach of the capitals will be here and that comes after the stanley cup playoffs. [laughter] just in case he is busy up until then.

i will present our guest with a traditional mug and a note it is the color of the air force blue. [applause] the final question you worked as an aide and carried the football that is an experience not many get to have what is the best part of working as an aide you can tell us which one space is working with better. [laughter] we would love to know that also. >> i will say that. the greatest thing is to be here for the transition in

jaeger 393 doing a trip out there i know you we're doing i worked for carter. and to be very suspicious of the carter administration to say they don't get we taken a nose to the constitution the commander-in-chief is the commander and we have new commanders of the time so just be ready to understand you are there because they one and that is our works. summit was extraordinary a question had that experience before i taught i have better stories but aha -- it was cordial and of little

bumpy but to see the pictures come down on inaugural day believe the government people stay in the new crowd comes in the afternoon is beautiful it is amazing. so to work for two different presidents to generations and to different parties with fund-raising was brutal to watching that to how a family spays to try to stay out of their way for both of them was an amazing experience and the favorite they knew i would do is you want me to do this? this is why we are here and one then is the original

entrance portico. sova en people got potomac fever i used to look at that to say that is what this means and the portrait that doubt -- dolly madison saved is still up there and the pitcher of abraham lincoln brings tears to my eyes. one -- i appreciate your time. thank you. [applause]

>> thank you to the staff for organizing this event if you would like a copy or to learn more about the national press club thank you very much. we are adjourned. [inaudible conversations] >> i want to acknowledgement

because this looks like an informed a crowd that there have been a bunch of critics with trade deals generally and typically my friends coming from my party. they are my fellow travelers on a minimum-wage and job training and clean energy a at dawn every progressive issue their laundry. [laughter] but i will tell you what. i just think it is good for the workers. i don't have any other rationale and on this issue

or trade? my dearest friends are wrong. in here is to try. it would cost american jobs over the next 20 years past trade agreements are true did not always reflect our values or protect american workers but with the trade deal and the companies said only care about low-wage have already proved they don't need a trade deal to move. for but this trade agreement with the higher wage jobs of

the future that they can access the growing markets but over the last two years our minute fractures have steadily created jobs since the 1990's under my administration. business leaders around the world but to be the third year in a row we are the best place to invest. [applause] the point is for in sourcing. but to do more advanced manufacturing but this trade deal would help that. just this morning nike announced with the trans-pacific partnership it

is an overseas by right here in the united states and more profits are made in the united states for thousands of new jobs at snaky facilities across the country and tens of thousands of new jobs. [applause]

cash" is the name of the book. peter schweizer joins us from tallahassee. on page 100 83, you write that the clintons are perhaps the most politically's -- of their generation. they know how things work in the corridor's of power and around the world. they know that foreign

governments are trying to influence machen foreign policy and they know that bribery is rampant around the world. they have numerous avenues for making money. some of those avenues may not be as lucrative as giving a $700,000 speech in nigeria, but they would be much -- guest: one of the defenses you hear from the clinton camp is that they are unaware of certain things, or perhaps there is nothing seriously afoot with all the money flowing to the clinton foundation or to them as speaking fees. but they have been players on the international stage a long time. a lot of the people who pay for speeches by bill clinton they are not an insurance company in the u.k. or a media company in germany. these are companies that operate in places like nigeria, south

america, and some of these individuals have sketchy histories as it relates to issues involving financial crime. i think the clintons are not ones who would be shocked that there is gambling going on as it was set in the film. they know exactly what is going on. that is what it is -- that is what is troubling, that they do not seem to have a filter that prevents them from taking money from sketchy characters. host: why don't some of these foreign governments or leaders give money directly to their own countries where it is needed rather than the clinton foundation? guest: that is a great question. christopher hitchens, a liberal writer, asked that very question and asked why is it you have these oligarchies in the third world in places like india or africa, why are they sending multimillion dollar checks

10,000 miles away to the clinton foundation, ostensibly to send that money back to do work in their own countries. the answer that hitchens gave was it is because it was a way of influence peddling. with a former president and a former president whose wife is first a powerful senator and then the secretary of state. that is what i think is mystifying. if you are in india and concerned about development poverty, you name it, it does not make a whole lot of sense to send it to new york city. why not work with the legitimate charities in india doing the same thing? that is one of the things. in addition, the timing of these donations is puzzling. host: kazakhstan, walk us through what happened. guest: causing stone is an oppressive government that has

ruled that there since the collapse of the soviet union. they are rich in minerals. they have a lot of uranium which of course fuels civilian nuclear technology and military nuclear technology. in september of 2005, l clinton is there was a canadian mining investor -- bill clinton is there with a canadian mining investor. clinton says nice things about the dictator of context on. in a couple of days, the canadian investor is granted uranium concessions. he later spends $30 million to the clinton foundation. if that is not interesting enough, this uranium deposit becomes part of a company called uranium one, a canadian company. they start acquiring uranium rights in the u.s. his is a small uranium company

but eight other individuals connected with this company also start making major contribution to the clinton foundation. the chairman rights multimillion dollar checks. those contributions were never disclosed by the clinton foundation. we found them in canadian tax records. the financiers in the company are major clinton foundation contributors. you have a shareholder who was not only a shareholder in uranium one, he is also an advisor to the clinton foundation and a major donor to the clinton foundation. all of these assets are accumulated and is flowing to the clinton foundation. then the russian government arrives and does we want to buy uranium one, because they have had a long interest in cornering the uranium market. this is a personal desire of vladimir putin.

he authorizes the release of funds to buy this uranium company. in order for russia to acquire 20% said 25% of all uranium assets in the u.s. it requires federal approval. there is a committee that requires a number of government agencies to sign off on this deal including the state department. they do sign off on the deal. what is troubling about hillary clinton in this is that no other government agency that approves this is headed by somebody who received $145 million to their foundation from denying individuals connected with this firm. the second thing troubling is that hillary clinton had a history of opposing precisely these kinds of deals. where a foreign government wanted to buy a critical industry in the united states. both of those things raise

questions about what her involvement was in this. the clinton campaign says she has no knowledge of this, was not involved in this. national polls show more than half of the american people question her trustworthiness and honesty. i do not think her verbal statement on this is going to be enough. i think there needs to be further investigation to see what precisely her role was. if three years from now we had a secretary of defense who had a private foundation that received 145 million dollars from shareholders and a foreign company that had business for the pentagon, it would not be enough to say did you do anything to help them? they would be in investigation and i think there should be one here. host: page five. "given my previous focus on

bipartisan self-dealing and corruption, why am i focused on one couple?" you write. do i simply have it in for billing hillary? what is the question to that answer? guest: the last five and six years, my writing has been focused on following the money in politics. i wrote about insider trading congress members and both political parties, that this pattern of stock trading. in a book that followed up on that, i looked at what i regard as extorted fundraising practices by political parties on both sides. i got the displeasure of john boehner as a result of that book. the clintons are unique and fit into this pattern. no post residency has been marked by as much money making as bill clinton has engaged in. between 2000 and one and 2012, they took in some 30 $600

million -- that is impressive in school. they have created a new model. if this model is allowed to continue and is successful will be adopted by others. the model is getting around rules and laws we have in place that prevent foreign entities from influencing american politics. a foreign company cannot give campaign contributions to american elections. with the clinton foundation and the ability to pay speaking fees to the spouse of the secretary of state, foreign entities have a way of giving money to families of elected officials in the hope of influencing them. i think that is troubling. host: peter schweizer a way for america and media matters have with lists of what they say are errors that you made in prison cashbook -- in "clinton cash."

from -- from media matters schweitzer admitted he omitted key information about clinton foundation donors. schweitzer's owing -- is anything you think hillary for america or media matters have gotten right in the book? guest: no. what is surprising is they say the book is a doubt, but their actions do not indicate that is what they believe. if you look at the list of errors -- i am glad to go into details on every of them -- it is a classic example of misdirection. one of the things in the video they put out from the spokesman was this statement that in this uranium deal, the shareholder sold his shares in the company

before hillary clinton became secretary of state. i point that out in the book, we do not know if he has shares or not. the problem is the spokesperson does not talk about the eight other individuals who are giving to the clinton foundation and our shareholders of the deal, who are chairman of the company engaged in the company giving to the clinton foundation during the time the state department is considering this deal. they want to selectively steer the conversation one way without looking at the larger fat. they are hoping people will not actually read the narrative of the book and they will take their word for it. i think that is remarkable on their part. host: "clinton cash" is the name of the book and peter schweizer is the author. phone numbers are on the screen. you can also go to our ace book page facebook.com/cspan.

we have a discussion there on the book and the topic. we begin with john in montana. you are on with peter schweizer. caller: hello peter. i would like to speak to the fact of people like george stephanopoulos and your host the other day attacking you, personally, on your ability to do research on the clinton project. all they look for is personal attacks. i would like for you to defend yourself there. guest: i do not feel that the current conversation is a personal attack. i think it is fair to raise questions about the research in the project. i will say that the stephanopoulos interview was a little odd in that george stephanopoulos worked for the clintons. he was part of the war room for the clinton campaign. he mentioned that for four months, i was a speech writer in

the george w. bush white house. but he certainly served the clinton administration longer than four months. i thought that was an interesting decision on the part of abc news. i do not mind a vigorous conversation. what is troubling is the allies of the clintons who have engaged in vicious personal attacks against me. they try to misinterpret or dredge up a book i wrote 17 years ago and they do not want to talk about this. they want to talk about everything but this. i am encouraged by the fact that a lot of media outlets the new york times, abc news, have all confirmed reporting in the book. i think it is now incumbent on the clintons to stop the sly statements that former president clinton has said about me and engage in the conversation about eight troubling fact pattern. host: you ask in your book "i

realize how shocking these allegations may appear. are these activities illegal? that is not for me to say," you write. guest: if you look at the tone of this book, and the wall street journal has a column about this. i am not a throwing, contrary to the clintons's claim. i'm not making outrageous accusations. i am laying out the fact. that is what i am doing. i am not and do not pretend to be an attorney. if you look at some of the recent cases of political prosecutions on corruption whether that is mcdonnell in virginia senator menendez in new jersey, or the case in oregon with the governor and his resignation, i contend that from what we know now, the fact pattern with the clintons is far

more troubling and developed than in any of those cases. i inc. this warrants investigation by either the fbi a federal prosecutor, or by a congressional committee with subpoena power. you need to look at communication, have people under oath, and ask serious questions about the flow of funds and the decisions she made as secretary of state and how they benefit those who were giving her family money. host: california, democrat. caller: good morning. i have one question. please, not a short answer. do not answer this shortly. i want an explanation. would you show as much enthusiasm if you are writing about the koch brothers? thank you. guest: i focused my research on elected public officials.

i think that private citizens -- we can have a rigorous debate about the role of money in politics, about if there is too much or whether there ought to be restrictions. the koch brothers do not actually vote or chart policy. i look at you elected officials. that is what i did in extortion. i took to task both political parties and got criticized by john boehner and other republicans for those books. hillary clinton was america's chief diplomat. she charted america's foreign-policy. she had enormous power over national security and our posture overseas. her husband took in tens of millions of dollars in funds from foreign governors, foreign corporations, and from foreign financiers over her tenure that had business on her desk. the results are astonishing. one example the caller might be interested, consider this.

hillary clinton, as secretary of state, is reviewing the environmental impact and making a designation on the keystone xl pipeline, a very controversial issue. during that time, her husband signs up to do 10 speeches for about $2 million to a financial firm in canada, one of the largest shareholders in keystone xl pipeline stock. they had never paid a speech for him before, when she was not secretary of state or reviewing the keystone xl pipeline. suddenly they offer him $2 million to do the speeches and heat badly does them. -- and he gladly does them. three months after that, hillary clinton green lights that pipeline. you see that replicated over and over again. i would ask the caller cannot give me a short answer as to

whether he would read the book, but actually read the book. if you do not want to put money in my pocket, go to the library. give it serious consideration. these are troubling patterns of behavior. they have not challenged any of them. the payments, the timing, who they got their money from, the decisions hillary clinton has made. host: politico recently reported that you are looking into jeb bush for a potential book. guest: yes. we are engaged in research for about four months. as governor of florida, you do not have the global scope as the secretary of state. with the clintons, you have a longer time in public service then jeb bush. but we are following the same methodology. flow of funds. it is always follow the money for me. it is about flow of funds, did decisions benefit those contributing to campaigns are giving to jeb bush's foundation,

what he did a couple years after he left the governor's mansion that was connected to it individuals that benefited when he was governor. we're looking at airport and land deals, things related to educational reform. we expect a major report out in september. we are following the same model that we did here. partnering with major investigative units of major publications because they have a capacity to get answers from political figures that i cannot, as an author. authors tend to get ignored by political figures. if you get a call from the washington post, the new york times, abc news, you will engage because you kind of have to. host: john is in pennsylvania. go ahead. republican. caller: thanks for having me. you have done a page out of

duty. -- a patriotic duty. for you to partner with the new york times, the washington post -- these are far left organizations. you are very credible. i have been aware of the -- i was troubled, personally, back from as soon as president clinton left office. he immediately embarked on this page speechmaking. he went before financial institutions, lobbyist. getting up to $500,000. as you indicated earlier, they made the clintons, between the two of them with look advances and speeches, they made over $100 million in two years. as far as this foundation, this

is a whole new idea. if are getting all this money and this foundation. as i understand, they are spending on the actual -- helping the poor about 15% of the funds of that, into the foundation. the rest of it goes to salaries and headquarters -- host: guest: i think the color brings up a lot of good points. i think we all recognize ex-president are going to the lecture circuit and i don't think we might it at a certain level. with the clintons it is troublesome because bill clinton's wife at the time is a powerful u.s. senator and has become secretary of state. when you look at the pattern of the money they are from the speeches, it is troubling. consider one statistic. bill clinton has been paid 13 times a total of -- a total of

13 times during his speaking career $500,000 or more to give a speech. of those 13 times, 11 occurred while here -- while his wife was secretary of state. it is hard to not see them for what they are. bill clinton has never given a paid speech in nigeria when his wife was not secretary of state. she becomes secretary of state. a businessman in nigeria who is very close to nigerian government is highly corrupt contracts for him to give to speeches for $700,000. as secretary of state, one of the things that secretary clinton has to do is look at foreign aid recipients at the government of nigeria and if they have rampant corruption and they are not improving it, federal law says they are not to get a. --aid. the only way they can get u.s. aid is at the secretary of state grants them a waiver. which secretary clinton did. you can look at this and say one

is a coincidence, but you find a pattern repeated over and over again. with regards to the colors question about the foundation they give about 10% of their money to other charitable organizations. the clinton foundation model is incredibly unique. you look at the website and you see bill clinton and chelsea and hillary clinton holding children in africa or in asia. but the clinton foundation really does not do a lot of hands-on work with people in those countries. they partner with other organizations that do. they function as a kind of middlemen. the world needs its middlemen but it is not like doctors without borders or american red cross or some of these other organizations that are actually doing the hands-on work. the foundation is more like a management consulting firm working in the area of charity. this is the reason why for example a charity navigator which is well regarded as a

evaluator of charities, they will not rate the clinton foundation because what they call "a unique is this model." and they lack internal controls as early as two finances and governments, etc.. host: eugene in kentucky. go ahead. caller: first of all, i am not a republican democrat, did libertarian. i am an american and i do not believe in being affiliated with a party. might question is -- my question is if you and i or any other average american were brought up in question by congress and asked to give over information and we destroyed it, would we be walking the streets or would we be behind bars?

congress gives them 30 days. they gave them 30 days to destroy evidence and that is exactly what they did. if we did that, they would come into our home. host: eugene, i think we got the point. peter? caller:guest: you are referring to the e-mails and servers and i think it was a big problem. hillary clinton was on the watergate committee as a junior lawyer. there were 18 minutes that richard nixon erased. we are talking about 30,000 e-mails that it just vanished. on top of that, you have the additional problem is a point out that hillary clinton, as a condition of becoming secretary of state, this was something that resident elect obama insisted on, they were required to give all the conservators of the clinton foundation.

hillary clinton promised the same thing in her testimony before the senate foreign relations committee. bill clinton went on cnn and said we will have complete transparency. as we were researching this book and went through canadian tax records, we found that low in the hole that was not true. there were undisclosed donors, including the chairman of this russian owned uranium company that gave $2 million. those donations do not show up on the clinton foundation website. it is now betting knowledge that there are more than 1100 donors that have been non-disclosed. i think we're going to find there are more. think about this for a second. the president-elect of the united states, barack obama, signed a written agreement with him that you were going to share all the conservator information that you have. annually, on a basis for you taking the job. some of these donations start flowing early in 2009.

almost immediately you violate the agreement. that is shocking. really, to me, raises huge amounts of questions. i think that's one of the reasons you have such a high percentage of the american people in these recent surveys that say they do not trust her or believe she is honest. host: greg is calling in from virginia. a democrat. caller: good morning. i appreciate the research you have done here. i am a democrat, but i'm definitely against the clinton dynasty as i see it. and also the bush dynasty. i have to ask. it does sound bad and i'm not surprised at all. i think it is one of those absolute power corrupts absolutely and this is not surprise me in any way. i have to ask you with your resources to me i am wondering if you would ever consider researching dick cheney and george bush in regards to the iraq war and the halliburton

connection and all those things where i really feel like there was a lot of money made through that bore --war where we should never have gone in there. i think it was a lie. i think it is much worse than the corruption that the clintons i'm sure are involved with. we have wonderful american soldiers losing their lives. that to me is a far worse sin so to speak. have you considered -- host: peter? guest: i have considered looking at things in the past. i tend to look at things that are contemporary. i always think it is a legitimate issue in a fair path of investigation and i know there are people that have done some work in that area. i think it is always legitimate to ask questions about when an elected official is making decisions, who is making money on it. i am not suggesting that every elected official, that it is the only tech elation they made.

i think there are other things that factor into it. maybe the money does not matter. what i am most troubled by in those concerned by is looking at patterns. that is what your me to the insider trading of the stock market. it is one thing if a guy makes a lucky stock trade at a certain time, but when you find an elected official who seems to be really good at predicting the stock market and he is buying stocks that are in an area like health care where he is on the committee that looks at health care, that is a problem. what drew me to the clintons is the cluster and the consistent pattern of the flow of funds. i think it is always a legitimate issue and should be researched because any elected government official, republican or democrat, when they are in a position of power, they have enormous livability to hurt -- capability to hurt people or help people. i think it is always there to say he was being helped and hurt and if there is any financial motivation or connection there.

host: if you want to participate you can go to our facebook page for the conversation is happening about clinton cash. here are some of the comments. james says, "why don't they help the american people with that cash." josh says "if the book is full of lies in the clintons should sue for slander." john gutierrez posts, "quit making the sky credible. he is a conservative flamethrower from back in the day." host:next call for peter comes from peter in valley cottage, new york. republican line. caller: thank you very much for what you have done. i think you are a patriot, but unfortunately this investigation will go nowhere. the fbi director will not investigate the attorney general -- the attorney general would not investigate as you recall.

with the lois lerner situation director mueller did nothing to investigate. mrs. clinton was part of the obama administration and his appointees will not do anything that turnage is his administration. -- tarnished his administration. former president clinton, he stated and when he was being interviewed that he did not say he -- they did anything wrong. he said there is no evidence here it you know as well as i do that if it were uri and we did what we did with our server with our e-mail, the fbi would of been there that very day to confiscate your computer. this is good because it exposes it but as far as justice is concerned, nothing will be done. i propose that they should change the way these appointees are appointed.

they should be from the opposite party in order to get a little bit of transparency. but when it is a friend of the president is the attorney general, there were none would be justice. thank you, sir. guest: i think the caller raises a good point. when the department of justice or fbi chooses to investigate, there are clinical pressures that are brought to bear. i am not an attorney. i do not pretend to know exactly how the process works. i think by any objective standard if you compare the evidence that we have in this case in this book, and you compare the two cases, whether it is in virginia or senator menendez in new jersey or out in oregon, it is far more compelling here than it wasn't in -- was in those instances. that's why this information is crying out for attention. i am encouraged because i think a lot of news outlets are pursuing the stories. they sort of get the structure now of what is been going on.

they see how the system works that the clintons have set up around themselves or self-enrichment. they are mining these rich veins for further information and i think we will continue to see stories on this. it will not go away. then there is the question of political courage. whether it is people that are at the department of justice. whether it is people on capitol hill that have subpoena power. whether it is a u.s. prosecutor somewhere. to have the courage to take on a very powerful political machine that very aggressively goes after people that even question the practices. there is no question is going to take courage. i am an optimist by nature and i think that is how we have to approach these things. that justice will win out in the end. host: eugene from jackson, michigan honor democrats line. "clinton cash" is the name of the book. caller: this book to me is what

your guest is made a living from. the entire republican party is -- has made a living off the clintons for 25 years. the more books and stuff, the more popular they are in the better off they are. this book year is one of the best things that hillary clinton's has got to be elected president. well, you make a living off of this. that is "clinton cash" and that is what you were making. if you would you change something, have the fortitude to run for public office. you know there is not as much money and that is what you are doing right now. host: mr. schweitzer? guest: this is the first book i've written on the clintons and i think if the color's --caller's thesis is correct

that i look forward to purchases from the hillary clinton super pac. they have done two things simultaneously. they have claimed there is nothing to this book, that it is a dud. they have also belted a very aggressive campaign against me. so what is it? is it a debtor something you are concerned about? i think they are concerned about it. they are see the recent poll numbers. well over half of the american people do not consider hillary clinton trustworthy. their approach to this matter, i think it reinforces it. she has not discussed these issues at all. she avoids it when the press for ask your questions about it. when the book was first coming out they selectively leaked it to allies in the press. they even had chelsea come out to vouch for the wonderful work the foundation is doing and the ethics of the family. when that did not work they had bill clinton make these sort of bizarre statements about me from

africa. it still has not gone away. the question becomes does an individual that wants to be the leader of the free world president of the united states doesn't she want to just come out and answer some simple questions about this? that is really all that people are expecting. host: as this book will try to show you, speechmaking doesn't happen in a vacuum. it is part of a larger pattern of activity that is never before been exposed to public scrutiny." you go on to say there is nothing clearly illegal about these payments. "their source, size, and timing raises serious questions deserving of deeper investigation." mr. sweitzer's book is published by harpercollins. a close associate of the clintons will be on "washington journal" on monday morning to take your calls as well. alan in michigan. guest:caller: you guys are always

doing the same thing. you're trying to hate a lot of hate and discontent over every little episode the goes on. i recalled you saying earlier that you want to do bush-cheney, halliburton, but it's all about chasing the money. you would to chase the money but you don't want to go i too far. you go back to far, you are dealing with cheney and bush and halliburton and iraq and weapons of mass destruction. foxnews and you guys like you all you do is put hate and discontent in the country. let amulet -- ambulance chaser lawyers and hustlers making money off of hate and discontent. host: peter? guest: i am not sure of the caller heard the part of the conversation.

we are doing an investigation of jeb bush. unlike dick cheney, he is contemplating running for president. we think that is relevant and people ought to see what information is there. i would encourage him in september, if he is so inclined, to see what our reporting and what information comes out. on this larger point, i would encourage -- he probably does not want to buy the book. go to the library and read it. there is not a hateful word in the book. it is very dispassionate. there is a column in "the wall street journal" talking about is just basically recounting the facts and laying up the narrative. you have guys like professor jeffrey sachs from columbia university who is hardly a conservative who heads up the institute, and is on msnbc this morning talking about the fact that yeah, it is right. the clintons are lowering the lines. there are some trouble some things going on.

i am not sure what to tell the caller. i do not think it is helpful -- hateful to bring up concerns about foreign money flowing to the family of the secretary of state while she is making decisions that affect them. i think that is a legitimate story. host: page 113. "the ericsson corporation decided to sponsor a speech by bill clinton and paid him more than he ever been paid for signal speech. $750,000. according to clinton financial disclosures, ericsson had never sponsored a clinton speech but now it apparently thought would be a good time to do so." what you mean by this a big a time? what was happening? guest: this was in 2011 when they decided to give them the single biggest payday ever. $750,000 racing will speech. as you recounted, they had never paid them for a speech before. ericsson, the swedish telecom

company, was in trouble with the state department at this time. they had been selling telecom equip into a run. --iran. they had been named in state department reports about selling a club into belarus, another oppressive government. they were state department cables a came out the wiki leaks that the state department officials under hillary clinton were pressuring the sweetest foreign minister -- swedish foreign minister on companies like ericsson that were dealing with -- doing this. why would they decided this point in time to pay bill clinton this outrageously inflated speaking fee that is higher than he'd ever been paid before? i think that context is extremely important. you can look at that case and say, well, maybe it is coincidence. but you have the same thing with the keystone xl pipeline case i brought up. you have a case involving the united arab emirates that takes place. there are multiple examples

would just the timing of these payments and the size just is not pass the smell test. it deserves further scrutiny here it host: host: next call comes from taylor in south carolina. go ahead. caller: thank you for having made. i want to talk about big money and politics. especially from foreign donators. that really raises my eyebrows. it was donating and what their dating for because they could potentially inhibit a national security risk. you never know what their agenda are. we know when they come around barely go this way or go that way. i seriously think that taking foreign donations from anybody outside of united states is a big no-no and essentially we should put a gap on the national amount you can get. that way we can get a little bit more content there here for the american people and they're not can be bought and basically -- and another