that there are these networks have relationships that are not safe, they're a nonstate areas including religious groups, include family networks and all sorts of communities with which we can affiliate ourselves. and so, i intended to encompass that as well. i don't know that i think this is entirely new. as somebody whose studies, for example, in the 19th century, transnational religious groups were all over the region for, you know, century to century. how they interact given the fact that there's more money around and there was than there was in the 19th century sahara and given the fact that they are also having to intercept with state, which are presumably trying to inhibit or enhance their capacity to be transnational, that is new.

..

the recession of states in the global era. however, i guess i think about laws and legal institutions still being very much state based and particularly really law enforcement. the case of egypt if we're talking about these transnational global networks maybe not listening to the state anand by the supporting civil society, for instance, directly. as we know right now civil society is sort of criminalize the works with foreign entities. how do we think about these transnational global networks, i guess, while laws are still state-based? >> excellent way of framing the problem actually. because i don't think, you know, over the course of your lifetime probably, you will see legal

reform in order to accommodate the mobility of everything. ideas, people, money, although things that everyone talks about. right now we are not there. we are not there in very simple terms, in commercial terms. now much less these are the kinds of ideas. you are right, we are caught at a moment where we know that there has to be some kind of legal regime for access to information, globally. there's going to have to be. you can't do that state by state. it doesn't make any sense. at the same time there is no such machine. and what efforts to our at this point are certainly not well integrated and excessive and so forth here so you do run into the problem of saying, so this is the problem of if the

government says you should not talk to them, you do anyway and then you're going to get into trouble, because that's the legal regime you're living in. i still think that it makes sense to try and be thinking about this in a way that does acknowledge that there are these kinds of relationships and networks and so forth, that they are conceivably waste to put your thumb on the scale of supporting people, aspirations which are not necessarily the sort of crochet democracy promotion, so forth. but you're right. it's a particularly challenging moment to figure how to do the. that i think you see that all over the world. again, we care about the middle east but you see all over the world. to have the support, some the

protest movements in other parts of the world in a way that's effective has proven to be a challenge. >> wilson center. -- [inaudible] the number of, very large number of the states failed since the '90s. we had yugoslavia. we have the soviet union itself, but the result of all this, state failures come is that the number of states have multiplied. it's not that states have become less important. it suggest we have a different states. and this is what is happening in the middle east, now in the lamont. i don't think i this is going to last as a territorial state but i think we will have not one but

two states and probably not going to -- when getting at is we do not seem to be capable at this point to go beyond the concept of the state as a way of organizing human societies essentially. in other words, all these organizations that you talk about did exist, but we still seem to hang on collectively to this concept of the state. you care to, you know, to react to that? >> i think in a way, yes, of course, but the expectation, so the global level if you look at this as an international relations exercise, yes, of course states are the going to. there isn't any other way that there's a little bit of the international financial institutions, a little bit of the world trade, so forth, but basically it's state-based interactions. so if you have a piece of

territory somebody has to planted a flag. there is no other way we can think about it. that will presumably obtaining for some time and in territorial terms it may be that somebody has to be assigned responsibility for a given territory for ever at this point. that's not the same thing as saying that the way these entities operate internally is recognizable from the perspective of the people who established an international community of states in the united nations. so if you look at central asia, yes, of course there are the central asian republics and they are members of the united nations and so forth but the way they are operating internally is not the way the soviet union operated. they are not small versions of the soviet state. they are patrimonial systems. they operate very much more like the nonstate actors that i was talking about. they just happen to have captured a state.

so some of our nonstate actors are nonstate actors. some of them are nonstate actors are operating efficiently as the representatives of states. that's perfectly fine, but that's not the same. so i think what we need is a vocabulary at a conceptual apparatus to say that there is a state that can operate as a european-style bureaucratic state with the rule of law and so forth and so on. and then we had the states that are captured by nonstate actors out because of the language we use that almost doesn't make any sense. >> back to tribal flags. on that note i'm afraid we're going to have to cut things off. i want to thank president anderson for presentation. thank you for coming. [applause] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> later today on c-span donald trump campaigning in west virginia which holds its presidential primary on tuesday. you can see his rally live on c-span 7 p.m. eastern. then at 8 p.m. on c-span2 booktv in prime time.

>> recently our campaign 2016 bus made a visit to pennsylvania during its primaries. students, progress at a local officials learned about our road to the white house coverage and our online interactive resources covering the campaign trail. our bus ended the week in warrington where visited middle schools to honor seventh graders for the winning videos industries studentcam competition. you can view all the winning documentaries that studentcam.org. >> guest: we are back with dave bossie, president of citizens united. we were discussing donald trump.

you are friends with him. you have known for a long time have k but let me ask you this. long ti can to unite the republican party like the rnc chairman aince priebus asked the republo republican to do and get behind donald trump? >> guest: i think he will. i think it's a pretty. it's a moral imperative for every republican in the country whether you supported donald trump or the cou not. there was many, many of my friends who did not but they will come around because i just b hark back to 2012 and 2008 and 2000 when i was on the receiving end of the phone calls that said you did not support mitt romney on the primary process. you did not support john mccain in the primary process which i did not. i then came around and supported him. i was not for donald trump in this primary process. i was not against them but i did not endorse them. but i will put my full support

behind him because i look at the alternative. and for america i believe it's imperative that donald trump win in november instead of hillary clinton. i think a clinton presidency is another four years of disaster for america. >> host: how does he do it? uncharted territory. can't descramble the map of reliable states? how does he do this? >> guest: i think every political professional in this town, they have the we thinking about presidential politics. what donald trump has done in this primary process is really flipped the table that the map is on over and then busted up with an ax because i think he really puts states in play that have traditionally been in the democratic lock column, pennsylvania, michigan, ohio which has gone back and forth. look, there's a lot of blue-collar workers.

i invoke the reagan election of 1980 and 84. which was much easier than the 80 election but you can put, my point is, and i'm not come arguably the donald trump and ronald reagan are exactly alike. the union leadership across the country came out in droves, and lockstep against ronald reagan, and they will, they have been able against donald trump. the union membership overwhelmingly supported ronald reagan in 1980. mean that paying members. that's what they get into this reagan coalition talk and that's really an important element because you look at baltimore or pittsburgh, these people are looking at donald trump and he is saying we're going to make america great again. he is saying we're going to bring jobs back, we're going to get the steel industry working again. are going to get the ports

working again. the average man and woman in america strike if he the family, union member or nonunion member, whether they are democrat or independent are going to be looking at donald trump in a way that i think changes the perspective of the american voter. >> host: is there enough of them? the editorial says that trump we become impossible. for office are predicted success -- >> guest: virtual i don't know what the number is in relation to object to look at in relation to this day in 2012 or mitt romney, a visiting 2008 for john mccain so i don't know necessarily the answer to that, or to that statistic but i can tell you, you know condi is bringing people out in droves as we've seen in the primary process. and winning by big margins.

look, this is historically always the transition. whether it's the difficult transition to give you mitt romney or john mccain. it happens every four years. i've watched it. i live it. i am usually on the losing end. as the conservative movement leader i've always on the end of the stick has been told suck it up and get behind the nominee. is donald trump a perfect conservative vessel? no. were most of the other candidates, the 17th of are running originally perfect conservative? no. so there was always going to be at odds on that we were not going to have a perfect vessel. i look at the vessel we have, and what donald trump has done in moving the needle on illegal immigration, on border security, on building the wall, on important issues that

conservatives have been really trumpeting for years and years with no traction we have been talking about immigration, illegal immigration, border security, al-qaeda, ice is trying to get through the borders, and taking it very seriously and without really getting the needle to move. donald trump comes on the scene and he has done a service for the conservative movement on those issues. >> host: the "usa today" yesterday said tuesday from is bad for the republican party is like saying if lead is bad for your basement. there is resentment when the party needs to attract minority voters. y voters. he demeans women when they are vital to the party's future. his intolerance turns off millennials and he labors under the opinion that he is in deep infatuation with himself is shared with by majority of his voters. how does he ovme his half but how does he overcome that? >> guest: he has six months. d. be honest with you, primaries, wednesday and there's

always a pivot to the general election. historically for both. by the way, i'll get back to your specific question, but it's interesting that no one in america i think thought that the and what did one, hillary clinton, at the democratic nomination process would go past the republican process. this as a world that is a little upside down on both sides, and so she has her own problems. my point is that donald trump will have some blemishes when it goes towards the general election and the national electorate. but so does hillary clinton. and when you see what you see, what donald trump did to his 16 other opponents, when you see what you did to run a very unconventional campaign, what you see about how he is able to personally deal with them, the

opposition research that gets dumped on him and he just towards a brighter and. so he is a guy who is unconventional. hillary clinton has fought with peril when you decide to engage donald trump. i see something she is doing in trying to marginalize him immediately, trying to ignore him, tried to say oh, i'm going to win because of his negatives. or negatives are just as high. >> host: 56% compared to his the 65%. that's look at what the clinton campaign put together yesterday after the results in indiana. sender ted cruz drops out. john kasich drops out. is what they put together. >> ima unifier. >> we will be a unified party. >> he is a con artist. >> donald trump is a know nothing candidate. >> donald is a bully. >> this a is an individual who mocked a disabled reporter, who attributed a reporter's

questions to her menstrual cyc cycle. >> that man who seems really feel big when he tried to make other people look small. >> don't look a -- to worry about, little marco. >> the greed, for showing off. speak i'm really rich. >> the absurd third grade theatrics. >> count to 10, donald, count to 10. >> i'm narcissistic at a level, i do think this country has ever seen. >> he would not be the commander-in-chief we need to keep our country safe. >> this guy is so unfit to be commander-in-chief. >> 's domestic policies would lead t to a recession. his foreign policy would make america a world less safe. >> i bring people together. everybody loves me. >> he needs therapy. >> host: and according to the

most reasonable looking to november hillary clinton right now is leading by 13%. what do you make of those republicans, their own words being used against them? >> guest: if you're hillary clinton that's a powerful tool, and that's what she's going to hang their hat on today. hillary clinton has her own problems so let's talk about her for a second. she's currently under investigation. it's not a partisan investigation. it is not a political tool to get about a congressional investigation. it is an investigation being conducted i career law enforcement inside the fbi and department of justice. it has to do with her illegal setting up of a server and whether or not they were violations of the national security act in dealing with her e-mail. but that investigation has been really rolled into a public corruption case, as we all know, and having to do with the family foundation and influence.

so the culture of corruption. the crony capitalism that the american people are tired of. and to be quite honest with you, when donald trump over the last couple of weeks has said i haven't even begun to deal with hillary clinton yet, i think that's really where people should begin the conversation because we saw what he did to jeb bush. we saw what he did to marco rubio. we saw what he did to all the other opponents. i just think she's going to be in for a fight that she's not necessarily prepared for. she is fundamentally, if you look at what she's got on with bernie sanders, she's not the best candidate, meaning she's not herself comfortable as a candidate. she does not evoke confidence in her staff. she is somebody who even though she's been on the stage 25 years, a little uncomfortable in her own skin. and i can tell you when you put

that weakness up against a personality like donald trump, there's going to be some problems. i think she should come out on the short end. even the donald trump's negatives on election day november might be high. hers are higher, this is game on. >> host: updates on the clinton server. fox news has this story exclusive that a famous romanian hacker said he briefed of the clinton -- breached the server and it was easy. but also for page of the "washington times" this morning, clinton aides are going to be deposed on the e-mail system that was set up and the judge leaves it open into the hillary clinton could also be questioned estimate and to the point, i was the chief investigator for congress, committee on government reform and oversight. and before that i worked on the whitewater. there's an entire generation,

18-30 year-old voters, who have flocked to bernie sanders for a host of reasons. but those very voters, who hillary clinton is going to need in november, don't know hillary clinton. they don't know her background because they were not of voting age. some of them were not even alive. so the clinton campaign is going to say the server issue is old news. their first thing is the first page in the playbook is to say these old stories, nothing new here. they will say the same thing about things in the '90s whether it was madison guaranty, whether it was her job at the rose law firm. all a host of things, the corruption of the '90s which many people went to prison, maybe four indicted. there were grand juries in place, and panel. we don't know if there is a grand jury today. we don't know and that's why

these stories about upcoming depositions, a potential deadly piece of the pie for her because if there is a grand jury, and jeb clinton staff, former clinton aides, state department aides went in and out of a grand jury, and maybe hillary clinton herself. that's a game changer. >> host: let's get to calls. several people waiting. dave bossie, president of citizens united which is a conservative advocacy group, over 500,000 members seeks to reassert the traditional values and national sovereignty and security. let's go to david, michigan, a democrat. you are of the first. >> caller: hello. just going about this whole flip crisis deal -- >> you can see this segment on our website at c-span.org. right now on c-span2 a pro forma

session at the u.s. senate.