are found in this opinion. this trial court was very meticulous in laying out what facts they found most credible, what they relied upon. the state. the state action was much more conclusive in that regard because they're dealing with a mountain of evidence around the state legislative and state senate district. finally i would say there are other judicial mechanisms available to this court and two district courts generally to control and handle the question of multiple cases moving through the system. congress making a decision that in the cases of statewide redistricting there would be an expedited process for cases to move through the federal system to the supreme court. whether that was good policy or bad policy in the pot of congress it was a policy decision that cases that come up out of the federal courts come from a three-judge panel on direct appeal to this court. the other case goes through the normal circuit channel this

court might choose or might not choose to hear it, but that's not an accident, that's not fortune come that is an actual deliberate decision that congress made in structuring the review. finally this is a question of the application of federal law and the federal constitution, our claims are in fact federal constitutional claims. the defenses are largely under the voting rights act and there's no reason why this court would not give the same, normal weight to a federal three-judge panel and those kinds of cases and somehow defer to. >> it's not a question of deferring it's a recognition that the state courts. >> i would've thought that's a

pretty well-established principle. >> they do mr. chief justice but it's an equally well-established principle that this court judge is finding the fact by laura court under clear air. whatever the state of north carolina. >> that doesn't seem responsive to the points you just made which understood to be that we ought to give greater difference to the federal court findings the way would to a state court. >> that i misspoke. i say we should give greater deference we should follow the ordinary rules which is the case that is before you is the case before you in the finding of fact by a trial court in this court are entitled to clear error. what i think i was trying to addresses there are circumstances for example in the grow situation where you have a deadlock where there is no map for the state court, because it's either been deadlocked are thrown out, the court has then said that the state courts go first because they're exercising a policy judgment.

that's not present. here here is the federal constitution and federal voting rights. there is no unique state perspective that are to cause you to overturn 100 or or 200 plus years of jurisprudence about plaintiffs having the rights have their case heard. >> do you think we should give any consideration to the state? >> i think you can read it in the way you would read any other decision of the lower court that may be of interest to the court. i don't think it's entitled to any more or less deference than a decision of the north carolina supreme court that it may have had interracial gerrymandering case from 1998. they can certainly inform you that it can form your thinking they don't think the findings of fact are entitled to any weight in this case. i think it clear

error standard applies. with respect to congressional district one to my want to make the point that this was clear error of law. that led to believe that it needed to destroy a crossover district which is what it did when there is no evidence of racial voting preventing african-americans from electing a candidate of their case. >> thank you counsel. >> i like to start with congressional district 12, this is the serpentine district, the one that everyone agrees looks terrible the question is whether race was the predominant motive or whether is politics.

the determination the court has said on numerous notifications is one for clear error and the district court had evidence before. once or three day trial. i want to highlight some key evidence that relied upon in making credibility determinations and finding race was the predominant and that starts with congressman watts testimony, one of the architects of the plan told him to head to ramp up the minority voting percentage in the district over 50%. that's a racial target at the starting point. as counsel mentioned we have the target being hit on the nose, 50.66% and we have evidence, direct evidence of the way the state did it. that came from the mapmaker and he said, although he did also say first that he did not he only is politics and do not use race, he may contradictory statements and said he did use race in respect to guilford county. he pulled the black population

in order to comply with the voting rights act. if you looked at the record you'd see exactly what you anticipated which is the state was pulling in concentrations of the black voting age population in the concentrations were so high that supported the inference that they were using race. there's a charge in the plaintiff's briefs that shows that you had that concentrated paul inches that's that's how it was done in respect to guilford county. the last thing was the district court may credibility findings that the political motive had been discredited. there is evidence that was there about political motive but the district court found it wasn't credible in light of congressman watts testimony which the court credited about the target and in light of the fact that the political testimony which was mostly put on by the mapmaker had been contradicted by the mapmaker himself when he said he used race and contradicted by the architects of the plan who tried to downplay politics in their statement.

so when we look at this and particularly in light of the clear air standard you have a three-judge panel that went through three days worth of evidence may credibility findings and even the one judge that disagreed with respect to this holding recognize that what the majority did was eminently reasonable. those cases i don't think you can find clear air. >> what you have to say about the voting rights in the air standard with respect to the cape the state decision. if it were the state case we would be reviewing their factual findings on the same question for clear error and now you're saying this once here so we should apply clear error. seems to me that response is not terribly helpful in addressing the conflicts that. >> pence: asked. >> first of all the way the court deals with potential to

bites at the apple problem is through the claim per preclusion document. so to the extent you're trying to figure out what weight the state has we think is the appropriate one. >> is that whichever one was decided first to arrive surfers? >> you would have to ask if the principles, you'd have to ask whether the principles were met. >> so we could apply the race principles and that leads us to favor the state court. >> no, i'm not saying that. >> will the state was the decided first what is let me? >> the application would apply a north carolina law in this instance. we don't have a position on the application of north carolina law. i'm saying the way you deal with this question is through application of the framework as opposed to doing some different like saying we won't use clear air anymore.

>> so you want us to apply to decide this question and you don't have a position on what the answer is? >> if you're worried about the state court having an effect you'd ask if there is arrested to bar and there's three hurdles to overcome to show that there was a bar, first whether the argument was waived, second whether the factual predicate is there, that substantial substantial question on the and third, whether north carolina law uses. [inaudible] my point is not that you need to resolve or decide it is certainly but if you're asking about what i do with the state court decision, the way figure out what to do is use those principles.

but you don't do is defer to the state court findings. this case is here on appellate jurisdiction. you need to decide the case before you and we don't think you would do something like the noble review because role 52 which mandates clear air applies to this court. i think this. i think this court should decide the case as it comes to and that is with a clear air standard with respect to district 12. >> just on district 12 you said there was a racial predominance, six strict scrutiny fails. >> because this date and give a reason to pass strict scrutiny. the only reason be sectioned five is the state suggested. that would make sense because section five is to prevent retro aggression and here they increased the black voter age by 7%. >> should maps be requires? >> we don't require a map anytime of clinical motive is

asserted. we take the case with circumstantial evidence, there is a direct very little direct evidence for race but there is strong evidence of politics and a correlation between race and politics. we knew the strong evidence of politics and we think it made sense in the context of that particular case for the court to say give us an alternative that shows us. when you have a case which is a strong, direct evidence of a racially predominant motive it doesn't make sense to require the mat. with the equal protection clause gives you is not having race being used for an unjustified reason. it's not the map is just an

evidentiary thing you could have or not have. >> not strong direct evidence would a map be necessary? >> we think the court has tried to get flexibility in terms of proving racial predominance. we see cromartie is a strong direct evidence of politics case. maybe one other thing is we don't think the court if it were adopting a map requirement for some clear set of cases it would've explained it in its opinion and does something so what's going on apart is a tough matter there is many states with black citizens and no black representation. and there is a thing called let's have the majority, minority district. the problem is how does the law permit the creation of that and at the same time prevent the kind of packing that medic. in other cases which is gerrymandering. no 1i think i think has a good answer to that question. so if you are too tough in this case and rejecting the notion that it was politics which is correlated with race than what's can happen out there to a successful effort to create majority minority districts where change happens and how do

we keep, do you see the problem? >> were sympathetic to the states interest and we think the court has been sympathetic and we think the court has done it in decisions like alabama. two things in particular. >> matches the states interest is the constitutional interest in seeing that minorities have representation in reality in the legislature. >> and some of the court has done this task about racial predominance, the first question. was race the predominant motive, show us your evidence. the second thing is when we get to strict scrutiny the state said given to justification. the mets the state was operating on an error of law and second it did not provide the justification and that's what the voting right act section two and five focus on. not just in alabama not just picking a number out of thin air but showing us there's a problem

and with respect to the first congressional district in this case there is not evidence of a potential problem because of the lower percentage not be in a majority minority district the african-american community was able to elect candidate of its choice on a sustained basis over a period of years and by wide margin. this is on page 49 a. it also said this it was operating on the mistake of law and getting back to your question, we understand this is a delicate balance i think the court has attempted to balance the important interests protected by this class against the concern that states have in the flexibility that states need by adopting these different parts. >> thank you, counsel, mr. clement your four minutes remaining. >> thank you. a few points in

rebuttal. first of first of all it's worth recognizing that six trial court judges looked at congressional district 12 and four out of six said that politics, not race prevailed. it's a funny sort of law that's going to defer to the minority of two. i don't think you can ignore the state court decision on the grounds that they weren't specific enough. a point you to appendix b, 161 through 163 which is the relevant fact findings of the state trial court where they were unanimous in finding the 2011 congressional district worked on in which president obama received the highest totals in the 2008 election. the only information on the computer screen used was the percentage by which president obama won or lost a particular -- and that gets to the need for an alternative map of the

difficulty. let's well and good to say we looked at it but guess what they pulled in all the democrats to because the african-americans are democrats what they could've done which would been simple enough woods to draw a map that says he's a liar, because if you use those he would come up with a different map. they didn't do that. any alternative map but are been easy to do and they didn't do it. they say they they didn't do it in other cases as well and i think two reasons explained that neither reflect well on the map requirement. one reason is because all the cases as lanes they got the state to say what we had 50.1, were off that so we don't need predominance and that's wrong and i think this court will say that. most of these challenges are brought by people who are at least concerned about democratic political prospects is about avoiding race.

the problem with putting alternative map together or should you prevail those no good dirty republicans on the other side could use the map the say can complain about that because it was your map. so if you people to bring race claims not dressed up partisan claims, make them put them to the proof. make them put together map that works. as to guilford county, several responses. it's all good to say they pulled in 75000 african-americans, they're all democrats as well. if you had no alternative map that shows there's a different way to do guilford county and bring in democrats and not african-americans and you would have something. just the fact that they brought in african-americans kids are trying to bring in democrats is about as interesting as the sum coming up in north carolina. everyone agrees agrees there's about a 90% correlation between race and partisan identity.

there's also a very good reason that we did not make a section five defense week as this was not a case about guilford county. their theory is not that we did something the various to overly comply with section five, their theories that cd 12 was drawn as a majority minority district. >> they did present both theories. they said proposed findings in mccrory that they purposely included a substantial number of african-american residents of guilford county and cd 12, the intentional placement of a number of black voters establishes racial predominance. >> to get them to 50% here's the thing, if they focused on guilford county they would add to problems. we would have to section five defense if that's how they queued up. >> but the senator of believe that it was necessary to avoid

richard. >> exactly, everything they set about cd 12 was a concern about retro aggression which is what when the senator talked about cd 12 in guilford county he did not say we do it is majority minority district he said we avoided a problem by making sure we had at least a higher v bap percentage of the map. that avoids any potential section five concern was split in the counting putting the african-americans in guilford county in the neighboring city which is a republican district in they be the first to complain about that. >> thank you, counsel, the cases been submitted. >> we have a special webpage at c-span.org to help you follow the supreme court, go to c-span.org and select supreme

court in the right-hand top of the page. on the page you'll see four of the most recent oral arguments heard by the court this term, click on the view all linked to see the oral arguments covered by c-span. you can find recent appearances by the supreme court justices or watch them in their own words including one-on-one interviews in the past few months with justices kagan, thomas, and ginsburg, there's a calendar for this term, a list of all current justices with links to see their appearances on c-span as well as other supreme court videos available on demand. >> next, senate majority leader mitch mcconnell holds a year-end news conference, then attorney general loretta lynch speaks at a mosque in virginia. in virginia. later, the center for american progress on anti- property programs under donald trump.

>> c-span's washington journal, live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. coming up on tuesday government study senior fellows talks about her book about why presidents succeed and fail. indianapolis reporter tony cook and tom roberto of the national review about the role vice president mike pence will play the trumpet administration in his years as a member of congress. be sure to watch c-span's "washington journal" beginning live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on tuesday morning. >> tuesday political editor susan glasser in her essay covering politics in a post- truth america. it outlines how political reports have changed. were live from the bookings institute c-span2.

later we host an election review and a look at how digital strategies will worked. watch live on c-span2. >> abigail fillmore was the first lady to work outside the home teaching in a private school, the hairstyle love a pink was marketed as a color and they sold to women eager to replicate this style. jack look and kennedy was responsible for the white house historical society and nancy rankin saw her stay mistakenly on the blacklist of suspected communist synthesizers in the late 19 forties. she appealed to ronald reagan for help and she later became his way. the stories are are featured in c-span's book

first ladies. presidential historians on the lives of 45 women. it makes a great gift for the holidays giving readers a look into the personal lives of every first lady in american history. stories of fascinating women and how their legacies resonate to me. first ladies, and paperback, published by public affairs is available at your favorite bookseller and as an e-book. >> senate majority leader mitch mcconnell announced his support for investigations into russian influence in the u.s. election. he he answered questions on replacing the affordable care act in tax reform at this 25 minute news conference. >> i think this is been a heck of a year. i hate to see it end

and it was topped off saturday night. you. you can see i have my global sweater on. lemar jackson won the heisman trophy saturday night topping off a terrific year for the things i care about like holding senate and electing president. i know the main subject you're interested in this morning and i'm going to read a statement which i typically don't do it these but i want to make sure you fully understand what i have to say on the issue that i think is mostly undermines us this morning. any form breach of our cyber security measures disturbing. i strongly condemned any such efforts. prior to the election the director of national intelligence released a statement saying the russian government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from u.s. persons and institutions including from u.s. political organizations. that's what the intelligence community believes can be said

and on classified remarks risking sources and methods. anything else is a responsible, likely illegal and potentially for partisan political gain. i agree with senator schumer mccain, burr and others, this cannot be a partisan issue. let remind all of you that the senate intelligence community which i and the chairman's it is ex officio members is more than capable of conducting a complete review of this matter. senator schumer on the committee will review this matter through the regular order. have every confidence and chair member to review the matter and responsible way the obama administration is now launching a review and when the office of the director of national intelligence completes the review there'll be additional

information released to the public. chairman mccain has announced shall conduct a review in the armed service committee of the threat we face from cyber attacks and that will be useful. as we need to integrate in our overall war fighting doctrine. the obama administration for eight years attempted to reset relations with russia and setback while russia expanded its rear of influence, intervened in crime area, eastern ukraine, syria and attempted to bully the baltic countries. it defies belief that somehow republicans and the senate are reluctant to the review russian tactics or ignore them. let me say that i have the highest confidence of intelligence community agencies, the cia who risked their lives for the american people.

let me just say in wrapping up the congress and then i'll open up for questions. i think by any objective standard the 100 14th congress looks good compared to the previous one. everything from the cures bill to nda and bills, the highway bill in 20 years, faa, the water resources bill. permanent tax relief. we address the opiate prescription jog epidemic in a major way. a complete rewrite of no child left behind.

the accountability of cyber security bill, human trafficking, trade promotion authority many others. others. even though there were some big differences in a time a divided government, we were able to search for the things that is my desire to search for things we had agreement on. i make progress for the country. there were a number of things in which we were able to score points for the american people. with that, let, let me open to questions. >> do you believe the russian government were potentially trying to persuade -- >> the reason i read that statement is i think it thoroughly covers what i am prepared to say. >> in you talked about an investigation, you support bipartisan investigation mission or do you want to do this --

>> we are going to follow the regular order. it's an important subject. we intend to review it on a bipartisan basis. >> you said in your statement the critique of the obama administration with russia. is it like wise concerning the signals that are coming from the new administration and the different attitude and orientation and more friendliness towards russia? >> . .

>> >> will argue concerned if the president-elect continues with russia that was behind the hacking is

now working with the cia? >> i have already addressed my view of where we are on those issues i really don't have any intention. >> should -- trump elect the of the same terms as russia and? >> i am very impressed with the nomination so far and we will have to wait and see who was nominated for secretary of state we will treat whoever that is through the radio reprocess. >> would he be confirmed? >> let's wait until we get some nominees. of what we are aware of i am optimistic they will be confirmed.

but i don't want to comment on the phantom nominee that the views and have been expressed dog in the statements that i've read to be in the right footing with the intelligence agency's overall to the trajectory getting on rainouts. >> double, who has ben nominated so far. cia is excellent choice choice, outstanding choice for defense, i am optimistic

the president will have a good national security team in place. >> i think that i cover that. one. >> and do you agree that is too long to wait? >> let me make sure for betty in the stands the notion dobbin that beth's one could do to allow that ought to oppose it is unacceptable. i tell my wife and i shin.

>> exit i you going to the phase and timing period so let me say again, doing nothing is not to an option. use saw those headlines all across last year about the status quo home movie get through deciding how we will do that i will let you know, >> those that are warning about replacement but it is actual medical associations and hospitals. how does that affect your decision quick.

>> none of those people are happy with the status quo we will work with them to come up with something bin it won't be any extravaganza to them of first timothy p. obamacare replacement resolution what comes next is legislatively we who will determine with the placement will be andy will currently cover as many without as those that do. >> 85 percent of americans have coverage there is roughly 25 million who don't . if coverage was the issue then obamacare was an abysmal failure berger surely we can do better.

so first we will go forward with the resolution then come forth with the replacement will actually be. >> will this be phased been piecemeal? one but with those plans that will be separate? is that the approach he would fight correct. >> data now how many times i have said the same thing we're working the phase in period and i have a strong

set of rules. >> day have not talked to the speaker. senator mccain and vote to and burn as i indicated in my statement. >> because mike karen is terrified. i base your office will not be the same. >> but we in anticipate doing to revolutions the sheer the first to one was obamacare though later one is in the spring largely dedicated to tax reform. so there will be today

scheerer and they will set up reconciliation vehicles. for us to address to very important issues in and we are worried about a this single biggest reason for that is our tax structure which makes it very difficult to stay here because the corporate and the individual tax rate is way too high. to move on as many regulatory changes as soon as he takes office led to that is done with the pecking order the two biggest incentives to growth in our country are over

regulation and the tax structure. in the republican majorities in the house and the senate. minnesota to fail in that. but to all of those appropriations process. in then to have six weeks to prop processes appropriation bills.

>> but this same is true on the house side. and then to have that ball process again but to what end? that we may have the president that they like to give up president lot of clout to in the different president of fed different warehouse maybe they try to get back to the appropriations which we would both like to do but

one that democrats tried to get the president elect were you with him? what do make of that fact quick. >> i have for not discussed it with him. the call later health care issue and did it is my goal to try to get the coal miner health care industry fixed but are the republicans but

with medicare and social security. >> again i can only speak for myself. with this will all of national debt is unacceptable the matter what we choose to do level of lucite of the steps that we could take to exacerbate so i m concerned about it. all of those faces taking into consideration. >> to talk about a massive plan over $1 trillion. butted to you commit to say. >> that tax reform to the

government does not exacerbate the issues that you raise. and on the infrastructure issue is interesting but what i hope we will clearly of for a is a $1 trillion stimulus going back to 2009 and now nobody could find it. to me it think it did is make federal accounts bigger and if you look around to find examples of the nasdaq ocher there were few. we need to do this carefully and correctly the. >> i al of curious how you

would describe the last eight years and moving forward how is your relationship with president-elect trump and how often will you speak as mr. speaker? >> president obama is very smart. he wanted to move the country significantly to the left and he did. he did the first two years with total control of congress with obamacare in the $1 trillion stimulus. i was wrong about my predictions three times the data after the election he would give it to the center. he did not do that. i thought after the 2012 election he would do that i that after the 2014 bette he

did not do that he wanted to move america significantly to the left high taxes and over regulation and of course, after a deep recession so if you bear in mind that is what they wanted to do know that that could move significantly in the european direction. but with those executive orders and regulations to get the country going again as they said earlier dealing with that regulatory onslaught and taxi for.

the the president was very effective to do what he wanted to do. he moved to the of middle of aviation and social security for tax reform with clinton when he lost the house and senate with welfare reform so we can safely say he is not and to be very high energy talking to my colleagues on the floor it was astonishing how many were talking to him. he is very, very excessive will and energetic and i wonder if he ever sleeps and they think we year all excited about the energy and the direction to take the

country and the best evidence is the appointments made so far all of which have been pretty impressive. >> q said the debt ceiling should be used as an instrument. >> gone one location it was of august to 2011 to reduce government spending two years in a row. allotted discretionary spending but other times to beat in connection so is

very transactional and terrific negotiator

but you can't aspire not to

be james buchanan . >> date being uh differentiation of a good president is only some that day were decisive. you cannot comment at the top of the ladder and not be decisive james polk hated him to be waffling there was of back and forth and you don't know what to do.

[applause]

to be so beautiful this morning and just another hand for all the children from this morning. [applause]

they are the reason that we are here. they're the reason redo this war can for all parents and grandparents and all your hard work has paid off. they are beautiful in their represent so well. all of those who spoke before me but most importantly with that commitment for the of recognition for what be all share does not see a difference when he looks at us. he just sees his children and as we saw before we all have to step bin. so the faith and community leaders and the activist and advocates, everything that you do all day every day to strengthen and empower all of our communities.

thank you so much. [applause] i am tremendously honored to be here today in this space and in front of this audience. but we're all here today as men and women of all races board in the united states with the immigration status resolve to and some came more recently in reid from different books of this scripture but we all loved the idea for which it stands in the are all committed to lead lives of safety and opportunity that we to

proudly claim the title of american. and we all bear the title of private citizen. that is our strength. we all together. and here today to see a living expression of the american promise, a living picture of america the conviction of the repurchases dignity is inherent and equal. 240 years ago, two centuries to both they proclaimed that all men are created equal but they have always to go between america's founding 80 is and the reality p. coz

what took those words who were in negative for american life was far too long. but those words work in empower fall n word to self evidence because generation after generation we have heard him and we are demanding they be fulfilled. just for seeking the right to vote. african-american soldiers defended freedom only to return home to a nation that would not let them vote. sometimes the marchers some

plays the jobs to bernie thing but be what they have done in civil-rights that these are all eight samples of determination of these and countless others but they also demonstrated a great truth that every generation must keep this going and pushed the country forward with those promises. we have built a society so much further along of liberty and justice for all. we have been challenged. as we are all aware.

as we talk about just last month the fbi released its statistics on the hate crimes committed 2015. and already we see a disturbing trend as an indication how much more work remains to be done. overall it includes tuition african-americans but perhaps the most troubling of all is the 67% increase of hate crimes committed. this is the highest total since 2001 when i built for so many reprehensible acts

but across this country to go reported. the we also know behind every statistic is somebody whose rights but according to the report was are now more afraid they and before and they and any american should never be. we have seen many have been great -- yang tough their heads with those swastikas that are sprayed got the side and those that are hurled id classrooms. the story told by the young boy but blenheim one of us

is threatened we all are. when one falls we all have to help. that is our obligation, our commitment and the department of justice is working on these issues. to leave few more and if you have none then hit next. but the people behind them should this be a concern for regardless of faith your background be kept ziv hate crimes vacated don't go yet.

a stain our dearest ideals and nation. there is a threat to that if it is strong and there is a is the threat against the woman to the assaults of the trans gender men and nine innocent african-americans during bible study. it is us threat to lead all of those in one of us is threatened be all are. when all falls we must step did. it is the of modeled be fair to say recognize the same.

>> and to be illustrated by the threats. the reason why we have some many people here today is to have those pitiful people leaders from so many different faith fair world the no deeply embarrassed some comment values. >> is that what we call ourselves? we must treat others as we wish to be treated. record this of the name of his domination we believe every individual is pressure in the report idol of for the church and synagogue

injustice anywhere is of red everywhere. i am so proud to lead the entire obama administration taking crime soviet most serious this but if this is because of their gender or sexual orientation that is why reworked so tirelessly. >> so what about the community? if one falls below must step up. so the cornerstone is investigating and drop the shooting and give one of those perceives to be after

9/11 the first to to be targeted? muslim americans all practitioners of all faiths you are friends and family members. those with police officers and firefighters. thousands of muslim americans that we all pledged allegiance to today. [applause] thousands have made fields mitt sacrifice to that flag berger doesn't make sense

but then to come to the increase of the most viable things than the rhetoric that we have seen it did years. they are targeted simply because of their faith. that is it. long have you we have opened

over 50 investigations and filing 10 lawsuits and eight briefs with private party implications to win form the

provision said requirements. and 48 percent of the civil-rights divisions involving mosque. thirty-eight% this this day's dramatic increase and it is not the only evil verbal statuses -- space is. because for our children to learn and do it they did so beautifully today it has to be a safe and inclusive classroom. at the u.s. attorney's offices that could advance our ability to address discrimination in schools.

[applause] because the place where you go to school is a place where their minds are open to other ways of thinking. our open and to different but it's that they work so hard to promote tension and be rocked by a dramatic incident. but to help people heal literally. [applause]

>> to prevent this cultural awareness program to the schools so they don't go this heinous situation in the future for the international program manager of the foundation committed these same three -- excited to talk about the three as i stand here today. [applause] >> of course, we are concerned about the ldp t so we saw no talk about ben shepard or illusion of the hate crimes but they need to be based on gender and disability and gender identity and sexual orientation.

[applause] we have a number of hate crimes cases around uh country trying to figure out which used to marco to meet to sign the steadfast commitment of all americans including elegy bt family members. [applause] and these are all important efforts by be outstanding partnership we have from the state's attorney general in the efforts have to be engaged with us community?

whiff those that help us tremendously. and that is no important to bring the cult country's needs. >> i am hopeful at they will serve one for years to come? >> so i am so encouraged over the last eight copiers that barack obama also knew that we faced challenges in the years ahead. challenges that will war require to remain inactive for scored could. the federal hate crimes were for creating a board just

devolution and to talk to prosecutors to block them. [applause] >> but to be here that also means all love you. we need you to be eyes and years one and we need you to work in partnership with the s. so so many americans are feeling anxiety or fear with this recent disruption as we note the hate everybody is talking about and many are wondering we in danger simply because of the way that they look or pray?

i know that some also wondering what we have made it such great cost is in danger of sliding backwards. i a no but to continue to demand the nation where all treated fairly with prejudice and bigotry and condemnation but so we were already pre-ordain to produce no guarantee how will that but our century is low and to discuss democracy

the goal is to create a more perfect union. that is not fate that is not destiny. that is the result of countless individuals and some names we've blown never know. but we all made the choice to stand up and refused recognition until they were more tolerant and more inclusive. ordinary people just like all love you today. >> they gave us the examples t is in the cases that we make. that is why it is so fitting we are here today in this beautiful house of worship with a deep and fundamental

faith because it has been the face-off since the beginning of a small upstart company is founded on freedom and the quality. this new nation could in fact, resolve the original san and with the bloody civil war. the faith but those that make bad faith a reality. so to move on there is no guarantee. that is the harbinger of every movement in this country people throwing themselves in without the

guarantee or the knowledge of what they were working toward me. i think to my own family who walked the path. mike grandfather and father lived in the southern one when they were less than fully human considered by the constitution could boast -- both lose their lives. but they had no idea as uh preacher in north carolina in the middle of the night on dark roads not there was no equal protection and until they could be led to

safety. but generations later my own father would use of basement of his church to organize our protest with the students. with the results of those actions and ast with the enormous courage of the pope. there were two men leading the country in a way that the events and voting were living their lives. when the declaration of there are so many other groups that were drawn on

their faces as well. they knew their portion of fear said to be far from perfect they both missed a great deal for that. and one day be the ceo of this country. [applause] >> and that hope is still alive and still here in this country. that ability to face

incredible odds with nothing but the desire and the knowledge it does mean us. you and i know know that it starts we the people. that is the backbone of this country. before we be here today acknowledged. >> to be inspired by our faith, lets us all leave here with a renewed commitment then what is truth to the founding promises and the sheer saith

and in help in then to meet that further. we'll be hard. is always hard. there will be challenges ahead. we have always known the price of freedom but to bar to in the nation's particularly in these times of anxiety the question is will be persevere? >> but we're going to in

front of my face. >> give me the strained to climb. [applause] so now to the fates that is recognized by all people here today that call to persevere. we have accomplished so much but there is so much more to do. that is what we do. that is what we do as people of faith and people of hope. we push for word thank you for letting me spend a few minutes with you today to talk about the country that we all love and the work

that we all have to do. in your congregations and communities to indicate the american promise of life. i cannot retrained the general but the work does not stop in my commitment to be involved in these ideas will not stop. i will continue in the cause of liberty and justice for all. [applause] sharing with you is the highest office in a the land and the most powerful. thank-you very much. [applause]

and done

still read we produce dade documentary covering the issue of the veterans of the streets of california they have given their country and the fact that they are now living on the streets that we will talk about this issue we decided to make a documentary. i consider all those t use this as up platform to speak their voice to say that your generation deserves to be heard in government and it is sad better place to speak to issues.

but one is to look into the communities because they are the ones that you love and that you see the most if eric is an issue of fleecy happen every day on the street that you want to be a voice for your community >> now a look at the future of antipoverty policies under the trump administration. from the center for american progress, this is just over 90 minutes. [inaudible conversations]

want. >> hello and welcome. at this center for american progress the campaign to make america upgrade to again, unfortunately e has not even taken the oath ofat office and it has become more apparent the entire campaign was at eight and switch with real policies to crackdown on those trade practices and picking winners and losers and refusing to divest. he would campaign living wages but his cabinet is tycoon's hostile to working families and the public is

distracted of the dirty work that the swamp even the majority leader is looking at taking coverage away from 22 million americans to cancel nutrition assistance all this while proposing to give tax they're coming on multiple fronts with their not standing by who will be interviewing the cat one negative with that president and where do they go from here?

>> tood morning. >> hello. s now what? >> is that your first question? now i think we have to haul donald trump accountable for working-class families for the agenda that is bin employed so far. there was a lot of promises. as the advocate for the families that were struggling but so far we have seen that they in effect includes but then we

should try to advocate for those families. >> is interesting to distinguish and they would give the ultimate terror bands break so weird to pick up from their of he did mention mention raising medicare and us

but this issue to melt the debate they will lead taken now been replaced three years later it is relatively unprecedented with this policy change in one year into wait for the answerer after the next deflection because issue wanted to a precisely after the big girl. in bad meantime 10 to put

these into chaos after the bill has been issued. but we think of voters are effective but that washa priced out with a will start collapsing so with the steven health care fda need we have teeeleven hundred stories in those areas i at health care now but this is not a policy which debates into the election.

but to consider ourselves. it is good too low with the agenda because the furor of persian and they are coming home to roost for period numerous very sick one. i do think he was bluffing but and then could the if

they amplified his or her voice would say over and over for that college of the center than why didn't thosese working-class white voters hear that message? is that the democratic agenda of? also finished just generic change are they satisfied with that status quo? >> so with any close question like this facing a multitude of things and that are relatively clear to me that is pointed out that

allotted people were not voting on the historic issues up. then i take that point perhaps the progressives are a poll candidates are with the changed message. there is 1 million reasons you can't point to but for n us going for word does goal has to be that democrats are the minority party to be really clear with economics to change the system. and to have that in coming administration. and with those cabinet appointments with treasury.

end with at record opposing to make people old drive harder. >> i was actually find by taking his workers to long but i cannot believe -- think of the differing case but people did not take seriously what he was saying during the election that could have been a blessing because a lot of americanse were surprised to wake up to the trumpet ministrations with that agenda on economics also he betrayed

those promises. >> headed into the next election but is very tough for the democrats filicide 2018 gubernatorial electionso to will give a chance for this opposition. so how can the democrats improve in the short term blacks medicare against privatization and social security and taking health care away from the 20 million but beyond that, what needs improvement ? how can they craft a stronger and more ambitious agenda? >> we will have additional thoughts on this later this week by dow review in is

that we are putting forwardour i forward, of redo need to claim the the homme mantel of reform of politics. and in that space we have to argue to things. that we have an agenda thatha will speak to voters and their economics making their lives better much more than you could offer with a signed contract with the republicans but also to focus on how to improve on their daily lives. one of the things that donald trump and showed us was a very clear message i will improve for life first is a more complicated answer

about wages and cost is a challenge and that is what we are working on now for the future. >> my concern on that front is that trump did talk about preserving social security bet it wasn't if you would respond in a more nuanced way to globalization or automation with the transition but the nuanced response is it comes across as something like sari. >> but i do take your point of little bit harder. but the reality is i am proud of the work. and we have talked about this before of the challenges of the

middle-class squeeze but i also take the pointks sometimes the clear answer is it is easier than the 10-point plan. and allied the voters voted for him because he is different than a politician not making money from people himself, that message was almost immediate be slid by of the transition period. if you told people have time most cabinet members would be donors to him not just a billionaires' but that would have given some people pause

>> so i wonder, he explicitly said during the election i have milk thee system i have ripped off i have put politicians into my little palm. he has said that. again and again. he also said what did joke so i wonder if there will be a similar dynamic on these cabinet picks? maybe these same types of voters to abide be arguments with the corporate connections to show the actual priorities. >> and i think that is a t fair question. if you look at uh part and

how have to use the system and now i will take my knowledge and work for free. that is the book but it isthe st using the system to work. >> q. are absolutely right pet but this populism is on the rise with this election thes and then just to ensure that they could control the level of power in our country saw

i think we have to see to be in support the but they will do it and putting it means some to advocate for working families by ensuring they get though wages that they need, protected in the workplace for the entire philosophy.is popul whether popular or not that it does not meet the needs of families and that is upit to the public.

>> are there some perils ahead with democratic unity? with those senators in the red states, i wonder if there will be a temptation on their part to not draw as hard of a line as the leadership may want? if he goes forward with privatizing medicare and then go for with thego obamacare appeal chuck schumer said to me that they would not participate of the obamacare replacement so will that be a temptation for the democrats to go along? but the infrastructure in isaak problem because you

may have some democrats who want that photo op. >> guess. i think the issue in is be affordable care act is the perfect example. i was pleased to see you sarai schumer talk about getting at democrats together so over the nextt couple of weeks so are months if they do pass repeal and replace which inducing failed to as every member of congress can achieve the affordable cataract and it is unjust might you go what 90 percent of americans but the reality of that is if they do

repealed and replaced you will see unraveling in the market but then i dunno if you can say i am part ofof thought problem but then it is up to the republicans and medicare in is another example even in those red states because no american thought privatizing was part of the debate. nobody expected that to happen so they did not take it seriously as an option. so that can infrastructure depends on what was proposed so far to offer that alternative. so my view is that even in

the last couple of weeks we have seen with these proposals to run do that social safety net and is not governing for the whole country but to offer that alternative it would be much clearer and easier. >> can i asked more with the scenario with the others are from in chaos but they will try to replace with something that has much fewer protections but that that point to not support any replacement there might be a role for progressives i

dunno with their appeal obamacare replacement is but one. >> absolutely. obviously the next few months we will be focused on fighting off and over the are really basic issues like but they can offer clear alternatives. pet those private companies they are hedged funds to

introduce down into a market with those tolls and fees their victims that the taxpayers are paying through the tax credit and the higher fees if is much better to have that corrective method. that had p. zero bus - - robust infrastructure package and one of the ironies with the programs and fire wished -- in additional to little to help wild batches but what we should do more around the country is it gives people an opportunity to lay out

but it is easier to offer that alternative. >> guess. >> so the names of the democratic party of what you call that robust expenditure plan. >> think about where br8 years ago this time. with a new league elected democratic president i fink with the minority of thehe country and has a done anything to be the leader for the whole country with

the cabinet appointments and language and what he says everyday is clear he is trying for half of the country. and not even that but to provide one vision that those democratic leaders told these core values. >> you will see intentionally racially charged comments via the day he say they struck me with the voting rights advocates that i talk to as us signal as a major wave of voter suppression and we have seen that that in addition to that persecution of muslims. >> what about the undocumented?

>> so this will be an occasion for the democrats to mount a very strong stand of minorities. >> yes. there has spent a debate on a little bit and the democratic party from identity politics and the oil wells for economic justice. to me, the struggle for civil rights and then to turn that back up to those groups that are under attack . so that ever to disenfranchised minority voters.

and to prove to people and then we are called on to do both and also the political reform grounds and in the past you put together a strategy like the bobby kennedy coalition with working-class families of all colors and never turn your back on the struggles. and he rationalize is race>> hen and created a lot of finger between different groups but

i do think there is a lot that we can reach from the economic and political reform. >> i and agree it is largely a false choice couldn't to crafts have a behalf of the minority groups there is that economic argument. >> absolutely teefour . .