alleged meteorologist -- administration so we're trying to look through the time tames and determine what is do-able and not appropriate. i'm not at lisch to discuss -- liberty to discuss our considerations. i will see what how cooking everybody. >> host: would do you think tom wheeler's leg guess will be -- legacy will be. >> guest: aan open questions elm ited tied to the decisions made. we have a very friendly relationship, personally, we disagreed on the both process and the outcome, and i imagine we're going to get a chance to review the outcome side, and hopefully improve the process. so, i'm troubled that -- after many years i've been there three years, will have been there three years, that some of the legacy in terms of the policy

adopted and the activities will no longer be in existence. that's a lost opportunity the commission. the things that can be accommodated in a bipartisan way. and i just don't see that occurring and so it's -- to announce what the -- the legacy may be how to improve commission function so is we don't do that again. >> what do you think of president-elect trump? >> ...

. >> eliminate a number of regulations that no longer are needed. every time we are moving forward, every month we are having to take three items that have new regulatory burdens on providers and users, on activities and if we had to strike to regulations to do so which can be done, we have a lot of regulations that can go, we'd have a much more effective and efficient agency and more opportunities for providers to service. >> what's your view of the new energy and commerce committee chairman? >> that's an institution i love.it's where i had my first employment. i think chairman walden, i've worked with him in the past in his capacity as

subcommittee chair. and the congress had a wonderful number of peopleto pick from , chairman walden is a great outcome for everybody. i imagine were going to have a lot of communication given his past subcommittee. >> media ownership is number issue, do you see that popping up? >> i do and it's probably quiet today. it gets to one of those instances where it's a lost opportunity. it's one of those instances where you have a statutory obligationand i think we dropped the ball on our statutoryobligation and in doing so, my views were ignored . we had an opportunity to improve . for instance, just the media ownership, our limitations that existed from the johnson and nixon administration and

in those instances, we had the opportunity to eliminate some, the chairman said he was willing to do so. we had another signal from another commissioner that he was willing to do so but only if all three current majority commissioners support were to be adopted and obviously one objective so the policy was not sustained. i think we can do it in a thoughtful way, with no media ownership limitations but protecting the diversity of competition of interests. >> one more question on the net neutrality entitled to, you talked about a more bipartisan commission. how do you revoke title to and perhaps initiate another principle in a bipartisan administration? >> two parts, one is chairperson and the agenda they choose but if this is a course of action that is selected, i suspect i wouldn't be surprised if the new minority will have

trouble in some activities we are doing but at the same time i think we can build a better process going forward so i think you can, there's only so much agreement were going to have a net neutrality and other substantive things we thought about for a long time and there's an opportunity in a long-standing place from congress to consider what they would like to do and their bipartisan negotiations on this issue. there is some room to find an agreement, i think congress is trying to do so but i understand there's some tough couple months ahead and i'm doing some policies that other people have common views on but i think from that we can at the same time do good policy, remove regulatory and building commission going forward. >> one of the areas that we talked about during the campaign that affected you all was the time warner deal.

do you have any reactions to that >> i never make any comments regarding pending or proposed mergers . i just think it's in the best interests to make a decision that potentially you have to make a decision in cases that are put before me. here i will actively review whatever put before us by the hearing to make a decision at the appropriate time. >> there's a lot of concern about cyber security and there has been for a while and it's getting a particular amount of attention with what happened during the campaign. does the administration have a role in? >> i think it's an issue that i think congress has been aggressive on in trying to find the right solutions. i think other agencies as well are doing so. i see the role as limited by the government communications act of 1934 and while i do believe the government has a

role to monitor and potentiallyprovide additional fixes in this space, they are authorized by law to do , and they been troubled by the solution in my opinion is not to do what we think is in the best interest of the law, that the appropriate action is due have a beneficial impact on the case and present an argument to the congress and let them make a decision representing the american people whether they would like to authorize the commission to do so. until then, the congress does not have action in this space. in fairness, the entities that we regulate to do are doing a wonderful job in protecting their best interest because they are seeking to provide the best experience to the consumer so they work as hard as possible to prevent any intrusions or instances of cyber security problematic circumstance for their networks and they are probably in a better position than we could ever be or other agencies with what they

might be able to solve. >> commissioner o'reilly, in the two minutes we had left, about an update on the auction that's been going on for nine months? can you give us anything? >> i expect that the good question, i don't know anything. they don't share the information with regards to what you see on the website, it's the information i have. we've not providedany information on how or what's happening or who's participating . i think that's for our own protection, that prevents us from moving markets , we have an opportunity to comment about whose bidding or not bidding. other parts i think is probably, they just don't share that stuff with the non-chairman so that's probably problematic and you can improve it a little bit but i don't have anything to share.i think the intent of auction will do its course and we will have to see what the outcome is. >> is there pending? >> there is to some extent in

so many stages. it set up and you do the calendar out and see what the end date is. we have to start when we started, we do have an end date in the statute which was supposed to be received but i'd like to believe that some of this decisions which i disagree that went into the formation of our option, i'd like to believe we can have a successful, i'm rooting for a successful option. the other is the one effective way for the spectrum will also address incumbents that occupy the space, how do you address that? i worked on the statute underlying the commissions activities as an advisor to members in the senate at the time and so i think it's time and so i think it's something that hopefully will be successful, i couldn't tell you or guess where that and what will be or where it's going to go the scc democrats were interested in regulation and it doesn't look like it's going to make it, do you think the

republicans could take that issue up and if so what could you all do? in some regards this is a long debate that's been happening closer to 15 years and in my previous role i had an opportunity to examine, i'm not sure that the market passed us by. the developments in this space have been ready important. the institution had ignored some of those in a draft version that was well talk about, moving to find our roles and making a complete 180 that it previously had had considered a lot of the reason for reform as we were making those changes no one knew about so i respect that the commission should take activity here but i'm open to good arguments and keep an open mind on every issue that comes before us. >> michael o'reilly is a republican commissioner on communications commission, david, a senior leader reporter . >> tonight on c-span2 we have

booked tv on prime time with a look at finalists of the national book award. starting at 8:30p.m., books on the vietnam war . the divide between red and blue america. in 1971 attica prison uprising and that history of racism in america.booked tv in prime time, each night this week. >> this week on c-span, electors vote for president of the united states and coverage in illinois, pennsylvania, michigan and virginia at 8 pm eastern. tuesday night at eight, jerry greenfield, cofounder of ben and jerry's ice cream talks about responsible business practices. >> the idea that we couldn't sell enough ice cream from the summer in vermont that forced us to look for other markets. >> wednesday night, former

vice president dick cheney and secretary leon panetta on thefuture of the defense department under president trump . >> i see the challenges are very great and we have unfortunately over the course of the last many years done serious damage to our capabilities and to be able to meet those threats. >> living in that. there were a lot of flashpoint and the new administration is going to have to look at that kind of world and obviously defined the policies that we need in order to deal with that but then develop a policy to confront that kind of world. >> first at 8 pm eastern, look at the career of vice president mike pence. >> and amidst the shifting sands of contemporary culture and lawwe have stood without apology for the sanctity of life, the importance of marriage and the freedom of religion . >> on friday night beginning at eight, farewell speeches and tributes to several outgoing centers including

harry reid, robert foster, kelly ayotte and dan coats. this week in prime time on c-span. >> join us on tuesday, january 3 for live coverage of the opening day of the new congress. watch the official swearing-in of the new and reelected members of the house and senate and the election of the speaker of the house . our all day long coverage of the days event from capital hill begins at 10 pm eastern on c-span and c-span.org or you can listen to it on the free c-span radio app. republican national committee communications director sean pfizer spoke with politico after coverage of the presidential campaign and president-elect donald trump relationship with the news media. this is about an hour. >> it's great to be here today. good evening everybody, welcome to please and

cocktails, i'm jay sherman here with anna palmer. we'd like you all to be joining us here and those sitting in on c-span and on our live stream, could you believe it, here we are. >> tonight's program we welcome sean spicer, chief strategist and communications director for the rnc. you can applaud. we're very excited. hopefully he's had a fascinating career in washington. he has a lot to talk about the white house and the election, he's in the middle of all the big decisions that donald trump is making. before we get to the program i'd like to ask a special thank you to bank of america for their tremendous import of this series for many years . >> absolutely, bank of america has been a true partner, making conversations like this available for all

of us to participate in so we thank them for their ongoing support and now, without further delay, please join us in welcoming sean spicer. [applause] piece bearing gifts, apparently. if you so much for doing this . >> thank you sean. sean, i guess you have some ... >> would you like to start? >> tonight is too important an event. it's seven days from infested us. so we can error some grievances tonight but more importantly it's your birthday. >> the big 31. >> i thought you were age 23. >> i wanted to make sure you were appropriately, that i gave you stuff that politico could use so we started off with a republican

bag. so that every day you are reminded of who's in charge. i wanted you and anna to have something to drink in . >> i like it. >> very nice. >> it would replace the politico one. we've got a couple stickers for you. >> perfect. >> something for your car. and then this is a very nice time that you can wear as you roam around the capital. >> it is another republican tie>> there's a theme here . >> put all that stuff in here . >> i don't really want to wear a tie right now. >> fair enough, this is the last one and it's something very special and i wish i had

brought an extra but i'm sure i can getone. this i hope you enjoy and you can definitely , you must wear it. >> it says make politico great again? >> for the record, i believe politico is great again but because sean is here i will offer it up. >> before we get started ... >> if you haven't noticed from the gifts, and, why don't you take it away? >> as a reminder to our audience online, if you'd like to see the interactive conversation, jake has the ipad so if you have a comment about how we are doing over these 45 minutes, would you please to us and we will track them here on stage so we will get started with that opening. it's hard to follow. >> that is a tough act to follow. >> i think the elephant in the room is the worst kept secret in town.

that you've had some modest disagreements with politico, to say the least so we wanted to clear the air at the beginning of the conversation with a new administration, were about to embark on a new year. >> i'm there. and i think in all seriousness, i think and i speak on behalf of the president-elect when i say that we understand and respect the role the press plays in a democracy, it is healthy and important but it's a two-way street and i don't think everyone in the media is bad. i don't think every reporter is bad but i think that in the case of, and i welcome the elevation at here at politico, i think she is working hard to try to write a lot of wrongs and i give her some props for that and i think time will tell that i have a problem with how

politico is engaged in covering politics, especially our side. i think it is to happy, it is click debate in many cases and it's devoid of facts. and i think you look for example at just today ... >> the final fact. >> this is every story politico is on the gop this year. this is the tweet, politico: in theory, 37 electors good denied trump 270 electoral votes. that is like in theory, this building could float away and go to mars. that's not journalism and i get that but it's not that serious thought about what's going on in the election. and i think that yesterday you had another person to out dumping unbelievably folder which i won't repeat on this stage and there's no story in politico about their own employee writing and saying stuff about the

president-elect of the united states. it was disgusting, reprehensible, unacceptable. >> let me interject one second. he is no longer working here. >> but there was no coverage in politico of this and i think that if a republican jay walks, it's a front-page story. if little johnny at thomas jefferson middle school says something inappropriate, the rnc gets a phone call and asks are how are we going to respond to this? should he step down? and i think that if you are going to engage in that, there's a similar level of responsibility that you have to hold your own people accountable and put out a story and say politico fire this person because this behavior is unacceptable. you have a media reporter, use them. though i think i'm willing to in my capacity at the rnc,

engage with reporters that want to engage in serious discussion but sometimes we are on the wrong side, we are wrong and when we are we should be called out for it but there's not one story in this passage saying something positive about the rnc, not a single headline and i think when you look at the fact that the rnc spent $175 million in data, put together the best ground operation that i believe in politico history and everything becomes a story about what we did wrong or how you came up short but wecould have done this better .i think at some point you've got to give us credit for a few things here and there orat least be willing to cover it from a more responsible way . [applause] >> fairenough . >> and similarly, i think that just like you say republicans make mistakes, i think reporters make mistakes and not only at politico, across the spectrum.

you can see that probably quicker. >> not for enough times. >> i think it's a news organization's responsibility to take responsibility and to , when there's a mistake made to correct it and i think it's what we do. >> one of the things important to me is you can't put the genie back in the bottle. when youtweet out the headline and it says xy and z and we are going to look into this , >> could i get some credit for drinking out of the trunk top ? >> we are not done. >> it's good quality. >> you're going to get much more good-quality too. a lot of results. but i think that the problem is that it speaks first, fix later and that's not acceptable. i said there are times when news is breaking and i get that and i've lived in this world long enough that you're

competing against others, fair enough but when you get it wrong , you can't go back and take away what people have seen and say how many times is something shared incorrectly and on friday, tuesday, two days ago, there's a story that reporter in politico puts out saying sean spicer disinvited twitter from the text. first of all, i'd love to say i have power to diss invite someone from a meeting with the president-elect but i don't. and they were never invited and i was never asked my politico whether that happened and yet they put that story back in the bottle and say , and so once it's out there, it's out there. that's what i think is unfortunate is that the attempt to quickly put up headlines and be provocative is not good journalism. understood? >> can we move on to some other topics? >> i can keep going. [overlapping conversation]

>> we've only got 45 minutes left but we have a lot of things i think you want to talk about and we want to talk about so let's talk about some things in the news recently. a couple hours ago, president obama gave his pre-i'm going to hawaii press conference. next year it will be the pre-mara longo press conference. and he said and i think it's been reported that the cia and fbi and director of national intelligence now are in unison that they believe russia interfered in the election. do you think that's true? >> i'm not an intel person. i'mnot ready on this information but i think there's two different things. one is look, i've changed my gmail six times in the last six months . i think that there are hackers out there trying to do things, sure. do i think foreign governments, russia and

others try to probe us sites, govern them, otherwise? sure. russia, china. we do it, they do it but i think the problem i have with this story and the narrative that out there about russia is a few things. number one, this wouldn't have happened if hillary clinton didn't have a secret server. she didn't follow protocol. >> none of the hacking would have happened? >> a lot of the stuff that is in discussion. number two, the stuff they wrote was inappropriate and they are basically saying, i'm not excusing hacking. for everyone out there saying, like i said, there's multiple pieces to this story but they wrote what they wrote. now they're basically saying it's russia's fault that someone found out that i said bad things about hillary clinton or people in her orbit. that being said, third, no

one talks about this but the wall street journal had it right yesterday. the dnc security measures weren't up to snuff.they tried by all accounts to cross, a lot of political entities and the dnc. people are mad in the democratic world, they should be mad at the dnc it department. >> one of the things, you knew this in the cycle before he went tothe transition before donald trump one area what do you know , the rnc was hacked. do you explain the situation? >> there's two things important to know. got a call last friday night from a couple insiders of the washington post. and they said they thought we have sources in the intel world that are saying that because both institutions were hacked, and they only allowed information to go out on the dnc that clearly russia intended to influence

the outcome of the election. i said okay, well, we didn't get hacked so if we didn't get hacked then the premise is wrong and the conclusion must be false. so we got the washington post, we explained some stuff and they said there enough. the new york times went ahead with it and now we see it reportedfrom cnn and washington journal saying our son was probed but our systems were such that we weren't hacked .>> what do you mean my probe?>> this is the second point.people throw around two terms that are important. one is hacking is actually penetrating the system and getting in and being able to extract data. right. probing is when you are just standing out there doing what's called fishing exercises, sending out all the emails saying what your gmail password, there you go. and the prince of sultan wants to give us this. and when you open those, that's a phishing attempt and that's how they get in. which we've learned from the

dnc is one of the ways they were able to hack into their system so probing is just been bouncing off the system trying to find ways to get in. it's almost likeknocking on the door and see which ones open, going around the house and seeing which window is open . they tried to break in but they didn't enter and in the case of the dnc, they found an open window and went in area that's a different thing and mark! is twofold. we weretold that the conclusion was based on those facts . so if the facts are not true then the conclusion must be faulty. the other thing that's interesting is on november 17, the director of national intelligence went up to the house intelligence committee and made it clear and open testimony that the connection to russia, and i've got testimony here if you want to view that vote. it's politico story on it but that fact, he says in open testimony that it's inconclusive that russia was

behind the wikileaks. so that fact has been devoid of this conversation. all i'm saying is you have an open testimony stating it and yet we are called to say why can't you just accept this fact? why isn't the dni'stestimony being brought into the discussion . >> he says they concluded that russia did metal. >> but there's a difference between them probing and then affecting the outcome and there is zero evidence that they affected the outcome. the rnc was calledto dhs and they said to us before the election , they called us and they said we want to be very clear, there's no way that you can pack voting machines and have an effect on the outcome. our voting systems are so desperate that we use, paper ballots here, there is no way that you could pack or change the outcome of the election and they were asking for our assistance to make sure that

to the extent that we could help reassure the american public that we believe in the integrity of the voting system and yet right after the election you have john podesta and david brock suddenly going ahead and getting electors to change their vote and calling into question the outcome of the election. it's ironic that it's been who are doing what they accuse off of and is now us on defensive with the media. [applause] that's my staff. >> let's move on. one of the things, let's be a little more forward-looking. this morning we went into a little more detail about this operation, what it would look like under donald trump. and you said quote, i think we have to look at everything. i don't think these briefings need to be daily, i don't know that that all needs to be on camera. you worked in the bush press shop. what model are you looking like when you make comments

like that. >> if you think about that comment for what it's worth in terms of having them on camera which is something mike mccrory thought was a mistake and needs to be raised salmon and i think it's not a question of saying this is going to happen or this is not going to happen but i think in washington too often we say this is how it's always been done, let's keep it going. there's a dialogue that can happen with the white house correspondents association and say what would make these more informative? what is a metal better tool to have a more adult level as opposed to having, again, maybe they come out similar. maybe there's tweaks that make it more accessible. maybe there's things that allow members of the public to ask the white house press office something but for too long i think we had a very stale operation which is all of the mainstream media folks get front row seats and it's a question of here are the broadcast networks, you're the washington post and new york times. what about some of the conservative media having some of the price seats in there? what about some of the top

bloggers being able to come in? i think that's a conversation worth having. there's a need to at least have a conversation and discuss it and figure out what would make things more open for as long as you guys talk about transparency, let's have a discussion. >> would be in your front row? >>again, i haven't thought this through . >> in donald trump's road. >> maybe it's a rotatingpool. maybe it's first come first serve . >>. [laughter] >> but look, all i'm saying is that there should be a conversation. it shouldn't be like hey, you're the status quo, let's keep going. that's the problem of what goes on in this town is that this is the way it's always happened and what donald trump represents is someone who comes and says let's get it done, let's question the status quo, let's and business as usual and let's make change. >> picking of that. >> you have a staff here, they should be clapping every time.

>> in terms of that though, you talk about business as usual. one of the things, we were at president obama's house for the christmas party. >> i was not. >> do you think will keep those long-held trip traditions, the gridiron dinner, the correspondents association dinner. >> i've got to be honest with you, do you think that's what we're focused on right now? >> it's not but i think if you look at the people and the pace in which he has put together a cabinet, that's where the focus is. look what he did with boeing, the tech meeting the other day. this is a guy focused on getting things done, not worried about whether or not we change the color of the drapes or what parties were going to put onhe wants to put on a party for america and offer real change but look, you can say what you want but our focus is not whether or not we're throwing the gridiron dinner . >> the role of the white

house communications shop should be decidedly different because donald trump has the ability and has been remarkably successful at communicating . he sends stocks all over the place and we talked about a company. >> what do you think as you kind of envision the next four years or even the next six months,what do you envision, how do you envision a press job changing? is there a changing role now that he's able to and has been successful in tweeting ? >> absolutely. he's got 17.6 million people on twitter, a number of 's of millions on facebook and instagram. he has the ability like no one, not just politicians but i would argue no one else to really affect, communicate in the most effective direct way that anybody's ever seen and i think that's a very powerful tool that will be used in the presidency to communicate directly with the american people . >> where does that leave someone like you? >> again, i don't think it's a one-stop shop. you just go to your way for four years.

but it's a powerful tool. i think he's going to use that as part of a whole arsenal of communications tools but you saw that, there are new and evolving technologies that he's utilized whether it'sfacebook live or twitter , instagram, but there's a way that again, this isn't about bypassing the press. it's about saying that it's not a single avenue to communicate with the american people. >> what do you think was the best to? >> to date? that's a great question. i have not analyzed them. i think the stuff he did around carrier was very effective. if you look at it effectively and say at the end of the day, he goes out there, talks about a company's name and its holiday season, there are 1000 people and their families who from thanksgiving to christmas now can breathe a sigh of relief that he did it area i think

that, the pressure you put on them to understand how important this was was great. he means what he says and the end of four years, people and a lot of people, i know this was in a tech meeting the other day, aside from the people who are on his payroll, i don't think anybody in that room voted for him but i tell you that when they walked out of that room, they were unbelievably impressed with his desire to get things done and get it moving quickly and not be bureaucracy for an answer. >> so who do you think covers trump fairly? >> not politico. >> there's a couple reporters here and there but there's folks at bloomberg that have done a good job. [laughter] >> .,.,.

>> there are people that have written good stories from time to time. i've seenstuff out of the wall street journal. there's a lot of conservative media that despite it being conservative media have done a good job of being objective and writing straight up stories . so, but i've seen good packages here and there from differentoutlets but i think objectively there's a lot of them that definitely, it's not even a question of, a lot of conservatives talk about bias, it's a question of fairness and having facts right . >> one of the questions are colleagues crowd sourced our questions tonight and one of the things the white house reporters were interested in was about access to the building. right now reporters can wander around, make the press shop and talk about hornets if they want to. there's been topics during the bush ministration of closing that out for a little bit. is that something you guys are thinking about yet? >> i think it would be premature to talk about that kind of aspect because i don't have the authority to have that discussion .

it would be highly inappropriate for me to answer that. >> do you think the access is important that they have in that role? >> sure, the question is how do you define access. is it walking in the press secretary's office all the time, is it access to the workplace where there's key staff? i know the obama administration has been from the white house press for, i think what is actually, i mean is, i'm not trying to be coy is as long as we get our phone calls returned because if you talk about access, i thought the folks who have with this in last several years and there are correspondents who only show up key things so is it, is there may be a better way to have an open dialogue? but frankly, one of the things that's important is it's not just the media. maybe it is inviting more people from the public to be involved and doing things on reddit, the ana, doing facebook live, townhall.

where you are actually involving the public in the discussion and not limiting it and saying the only people who can ask members of the white house are members of the press corps. >> but do you think press conferences are important? >> sure they are. i think interaction with the press is a healthy part ofthe democracy . >> you been around db for a while and have seen a lot of press secretaries . and the bush white house, in which you worked, in the obama white house and there's the style, ari fleischer was an aggressive press secretary area that's how he seen. he was seen as an aggressive smart guy. someone like carty was a little more laid-back. your boss, under his opinion on josh, other twists on the speech, does it seem like what you think is an effective strategy for someone in that role? >> that's one of thethings , you guys know that there is like this west wing of the

show version of what a press secretary does which is stand up at a podium for 12 hours and on tv at night and as you guys know, 95 percent is off-camerahelping to facilitate the press get the answers to what they need . i think the best thing a press secretary but a press shop can do is to make sure they are aggressively getting the facts and figures out and shaping stories, working with reporters to get it right. it's a two-way street and i recognize that. if we don't get the facts out there, and that's on us so i think it is incumbent on any press shop to make sure that they are educating and informing reporters. one of the things when i groups of up-and-coming press secretaries is they say don't secretary a press secretary and by that me i mean, too many signs i will see someone that says my boss got a call from politico so i had them call anna back. that's the secretary, you

ruin the message say call this person back. the question i have is did you educate the reporter? did you say i read this study that got put out, the gpa said the following. here's why we think this is an important decision or here's why i think sometimes the narrative is incorrect on this. have you done your job to work with the reporter to inform them to the best of your ability? if you've done that, that's the healthiest thing that a press shop can do is make sure we are getting the facts and story out to the best of our ability. >> how do you see your role? you have competitive exchanges with people on the campaign trail, myself included. is that the role of the fighting back, is that how you see it? >> it depends, if there is a conversation and it's a true conversation with the reporter who says i'd like to do a story onthat, tell me what you think about this, what do you have for the good folks on your shop , but at

the end of the day we come out and we don't like the story, that's one thing. too often the phone call i get is can you give me a quote, we're writing a story that says the following. that's not journalism. i'm not going to hand over quotes to legitimize the story that attacks me and that's where i think too often i have a problem and i'll go aggressively at reporter which is not reporting. that's just collecting and cutting and pasting. i thinkthat's the problem too often where i need a quote, my deadline is in 10 minutes . all we're doing is adding the legitimacy to a cut and paste exercise . [applause] that's the staff also. there's a couple politico reporters. >> let's talk about your role now. in 2011, is that right? >> that's a long time. >> it's a long time. >> was about, you've now been up innew york , 11 nights at marriott this year. so, can i borrow some?

describe your, describe your policy interaction with. how does he consume media, what's he like behind-the-scenes? i always believe more people that can get to know him, the better. he is unbelievably caring and gracious and you laugh but you look at the people who have been around him control tower, 10, 15, 20 years . he takes a very personal interest in people's lives and i don't want to get into it but i will say that he has hung out with me as well he will who call and check on you. he will show concern and i know the exterior sometimes is the tough guy that is just a successful businessman but he has got a true concern

about not just the people around him but when you're in meetings with him, potential cabinet secretaries, business leaders, his constant question is how do i get that done? he is so motivated to make things better for this country that it's something that frankly escapes the narrative that out there and it is something i wishmore people can see on a one-on-one basis . >> you bring up an interesting question, why don't we see that? >> it's something that the town halls with the family, there are consistently more opportunities we are looking for to do that but it's just it's a side of him that i think as president, a lot of times he doesn't, as much as he is in the camera, there's a lot of moments that you want some privacy, that he wants to have a discussion with the family is going through tough times or an employee has experienced the loss and as much as he appreciates the spotlight, he has a very private side to

him that is very, very under known if you will. >> tell us a little bad about you, you are in front of the cameras a lot in your public persona. you were here in spirit island, you went to connecticut college, got a masters at the naval process, what your washington story? >> i was a japaneselanguage, i was going to be a major in japanese language . >> that's where the story ends. >> but you were a japanese language ... >> i went to college and i saw it was in the early 90s when i went to college in the late 80s and japan was coming on the scene as the next powerhouse and i thought, i grew up in a very working-class family . my parents struggled to help get me through college and i thought i could make money, if i learned japanese, and

assess the economy, iwas the kind of kid that was constantly selling something, greeting cards, all that stuff back to magazines . every neighbor had me selling now but i thought, so i went in for the first couple of years, it was an hour and a half every morning and i frankly didn't enjoy. i took a government class and i had done a little of this in high school and i really felt challenged.i enjoyed the discussionabout the role of government and politics . i felt energized and volunteering on the campaign in 1992, i volunteered on connecticut's second district campaign. we lost by 2300 votes in a racewe literally 50 grand . and then in 1994, they hired me back to run one of the field operations, to field operations, 54 towns and cities. we lost by two votes on election night . and so i came down here in

turn for the house ways and means committee, we had just taken over congress. we worked at night on the senatorial committee doing research. we used to do this thing called coding where we go through the record and type it in to a database and we would get i think $.95 per article . i worked from 4 pmto midnight at the senatorial committee in a basement that is now a gym . and then did everything i could to get a job in the press and finally, everyone kept saying you'd be really good at this, youhave no experience . >> a real irony, right? >> sorry. >> hope that wasn't my cup. there it was. >> didn't break. >> of course it won't. you cannot get over. >> bottom line, there was a guy, a poster that i was affiliated with in 1996 and

he said there's a race in western pennsylvania. the guy is in a primary,he's not going to lose the primary, do you want to do it and i was like yes . so i moved to washington pennsylvania. to work for a guy out there. >> who was that? >> gary welsh, he dropped out of the primary right before but at the time, this is important, i whatever it was, was for three months the campaign manager and press secretary. another pollster who was affiliated with the media consultant called and said frank is running for reelection in new jersey. he's looking for a campaign manager. >> i'm acampaign manager . >> and that kicked off so then i think i've worked now for 11 different members of congress but we all enjoy the hunt and i think one of the

things i like is at the end of the day you've either got the story killed or you got it to come out the way you wanted it and if more, you got that but you know every single daywhere you stand . that attack was not the way you wanted, did you shake the story, did you lose? you have good days and bad days but every day you are fighting out there and i think you can be a legislative assistant and someone that's worked for a decade and have an amendment passing omnibus but for a lot of people that's their passion, they want that to happen. >> but you talk about press access to one of the things the trump campaign gained notoriety for was for banning reporters , banning outlets. politico was one of them but you said i think that your not going to happen. >> there's a big difference between a campaign where it is a private venue using private funds and a

government entity and i think we have a respect for the press when it comes to the government but that is something youcan't ban an entity from . conservative, liberal or otherwise, that's what makes a democracy a democracy versus a dictatorship so there's a vastly different model when it comes to government and what should be accepted and that's on both sides. >> talk about that interaction, the press corps and the trump campaign has had a contentious relationship but as far as the press pool, you guys are working a little more collaboratively? >> yes and you are seeing that. we've got a press pool that travels with him now. >> alongside him, not with him. >> again, it's unprecedented. >> i'll behonest, i don't know where you would sit on the plane . he's in the middle. but to the extent that wehave

brought the press along , i think part of it to is that there is a balance and i think all you hear from the press is we want, we want and there's a balance between your available to see certain things but i get it, you want to see everything and you want to meet at every meeting, i like to be at some of your meetings area but you go that's not so. so i think when it comes to government access, that's one thing versus what happens in the private entity. >> how gracious of a media consumer is trump? >> i'd say very. you see it in terms of how he reacts. he watches a lot, he reads a lot. obviously he's ontwitter quite a bit . but i think, look, i do think that on the whole you look at coverage that he gets and honestly a lot of times it's hit first and ask later.

itis not on balance their . and there are hits that he takes that it's just constantly, there's almost no end to what he could do to satisfy the press corps in terms of knowledge and information and there's a point at which nothing is good enough . >> one of the things that, let's talk about some of those hit. >> why not? >> the drain the swamp message he talked about. his cabinet is made up, and these are people that have impressive careers but he ran his final add about a global financial conspiracy and then has built his cabinet with several peoplefrom wall street . and again, that's not a commentary on wall street but if it matches what you said on the campaign and what he's doing now ...

>> just because you worked somewhere, for example, you take a guy like rex tillerson. the guy grew up and started working at age 8. he lived in a house that had one bedroom, slept on the couch through college. he's now head of exxon. you want to talk about a guy who knows success, who knows what it's like to be dirt poor, who now knows what it's like to be successful and you look at the countries that he is in, the work they are doing, he's unbelievably qualified and he brings a perspective that is so outside the box but yet the focus is on his network. it's not like all these people ... i get it but i think the problem that i have is it's always the question of how much are they worth, not what are they qualified to do? >> it's the disconnect between what he campaigned on and what he's done. >> but that's what i'm getting at, these people are all committed to his agenda. they're not coming in thanks

for the job, i'm going to do what i want to do. youunderstand in a trump administration you are there to advance his agenda and get things done and believe me when i tell you if you don't get things done, he's going to replace you . >> how long does someone have to get things done before they replace them ? >> i think he wants to hit the ground running. i don't think it, i know it. he wants to bring real change right away, day one. and that means getting things done, repairing the economy, getting job creation, reducing regulation. those things are going to happen they want. >> how long will it take to replace obamacare? >> a lot of that depends on what can be done by executive order and what can be done legislative and statutory. >> we are almost out of time. we don't want to ask you about your role, you've been here for a long time and there's been a lot of speculation that you will be the next press secretary so we will have the pleasure of dealing with you more in that role. is that something you are looking forward to or you are hoping to do? >> i appreciate the speculation but there's been no announcement and i

honestly meanness, until the president-elect makes a decision on any position and you've seen thiswith some of the candidate, you never get ahead of him. he makes the decisions and he has not made a decision . >> have you met with him? >> no. >> hannah and i've always though in thinking about writing the playbook and thinking about when we see speculation about cabinet secretaries, that ultimately are wrong, does that mean that you made a decision and has the decision change? >> it means, i think what happens in this process is that there are people who come in and make the case, either the potential candidate for members of the staff and believe he's going in a certain direction but i've never once seen him change his mind is that we they made a decision based on some reading of the tealeaves . but until he says hit send on that, it's not final. >> so you think it's just

speculation. >> i know it is. >> they react to something they took something away from that. >> yes, or the potential job candidate who's come in and believe that because of some sort of facial tick or whatever, that means this but no, until he makes a decision, it's not final. >> we have two questions, you are known at the rnc for wearing your uniform. no? >> when i have returned from the pentagon, i may take it off but there's a clear delineation between anything i've ever done for the navy and political work. when i walked into the office, and i changed immediately, yes. >> this is the most pressing question.

>> we didn't know this until today. >> i got several emails about this. >> it's not that. >> there's one question that everyone has been askingus to ask you . will you reprise your role as the easter bunny act the white house as you did when you worked under the bush administration? [overlapping conversation] tell us about the easter bunny to get started. >>give us the back story here. >> that's one i will definitely preface for . so i've been at usd are, my wifei think is in the audience . and i said you know, you know sarah armstrong is at this office and she decided i was like really, are you serious?

yes, how cool would that be? she was like yes. that should be the handler and she said yes. i will tell you though that the same costume you see has been around i think since kennedy. >> your kidding me. >> you're going to want to get in early. the early morning shift is where it's at. because i will tell you once the sun comes up, oh man. it's not a goodplace to be . >> we will leave it on that i think . >> sean, thank you so much. >> happy birthday. >> thank youfor coming in . [applause] >> coming to play, we appreciate your candor and we want to thank you here in the audience and the live stream for joining us and we will see you again at the bank of america for another edition

of the playbook series this is our last one of the year so stay tuned for 2017 sick around, there's cocktails, hors d'oeuvres and have a great evening . [applause] >>. [inaudible conversation]

>>. [inaudible conversation]

>>. [inaudible conversation]

>>. [inaudible conversation]

>>. [inaudible conversation] i think what i was saying earlier is that it's not just being prepared but letting people know in congress, i think too often we focus on the key, these sort of mainstream media types is fine area there are a great part of the media there's a lot more ways that you've

seen what's going on in participating in this democracy . >>. [inaudible] >> some people. and there's something that we give them a break but others that are not good. >> how do you get the cnn and the new york times? >> it depends on the individual authors. i don't want to paint anybody with the same brush. some are more fair than others. >> good to see you. [inaudible conversation]

>>. [inaudible conversation] >>. [inaudible conversation] >>.

>> the presidential inauguration of donald trump's friday,january 20 . c-span will have live coverage of all the days events and ceremonies. watch live on c-span and c-span.org and listen live on the free c-span radio app. >> attorney general loretta lynch sat down with reporters from politico to discuss her time at the justice department and the future of the department. here are a few minutes of the conversation.

>> your presumed successor that session, the senator for alabama, do you have a relationship with him? >> i met jeff atkins, he's a member of the judiciary committee that we have spoken on several occasions about the issues of the dayand so i certainly know the senator . >> so you disagree with him on most issues, you would be fair to say. >> i don't think i'm here to speculate about which way he's going to take the department and the people ask me that a lot and i think every attorney general is going to have to answer those questions for him. every attorney general is going to have to be held accountable for how they leave the department and for that, i've always had in my relationship with the press been important in that. i think the fourth estate is a key fixture in uncovering the priorities of the next ag but anyone who's going to be setting policy for the administration, i look forward to watching you guys

get into that debate. >> we look forward todoing it . >> more broadly, are there concerns that you have with the direction that trump has been known for his next administration, whether it be times using facts and figures that are actually accurate such as now with him saying the voter rate has spikes, does that larger lot at all? >> i think that every administration is going to have to find their footing on these issues area and i have always felt that the press is very helpful in doing that. and i think the benefit of actually being in office is that you do have access to a great wealth of information and i hope that whoever's in my chair, any of the chairs that are going to be setting policy will take it vantage of that and avail themselves of that as well as listen to

people. listen to people who have done this work and i know people ask about how important justice will change your shift and every ag in every administration's got their own policy and priorities but there is the beating heart of this department as opposed to career people who have dedicated to the commission who are dedicated to justice or committed to independence of the department of justice within any administration, and they stay on. they stay l on and they guide the ship so i have tremendous faith in them but i have faith in the american people. people come to us and they raise issues and concerns and they say we want doj involved in that, i take that seriously and that's not going to change but coming together over issues in ways we haven't seen since the civil rights movement in the 60s. we have not seen in my recollection since the first people protesting various issues that we've seen,

people who are marching in the streets whether it's police issues, whether it's in support of a proposal, the groups are young, they are old, multiracial . we're seeing a greater level of understanding in this country than we've had in the long time. that is a very powerful tool. that is a powerful tool and it can be used to make people's voices heard and that's what people have to do. every government has to be held accountable. this administration included. myself included as well. so i've always welcomed that and i think it will continue. i also tell people don't forget the worker level, don't forget your local prosecutors, your local government. talk to them andsay we need laws that are responsive , laws that are effective. that are evocative of the founding ideals of this country which is that everyone has a right to be in

america, no matter where you live, what you looklike, who you love, no matter how you were raised. that's the foundation of what we do and we are the ones who can never forget that . >> one of the issues that donald trump has brought up at various times in various statements is undocumented people from this country. you told rachel maddow i believe this week that you couldn't do anything to protect undocumented folks en masse, there was no blanket action you could take. is there anything this administration can do in the last days, the last couple weeks to address the issue that various people in the administration have spent a lot of time on? >> the question is whether or not there could be pardons of a group of people, the young people that came here and are working people and who are contributing to our society as every immigrant group has done since the beginning of the country. and as i said then, the issue of pardoning someone is an individual decision is made on a case-by-case basis so

there's no legal framework or regulatory framework that allows for a part of a group en masse read that being said, this was a decision that this administration came to based on looking at the situation of these young people, looking at how they had contributed to society, looking at the record and dreams and goals and looking at how that was consistent to the ideals of this country and so people have got to continue to make that case, they've got to continue to raise those voices at all levels of government. not just doj, department of homeland security but make sure that people into these positions understand the importance of the policy that led to them so i don't know what the future holds and there's no guarantees in life but that's always been the case. that has never stopped people from working hard on these

issues before and that cannot stop them now. >> talk a little bit about continuity about the people that have been working on this these issues. what would you say to some of the career historians who are having a soul-searching moment of whether they should stay in government? what's your advice to them? >> not only at doj, people across the government were wondering if this issomething they can do . >> i think everyone's got to make that decision for themselves based on the nature of their work, what they are called upon to engage in and how but i will say i was fortunate enough for over 20 years to have served in a number of different administrations . and so i think people have to look to see are they able to carry on the work that is of import to them and i think they will find that in many ways they will be able to do that and the work of protecting the american people, the work of protecting the environment, the work of reviewing the business community and looking at those cases and making those decisions read that does go on, that will go on.

the cases at the department of justice brings both in the criminal side, civil side, environmental as i mentioned in other ways, that will work will continue and i think that people, if you focus as i always have tried to do, one of the best pieces of advice i ever got when i was a young prosecutor was it's not about you, it's about the people you are sworn to protect and what can you do to carry out that mission in the most effective way? i think people have got to look at it that way but they will make the same decision. people will move on to other challenges, they will take their mission to other venues, other forums and that's part of government life also. that's something that i think can be a tremendous benefit to people who are working on the issues of importance, there's a number of people who have the time thinking about these important policy issues and pooling all these different voices together to make the unified push for change is going to be carrying that forth into the private sector and to the benefit of everyone.

it's about thinking that spans the discourse so i think people are going to find a number of ways to contribute whether they date in their agencies are not area . >> one of the things that the president has gotten in this administration has gotten a lot of attention for his commuting sentences or pardoning. some people have called for, my colleague pointed this out for, commutations for drug offenders. is that something you would recommend or do you think it's an appropriate action? >> what i will say is we obviously have regular work on the president clemency admissions for several years now and very gratified that the president has taken the recommendations of the department of justice although i will tell you, he reviews every file himself. >> does he call you about a lot of people? >> there's a whole line of people who contribute to this and it'svery well thought out , the recommendations that the doj makes as well as the

review in the white house and the president and i think when you are talking about clemency, pardons, it's very individualized decisions. it will be hard to crack a system for a blanket commutation of a graft of people but what we've done is look at it as, let's look at these iterations where people have been held accountable for their behavior. this is not the sort of blanket approval for what got them there in the first place but how have they handled themselves while they are incarcerated, what's the sentence they received? is it a sentence they would have received today and how welook at these types of offenses . and just being very careful about how we review these matters. i said one of the great obviously with respect to josh who's a tremendous asset at the department of justice works well with us and we're happy to have him there of course. >> so as well as all members of the media who work with

us, it's an important role that you play. so i still believe that as we look at how we have tried to make the entire criminal justice system not only more efficient but more fair, the focus has been on getting prosecutors the discretion that they need to provide individualized accountability for people, to give them the tools and flexibility they need to make sure people are held accountable in a way that's consistent with their role in the offense. that's the same theory that carries forward and how we review clemency and pardoning. >> what is your relationship like tomrs. obama? how much you talk to him on a regular basis ? >> telus behind-the-scenes. you are both voyeurs so you graduated harvard law school, what is his process? >> what i can tell you is it is very gratifying to work for a president who is thoughtful, who considers issues deeply, who cares deeply about the human and

personal side of every issue, certainly that i have presented before him but that i've seen him discussing groups large and small. it's tremendously gratifying to have a president who supports the independence of the department of justice and values are input and guidance on issues like clemency and pardoning and it's tremendously gratifying to have a president as i said who i think does a bedrock of every issue he considers is how will it help the american people? those discussions mean that having that endless discussion means you are always going beyond just what can we do here and give me the legal answer but it how will this help? what will it mean? what difference will it make in the lives of people? i watched him hold meetings on policing issues with

community members, with law enforcement leaders, with elected officials and everyone in the room has a chance to see and felt listened to and everyone's voice was taken into account in the final version of work that we all turned to later and so i think that has been a tremendous asset to me as a cabinet member, i think it's something the american people have benefited from greatly that you could never have someone who cares too much but it's also willing to make the hard decisions and to look at policy and to say not just why hasn't anyone done it for years but why are we doing this way, is it the right way, is it the right thing to do? >> i was going to say, the independence of the justice department, it's a pretty big role in the 2016 elections. >> more than you would like i imagine. >> james told me to report to you, said the investigation into one of the candidates for the election. do you think he impacted the election? >> i'm going to have to leave that to the analysts and the pundits to review because i

think there's a lot of calling on my host of factors in this election because so many things that i think people viewed on the statistical advantage point for example turned out to be different so there will be a lot of discussion, there will be a lot of analysis about that. i certainly am not in a position to say at this point what weight in one way or the other so i let people analyze that. what i can say about the whole matter is that throughout the consideration of the investigation that was under discussion, we took great steps to try and make sure that the independent team of career prosecutors and agents were able to do their work freely, without any interference from anyone, really and just make their recommendation and we reported those out. so when people try to be more transparent than we often are about that and provide more information about that , they understand the process and

how that worked out i think is also played out in the public discourse to a great degree so i'll leave that for the analysts to decide as well you wish he hadn't said anything or do you have any thoughts about that? >> i don't go back at this point. we have to see what we've learned from that in terms of handling these matters going forward is there any report that the justice department is doing that that was handled through? whether it impacted the election is up for debate but is there any action report on just how everything went down? >> i wouldn't go into what we are doing in terms ofreports or discussions, i don't do that in general . but i will for that matter as well, but what i can see is that the focus has been and always was and will continue to be on making sure that it's the work of the department that is the issue and that the career people there who work on these matters are the ones who are going to be giving us the information we need to make

the final decision area. >>. [music] the presidential inauguration of donald trump is friday, january 20 area c-span will have livecoverage of all the days events and ceremonies . watch live on c-span and c-span.org and listen on the free c-span radio app. tonight on the communicators. >> if we had to strike to regulations which can be done, we have a lot of regulations that can go, we would have a much more effective and efficient agency and more opportunities

for providers to serve consumers. >> michael o'reilly, fcc commissioner talks about how the fcc may change under the trunk and administration. he's interviewed by david couch, editor for communications daily. >> there's a lot of consent about cyber security and there has been for a while. it's getting attention now with what happened in the campaign. does the fcc have a role in that ? >> i think it's a very important issue and one that congress has been very aggressive on in trying to find the right solution. i think other agencies as well are doing so. the fcc's role is limited by the governor's communications act of 1934 and while i do believe the government has a role to monitor and potentially provide additional fixes in this space, they are authorized by the law. >> watch the communicators tonight at eastern on c-span2. >> tonight we will have book tv in prime time with a look at the nonfiction finalist

for the 2016 national book award. starting at 8:30, books on the vietnam war, the divide between red and blue america and 1971 attica prison uprising and the history of racism inamerica. book tv in prime time each night this week area . >> tonight, states count their electors vote for president of the united states, coverage of the counting in illinois, michigan and virginia at 8 pm eastern. tuesday night at eight, jerry greenfield, cofounder of ben and jerry's ice cream thoughts about responsible business practices. >> the idea that we couldn't sell enough ice cream during the summer in vermont to stay in business, that forced us to work for other markets. >> wednesday night, former vice president dick cheney

and defense secretary leon panetta on the future of the senate department under donald trump. >> i think the challenges are very great. we have unfortunately over the course of the last many years done serious damage to our capabilities and to be able to meet those threats. >> living in that period, there were a lot of flashpoints and a new administration is going to have to look at that kind of world and obviously define policies that we need in order to deal with that but then develop defense policies to confront that kind of work. >> at 8 pm eastern a look at the career of mike pence. >> amidst the shifting sands of culture and law we have spent without apology the sanctity of life, the importance of marriage and the freedom of religion. >> on friday night, beginning at eight, tributes to several outgoing senators, harry reid, barbara boxerand kelly

ayotte and dan coats. this weekend prime time on c-span . >> up next on c-span2, a conversation on the security issues facing latin america and the geopolitics of the region following the death of adele castro. we will hear about how president-elect donald trump might approach relations with latin america.>>. [inaudible conversation] >> well, i think we ought to get things started here, it looks like the weather wraps is held a few people back but we have in my humble opinion a superb group of people to meet with you here today and to talk and update us all on latin america and what the situation looks like and what some of the real challenges are.

it's interesting when you go back, i remember about 18 years ago or so when we undertook a massive counterterrorism type effort, a big study on both the national and international and regional security concerns, what i get out of that, one of the big studies was on latin america and if you read through that report and the like in 1999, while some things have changed, i always talk to some of our colleagues earlier, some things have changed, the situation is certainly better in peru and it has certainly an optimistic potential in columbia and the life. in some ways, the situation in venezuela is not even as good as it was then so any of the pluses that came out then are applicable today. and that's sort of the way it is so sometimes i guess it's

a good idea to review our history and know where we've been so we can talk about the future but enough of that. let's get started. let's introduce our panel. >> make it quick. >> can i have three minutes? >> yes. >> okay. >> it's taking me more than three minutes. >> the good news is that we've distributed a bio so you can look at this. in detail. first of all, i will follow up with what the general said, i will introduce the press panel. then i will follow with, i'm

trying to be an academic but next to the general, we have mister margaret tate. i just would mention one or two, she is a former director of the center for atmospheric defense studies at the national defense university, a very distinguished institution. also she was a staff member at the us senate foreign relations committee and had a very distinguished academic experience as the center of naval policies and also a professor now at georgetown and she also served at the

johns hopkins university and so forth. and she has a wide range of issues that she dealt with over the years, all the way from the security reforms, military civilian relations policies to human issues, these are some of the issues that obviously will come up today, she was an educator at indiana university with a phd . great institutions. next to her, deonna negroponte who was also educated at a you law school and also georgetown and elsewhere, it's a long school

of economics. as i said, they can read your background at their leisure but what is really important, she worked on many of these issues in mexico, central america and so forth and i understand she's writing a book on mister baker with the cold war, there are many important lessons to learn so read the book. next to her, we have three lawyers here so we have to be very carefulwhat we are saying . in the interest of transparency, also a lawyer. a distinguished lawyer, he is a partner at a law firm

cochran and rowe and specializing in international criminal law and actually will discuss this topic today and i think it will focus more on international conferences and law enforcement and so forth so he has wide experience, practice in latin america with the visual entities and governments and around the world. he is very distinguished, i think a scholar and currently he is also the editor of the international enforcement law reporter. and next to him is another lawyer, a true friend, fernando jimenez from spain. with whom we have the honor to work on some of these

issues related to the challenges in spain but also there's regional relations back in america and he was the governor of the country, etc. but also he is involved in some things related to latin america, first at the latin american bank, the development bank and currently is providing consulting services . so this is strict but we do have of course general gray who made very brave opening remarks, is less closing remarks but at any rate, he is the chairman of the international law institute,

professor at georgetown law school and so on and our colleague for many years, a very distinguished background . you can read a lot about it. we have a terrific panel, we have also a very knowledgeable audience of scholars, academics, of government officials who will contribute to our dialogue today and we are very grateful to them. we are also appreciative to system for recording these proceedings, our discussions because the key is really education and to make sure that we are dealing with credible information at a time when journalists and the media are struggling to make

information or so-called information, propaganda, whatever onewants to call it . we are grateful again for assistance for bringing the disadvantage this event to the attention of a broader audience of the united states and abroad. now, the purpose of this seminar again is to deal with multiple challenges, security challenges, it depends on the definition of what it means. security, it refers to some but it goes all the way from organized crime to terrorism, again, all the way from those of two organized groups and so on and obviously state-sponsored terrorism

from a bomb that we are going to deal with and so on. besides that, obviously you have a question of integration, sometimes called refugees but that is more appropriate, economic development. >>

was colleagues, doctor klein was cia director and he actually briefed president john kennedy to show the evidence, the russians involvement at that time in cuba and subsequently, i was fortunate to work with him

on the involvement with the soviet union and the roots of which go back to the 1930s, and activities of the cubans, for example in africa and elsewhere. this was one experience in regard to cuba, and i'm sure the issue of cuba will be discussed, particularly as a result of the new administration of which the cuban american relations, but the second experience i would like to mention is argentina, very briefly, all the way from the war between 1976 to 1983, about seven years and they may

not be familiar about that, but i think it's important to look at that background in terms of the lessons learned. in other words, the program at that time was the so-called rebels or terrorists that were conducted by the government forces at the time, the torture and other practices and massive violations of human civil rights and so forth. i think one is to look at that particular lesson and then, on a personal level, i had the opportunity to be involved in the investigation of the attack on the jewish center in buenos

aires in 1994, the so-called attack where 85 people were were killed and more than 100 people were injured, but the point is, both the hezbollah and iran were involved, in the story story is not over, even two decades later on when the prosecutor for example, a few years ago or so was assassinated, so that particular event is not concluded. the other experience that i think we need to deal with and the general mentioned, is columbia. the bad news is that it was actually a battle for about half a century. the good news is, of course president santos, just a few days ago received the conclusion

of that terrible war in columbia we would have to look at this as well and finally someone, some experience we have to look at in terms of the relevance implications for security is brazil in terms of the zika epidemic, and we had opportunity to work with the brazilians on some of their olympics as well. with that, i would like to begin to discuss the challenges, the the security challenges in latin america and ask margaret to

provide some general overview and then we will discuss some specific cases of this. would you like to come here? >> first of all, thank you you very much for the invitation to participate in this discussion because i sometimes fear that the kind of attention, the the quality of attention that is given to the latin american region by our government and by our population is way below what needs to be paid, and certainly fear that may be the case in the incoming administration.

i would take a point of difference with you, professor alexander and perhaps with the title of this seminar. i'm not sure that the passing of fidel castro is going to have much difference, make much difference in the region. cuba has its own problems, it is going to have to deal very definitely with an underperforming economy, with a new government and the question comes, not right now, but once raul castro passes from the scene ,-comma what happens to the internal politics within cuba. the rest of the hemisphere does suffer from some profound

insecurities, many of which which were listed, itemized in the 2003 oas multidimensional security declaration which sought to bring attention to the human security side of the security equation, the rights of personnel, the need for safety in your community and so forth. i think the insecurity or what i call the insecurities of the region are the ones that will be of concern in the region and to which we need to pay attention. obviously, drug trafficking is one, transnational crime that facilitates drug trafficking, but also the profound, and we are seeing more and more profound corruption in many of

the governments, the failure of their legal institution to function efficiently, effectively well, the failure of government to exercise the basic tasks of managing financial sector, providing education, providing health, providing transportation, encouraging good jobs and so forth are the things that are really going to plague the region. i think the place we need to put a lot of attention is the focus on governance, the world bank, many years ago undertook to try to understand why, with all the money that the bank was putting

into africa, countries didn't develop. they came out with a very good document, this is a long time ago in 1992 called government governance and development, but we haven't gone very much beyond the document. what is government ,-comma what is governance. the procedures, the organization, the rules, the regulation, laws that yield good results in the execution of tasks of government, and the economic effect of employment of national resources, and governance, management in the public sector, rules that people follow and that effectively limit or promote activities, and the services that the state

requires. one of the problems of the latin american region is that the crime and violence, the corruption, the impunity is contributing to what i will call community decay, separation of families. one of the reasons there are so many gangs, and gangs are the family for young people in central america or in the slums of rio is because their parents, their aunts and uncles have left for the united states to get a job when jobs are not available in their country. the central bank of el salvador, several years ago did a survey

and found that young people, teenagers mean goal as they looked forward was to leave el salvador and go to another country, come to the united states, especially, to get a a job and get away from whatever their environment was providing. this community decay, the fact that people don't trust the police, the fact that the police are so ill-prepared, even resourced and trained, the countries are calling in the military without training them in urban operations as we had to learn in the united states. this trust community decay, family decay, it contributes to lack of trust in the state, lack of trust in your neighbors, and so forth.

it is leading to the formation of substitute families, gangs in many of these cities, in particular. the availability of the gang organization is leading to contributing to drug trafficking , to profound extortion across central america, many of you may have seen the 2-penny gang story in the new york times, i believe the washington post recently on the extortion, describing the activities of gangs in central america.

what governments are not providing, donor institutions are seeking to provide community activities that will provide an alternative life for some of these youth, but governance themselves, because they are largely ineffective are not necessarily adopting some of the suggestions that others are suggesting. there have been some good stories, on the u.s. border of mexico, they had a resurgent, a mayor who took it upon himself to really address the problems of local community coordination

and looking out for activities in the different parts of the community, and they resolved a good bit of the gang violence in that community. they are far too few of this kind of activity. because of the violence neither the local elite or the international community is investing in the region. if you don't have jobs, if the family don't have jobs, if the parents leave and the kids want to leave in order to join their families, i don't know many of you, you may think back to the time i served on the foreign relations committee, we had the caribbean basin initiative which was intended to stimulate

international investment in central america, the caribbean and so forth. there was a time that all your t-shirts were made in haiti, but it was a brief time. because of violence, because of lack of good government, the industries have left and they're not going to go back unless countries are going to be able to resolve some of their problems. now, there are some good things that we need to talk about. first of all, the countries are beginning to cooperate amongst each other, central americans have signed the alliance for prosperity in the northern triangle which is hopefully going to promote the coordination of efforts,

particularly economic economic efforts, but border control efforts, law-enforcement efforts amongst the three countries, and begin to put down the level of violence, the the volume of drugs that move through the region and so forth. i'm reminded that general keane who was the commander of the southern command in the u.s. representative in haiti haiti, after the the earthquake, as a result of his experience the new c2 is coordination, collaboration and i think that is a good way to think about what these poorly integrated countries are beginning to do and beginning to see and do.

they are also asking about collaboration in response to the haiti earthquake, all of the sudden peru and chile are holding long-term enemies, they are holding disaster response exercises jointly. that is very positive. where the militaries are cooperating, other elements of government, the police, the border control and so forth are not doing nearly enough and we need to see more of that. i think we also need to look at what is going on that is bad and what's good. already mentioned was venezuela. that's bad.

how is venezuela after this current crisis passes, if it ever does, how are they going to put the country back together again. how do you put humpty dumpty back together when a government has totally undermined the legal tradition, changed all of the laws and so forth. brazil is mentioned. i have special interest in what's going on in brazil, but the endemic corruption that has occurred in the brazilian government needs to be ended by the very people who are profiting and taking advantage of opportunities for corruption, i.e. the legislature, politicians and so forth.

this is going to be hard. central america is obviously a problem. weak government, corruption, impunity and so forth. the colombian peace process is a positive. columbia has one of the stronger governments, unfortunately that government doesn't do very well getting out of the main cities, it has to extend the capacity of the state to remote areas. it was fascinating that the referendum in support of the peace accord was defeated by low turnout in precisely the areas of the country where support for peace and an end of violence

were the highest. they were also the areas of the country where the government reached less well or not at all. you mentioned argentina and its dirty work, but i think that is something that is passed in argentina. argentina and chile, both have military dictatorships that were particularly nasty but probably have some of the best chances to reestablish good and effective government. it won't be easy to do. there is a lot of work to be done, but there is positive movement and there is some foundation on which to build in

these countries. with respect to argentina specifically, i will tell a a funny story, and that is, i once asked and argentine he economist working at the world bank ,-comma what do you learn in primary and secondary school about how democracy, how your government ought to work. what are the responsibilities? what are the rules of the gang. this individual kind of chuckled and said you know, i think we shot all those professors. but, i think the question is something we all ought to ask as we do with the region. what do young young people, whether they are in good schools or bad schools ,-comma what do they learn