become a greater priority within the trump administration. she is interviewed by communications daily senior editor. >> what would you say your biggest priorities are right no now, in congress or at the fcc. >> how to make sure that broadband is considered part of any infrastructure package that is considered. i looked at it and i think, for the highways of the future, it's really about broadband and the ability to do the teleworking and bring jobs and education in medicine, all of the initiatives that keep our country robust can be derived from broadband. how do we make sure policymakers view infrastructure beyond the road and a bridge. >> watch the key indicators tonight at eight eastern on c-span2. >> now a forum on president trump's first 100 days in office. former clinton advisor ron klein and former assistant to president bush form a panel to discuss campaign promises and

previous administrations. >> i am the assistant professor of political science at usc and thanks to everyone for coming and helping to set this up. political science research has shown that judges sentencing tends to be harshest right before lunch. i assume similar patterns hold for political discussion so my pledge to you is that we will make up some time in the air and aim for a safe landing by 1230 and hopefully you won't have to throw anyone after flight along the way. you may begin by introducing our distinguished panel which, in the spirit of this conference, combines some luminaries from academia with people who have really rich experience in the political world.

to begin, going from left to right, matthew kohn is a professor of economics, spatial studies and environmental science. ron plane is former chief of staff to joe biden and al gore and a former 2016 advisor. joe is a former assistant to george w. bush. my colleague is professor of political science and next we have the 40 lieutenant governor of california from 2008 until 2011. let's begin by asking a general question of our panelists, starting from left to right. a general question. the trump campaign was unlike any other in modern american

history. i think we all agree on that. at like to begin by asking our panelists, this is a panel on trump at home. how have the first 100 days mirrored the unconventional campaign, or have they at all? in what ways have we seen trump break with his predecessor and in which ways are they part for the course. >> very briefly, i am an economist. we are used to being relatively powerful in washington, and it's fascinated me and many economists i know that academic economists do not seem to be playing a major role in policy deliberations. that is a surprise to me. it might be a statement about our value added and so something i teach my students here is we can only know the effectiveness of a public policy if we have variations

so president trump, by changing public policies, we are learning a lot about the effectiveness of public policies. we are creating a control group. to a economist, these are very interesting days because there is literature in economics about uncertainty that investment can freeze up when there is uncertainty about where political winds are going. president trump who has been a very successful businessman is thinking about how to make the economy grow, i hope he anticipates some of these unintended consequences of his policy. >> i think there are three things that have stood out. donald trump came to the white house as a president least owing anything to a political party in 50 or 60 years. the most independent of both parties. he had an opportunity to govern in a very bipartisan way.

even liberals in our party were saying we want to work with you on infrastructure and yet he has governed is a very traditional republican. he has aligned himself closely with mitch mcconnell and paul ryan. unlike president bush or president obama, he didn't put a member of the opposite party and his cabinet. i think the first question is how much of a republican partisan he has been. the second thing that surprised me is how much he has abandoned his economic populace agenda and his first 100 days. he started off with healthcare not infrastructure. he has stoked up some cultural wars around immigration, but hasn't delivered. on october 22 he outlined a ten-point plan of ten things that were economically related and try to get it done in the first 100 days. nine of them he didn't even send to congress in the first 100 days. he really hasn't tried. third, personnel. personnel matters when you're president and there has never been a modern president who has done less to try to staff

is president and the first 100 days and that will have consequences if there is a crisis. he has been fortunate that he's been spared the major foreign crisis or domestic crisis. when that happens he will find that lights are out and nobody's home in these agencies and that will be a problem. >> the morning everyone. i want to start by thanking my friend for the invitation to come out. it's always hard to say no to bob so here i am. three points that bear when you look at the first 100 days and previous administrations and where we are now. the bush presidency when we came in in 2001 there were a lot of people who questioned bush legitimacy. there are a lot of democrats upset that we won. there were a lot of democrats who were upset by what happened in florida and ron and i both know this, but the first couple of months the media made a lot of the

legitimacy of president bush and you see that now with president trump. the second is the other wrong mentioned that personnel of policy, my chief of staff used to say that policy is personnel and personnel is policy. one of the things that has struck me by this white house is that there is nobody there. you walk in the white house and you see all these offices and their dark and there are new computer equipment and chairs and staffers that are waiting to be seated but they're not there. to put that into perspective, of the 16 executive branch agencies, we only have two deputy secretaries. you wonder who's doing the work. the lights are off and the works not getting done is something that i find intriguing. the third point is this is obviously the twitter presidency. bush is known for discipline and staying on message and

i've never seen a president of the united states who takes to twitter to go above the media to get their message out. : about the uniqueness of this particular president but within the context in which we live. all of us think these are amazing times because guess what, these are the times we're living in. had we been able to live in

the 1800s we would have thought those elections were amazing as well. what we have now in the age of the technology that we exist in is that the student said to me people say things because they want to get noticed. they do things just to get attention, rather than wanting to be right, using facts, reasoning or saying something useful, they instead say things to me noticed and get attention so i think in some respects, this particular change in the technology and ways in which parties and the media have changed help to increase the extent to which a person and a personality of the president that we have now can either abuse this element of communications technology or use it to his advantage. alternatively the ways in which we are the same as we've always been is that there's always a polarization. there's always partisan polarization, it's always been the case that anybody

who engages in motivated reasoning, oh yeah, that's a good thing that he did. on the other hand if it's a democrat, it's a bad thing . it's motivated reasoning as well as information bias has always existed. long-standing psychological processes, those are no different so the polarization that we see, the distinction in differences of approval and not approval or disapproval by phone parties should not be surprising. these are normal aspects of politics. having said that and turning back to the original point about the extent to which people today who want to be particular would like to get aid, to be noticed rather than they must be true or not true so i think about that within the context of the person who is not only the leader of the country but who is a mouthpiece for his political party and the significance of all these statements whether they are well-founded or not is

reality done at three in the morning, driven by whatever sentiment they are driven by, nevertheless people will continue to follow this president and this party will continue to teach the young voters, like our students, new immigrant voters, 20 percent of the us population is immigrant or the child is an immigrant, introducing us politics and this is how the president behaves, this is ourrepublican president needs . the lesson and one of the consequences of the communication strategy such as this. >> first of all, thanks for having me here. i was asked to come and say a few words, obviously i come from cisco county and you guys had the degree to find somebody that would talk about in good terms of donald trump and it's great to be here. i want you to know that as 20 years in public service myself, coming from the private sector, i've been watching what's been going on

obviously i had the opportunity to meet president trump and it's not who i see on tv sometimes with respect to the matter. when i went on one conversation with president trump he was very very locked onto conversation, very smart, understands the issues and somehow when he comes out of that office obviously different. and why do i say this? i was a lieutenant governor with arnold schwarzenegger and i see a lot of the same. he is a businessman first and you have to understand where he comes from you see we've heard earlier there are a lot of position. putting my businessman on and his businessman, i'm hazarding a guess that he sees that as savings for the federal government when it comes to resources. luckily, there hasn't been a crisis, when the rubber hits the road but if you look at the president today, in his first 100 days, here's a man was never ever elected to office area ever.

and you look at the previous president, president barack obama obviously didn't have executive branch experience but he was a senator and us senator and he had experienced and look at president bush, he was a governor and andy card was also elected official at one point. he was a secretary of transportation, very well knowledgeable and then you have president trump. who comes into the oval office, he didn't have a transition team in place because i think they didn't think they were going to win and so he hires a chief of staff who doesn't have any government experience either. 45 -year-old chairman of the party. and then you have some advisers who have been around him for a long time who had zero government experience so i'm speaking as an outsider today because i'm not in office but if i go to the parts store in my community,

they love it. but if i come to los angeles, and i an institute, there's a lot of questions of why is this happening? but it gives you a flavor of the dynamics of what we have today. if you ask me what has he accomplished in the first 100 days, well, he's nominated and got appointed a 49-year-old judge is going to be there for 30 years or more. that's a huge accomplishment for him that he can talk for a long long time. people want to know about immigration, that's one of my biggest issues. and i'm sad that some of the things that have been said but i think there's an opportunity here. to work on immigration, i think there's a lot of places where people are seeing where he's trying to correct himself. if you go back and look at arnold's worsening her, there's similarities here. and maybe you've caught on to this or maybe you have not. most politicians want to be liked. >> most movie stars want to be loved.and if you look at

when arnold was speaking, he would always talk in the third term, he say when schwarzenegger wants to do this, you never hear mitch mcconnell saying mitch mcconnell wants to do this for nancy pelosi is saying when nancy wants to do this and when you say trump is going to do that, both our brands. when the brand takes a hit, there's a correction in who they are. when arnold got his brand hit, there was a correction and i think president trump is going to correction and i think joel talked about earlier today about the faces worry he's going to go left. and that's a big point, that's the big question today that i think is where america is going to go, to the i, new yorkers come in and take over or does he continue to talk to the base as i think you are talking about, he's been president since the

republicans so my thing aware and coming from, i want to be the voice up here of the outsider who is not in office, who was a farmer, was a bit of a culturalist, who is looking back and saying maybe there is a change and also as the off author of proposition 14 in california because i believe the biggest problem facing america today is partisanship and i think there's a hidden tax on partisanship because republicans go into a caucus room and they worry about electing republicans and not worried about the economy and democrats go into a caucus and they do the same exact thing. >> we lose at the people of this great state and people of this country so will go on to other questions. >> so couple of the themes that seem to come out of this were happening, that is fairly unorthodox and to some extent in some offices there's nobody home. >> and mitigation strategies so i wonder if i can ask , i'm happy with any of the panelists who want to wait in on it, to what extent and how specifically have these two

idiosyncrasies of the trump administration maybe help or hurt the president and in moving some of his signature agenda items forward? >>. >> on staffing, if you've got a look at the president first. this is the man who was running a multibillion dollar company with 30 people. >> and of those 30 people, probably third of them were his family. >> and its where he's coming from. >> and where his trust is and where he feels, not understanding that the federal government is a huge, huge operation. >> with some, i think there's a number of 550 people that are in senate confirmation that haven't even been nominated. that's a big thing that he needs to correct and i think

that he will. some people on my side of the aisle will say it's the democrats that don't allow him to do it. no, he's got to nominate them and we have the democrats saying he's not nominating but he doesn't have anybody qualified. well, that's just both sides of the aisle. i think were going to see some movement in the next month, i think he's been focusing on his 100 days and to be frank, outside this room or maybe outside the city or, i have never ever heard somebody come to me and say the hundred days on the most important days of the president. >> i think it's sets the tone. but when this for years are up, they're going to judge him on what he did over the four years. but he staffing thing, it's mind-boggling to some but some others, it goes back to what you said. >> there has been a crisis or has been a situation where he needs to ramp up and move quickly but it's a challenge and i see him coming back to people that he believes that

have some kind of business experience. hope fully will help him but then you look at the appointment of the secretary, and the secretary might have the discretion of the deputy is. >> it doesn't work. >> when i was arnold's lieutenant governor, we worked together. >> and if you don't work together, fortune 500 company doesn't work that way. >> so those are the challenges that i see as we move forward and the staffing is a huge issue. i hope it's corrected soon and i think it will be. when we left sacramento, arnold told me something i never forget. jerry brown was sworn in, we had his beautiful ceremony. he said i really like this job. but it took him five or six years for him to say that. >> president trump is going to say the same thing, is going to love this job, he's the that are like them.

>> but it's going to take some time, right now i don't think they're there. >> so let me try to put this in perspective for you and ron has this very well. there is nothing more unusual than showing up to the white house on day one. because there's no instruction manual, this is how you are the deputy domestic policy advisor, you show up in your office and there's literally nothing in your office except for a little band around your computer that says this is property of the gao and everything here will be in the report, that's it. >> so as you try to sketch out how can i serve the president, how can i work with the vice president, if you don't have the personnel in place to carry out the president's agenda, you're in a very bad spot. and i look at this administration and i look at the president and say you got to stop the infighting. there was a fascinating article in the front page of

the washington post that i largely believe from my friends from inside the white house of the different camps going on. you've got involved and generated in one corner, you got been in another corner, you got some mild holdovers from the bush ministration in a corner and they're all sign off on the most minor of appointments. the president needs to have a position in place allows the opportunity to get the senior people nominated as the governor said. but most importantly, to have the schedule fees, to have political personnel in place in the agencies that can take direction from the white house and fulfill the president's agenda. i think he's being ill-served by his staff with that infighting. ron and i worked for, as the vice president and president but you recognize at the end of the day is not about you, it's about their agenda and what they're trying to achieve and the infighting and stories you hear about that are really undermining under serving this president.

and as it relates to communication, certainly this is another area where his staff i think needs to pick up the ball and recognize that again, it's not about them, it's aboutthe president. we used to have message readings three times a week, the first one you talk about what we're going to do next week , the next one you talk about what we're going to do next month and then you talk about what we're going to do for the next three months, have integrated communication strategy with a policy message . then the american people can understand what you're trying to accomplish but when you are doing communication via twitter and having the press secretary having to correct or amend or otherwise contradict what the president has tweeted, you're in a bad spot and the news has been driving your message as opposed to you driving the news. >> i want to pick up what the president said earlier, this does feel like the cardassian presidency where you know, he's desperate for attention, to sell things that are patently untrue and it's why

in most of the polls, even republicans say is the most dishonest president we had in modern times. why? almost every day. that is not a good thing for a president and even if some of those lies rally his supporters and appeases voters and our red meat for his base, ultimately erodes his credibility as president, and there will come a day when he will want that credibility and it won't be there because he squandered it on ridiculous things like saying barack obama's fine on him. >> so i think that's one problem with this whole mode of communication we have. >> i do think the governor schwarzenegger model is an interesting model and frankly, i expected him to be more like governor schwarzenegger, what border schwarzenegger did was reach out to democrats. he understood this was california, he couldn't just go republican. he understood he had to find a middle ground on these issues and that was really

what i expected donald trump to do, a more pragmatic businesslike bar partisan thing in the model of governors shorts and a and mayor bloomberg in new york. under a lot of models that and that's not chosen. now, a final point i want to make in the 100 days and governor, 180 matters because it is benchmark of sorts and it's there, donald trump did tell him in the campaign i will do these things in 100 days, the set the standard. >> it was his campaign message. >> but it would be a mistake to include that because these things have happened in 100 days, anyone who is underestimated donald trump has suffered price and i think that it is still in his power to change direction and to fix some of these things and to correct the course this presidency is on. will you do it?

i don't know that anyone knows, i don't know if he knows but he still has 1360 days to fix what's wrong. >> thank you, the question following up on that or april and then i like to go to cane . is trump hurting himself and pushing his agenda by having hurt his credibility in a variety of ways? is not the issue in the infighting, there's the sometimes bizarre late night or early morning twitter screeds. it is this hurting donald trump? or is there maybe a method in the madness? >> it's who he is. it's who he was before the campaign. it was who he was during the campaign. people say well, he tweeted at 7:30 in the morning because it was saturday and he didn't have his caretakers around him.

he's been tweeting at 7:30 in the morning for several years. how can i put this? he's learning on the job. and he might not want to say that but he's learning on the job and then soon he will start, believe it or not, soon he will start doing repetitions of okay, here's the budget again, here's the deadline for this and he'll start to get the hang of this job and before you know it, don't underestimate him. don't underestimate what he's doing. it just came out right now what, 30 minutes ago that the freedom caucus is supporting obamacare repeal. well, i'm not going to believe that till i see it because i've seen the freedom caucus members and send from cisco and when the vote comes up it's a whole different ballgame because they have to get a check up on a couple of lobbyists just like the left have to get a check up on lobbyists and so forth but i don't see it as hurting him. this is how donald trump is a

president trump operates, he's going to continue to operate and is going to fix things here and there but at the end of the day, he's the one making the decisions, he's the one making the call and let me share something with you, i've been in business before politics and i remember were going to do this tomorrow. guess what, we're going to do it tomorrow. in government, the one thing that i think president trump is going to learn real soon as the government was designed by our founding fathers to move really slow. it took me eight years to figure it out. and you take little bites of the apple every year and maybe after five or six years to get the whole apple and you have some satisfaction on federal government issues and state government issues. >> and i think he will learn that and he'll figure it out soon because he's very smart. >> the question is how soon and when can we get some relief from some of this twitter stuff that people think he's going to stop, he's not going to stop. he's 70.

he's on twitter. he's on instagram. he's on facebook.he communicates and in his mind, i don't know this for a fact but in his mind, he knows how many readers the "l.a. times". and in his mind when each week something he's getting more of his message that what the "l.a. times". that's what i believe he feels. so he's going to keep going. and i'm sure that he sees it to from somebody else that says yes, that makes, retweets. >>. >> i like to bring jane in here and i guess maybe part of what i'm driving at is the question the difference between being loved, which people seem to think president trump wants, maybe even being feared and pressing forward an agenda,is there a message and which of those aims does it serve ? are those aims intentional? >> you never donald trump, i

care not to draw any inferences about what drives him necessarily but i will provide a different answer to that. i'm a political scientist so i'm not been involved in day-to-day politics as you well know if you've taken my courses but what i am involved with and interested in is that we're not interested in day-to-day politics, we're seeing larger and broader patterns. we're looking at systematic evidence of the significance of those actions. these studies in political behavior and attitude that we're trying to understand is what is the cumulative effect of this type of communication strategy regardless of whatever his personality is, he wants to be loved, if he's got some other complex that he was raised in a box, who knows so let's leave that to biographers but in any case, the point of what we can do is systematically as scholars and as students and as

informed observers of politics is to try to understand what the longer-term implications are for communication strategy, the intensity of it as well as the tenor of it. and when morris asked the question of will he lose credibility, of course the answer has to be isn't within the context of who are you talking about, is fervent supporters of trump i would argue that may help him. >> people who are informed observers, the likelihood that it will help in is relatively low and this all emanates from the question, the perspective of what is in the content of those communications so over time, if the president continues to provide commentary such as the former president wiretapped him or other elements that are equally as divisive, divisive, accusatory or defensive and to the extent that the media coverage about that only follows those, i think there

can be a long time deleterious effect not only in in the image of the president and his credibility among his supporters but certainly among people who long term are consistent voters, those are the voters that are the most important in the presidential year elections, they will be important in 2018 we understand what we're discussing today, but furthermore also to the extent that you are talking about a reelection run into the 20 which will start only 18 months. >> so what you have to think about answering this question is who is we're talking about and if and to the extent that the president decides to treat other things that are potentially less derisive and divisive or defensive, it would probably be useful for

people to cover that as well. i'm sure he tweets nice things, i'm sure he to congratulatory messages. someone is analyzing them at this moment, nevertheless the answer to the question inferences that we can draw based on systematic data to be about the long-term consequences of this , when you feel today might be very different at the time, 18 months of gone by and you're ready to vote for the next president or for that matter centers who represent the political party of the president. >> to switch gears a little bit to talk about particular agenda items. and also i'll start with matthew con and going off your comments earlier about the distinct absence of economists surrounding the president i like to turn to the topic that seems to be on everybody's mind which is tax reform. so the question i like to ask is beyond sort of what are the prospects for reform and why has trump apparently opposed something that seems to have on its face very little chance of making his way to congress at least unaltered.

i'd like to ask what role would experts more narrowly play in the design of this legislation, where you see the impact of maybe those missing voices in design and strategy of this particular piece of legislation and i should offer that i guess trump was going to have a meeting on this today so if there are any recent develops i'm unaware of. >> in the new york times today, arthur laffer, i don't know if everyone's ready new york times, or is focusing on clippers law last night so arthur laffer in some, i'm forgetting the name ofthis , he proposed that by cutting taxes we could raise revenue and so we're about to get another test of the last curve and the basis of, what economists know is that many of our social problems could go away if our economy to

grow by four percent a year. as the baby boomers age, as a series of entitlement issues, we can finance the. we could invest more in the poor and inner cities if the economy were growing by four percent a year. >> i think a fundamental issue that i don't know the answer to and i apologize for my appearance, my second phd is if there is the text from the president bush's pushing for, will we get this back from stimulus because i think it will probably increase income inequality but will we get the economic growth that is promised? this is a new age of humility for economists or at least the economists on this side of the table. i know that i don't know the answer of what we would get and so i think a very interesting question is when you know that you don't know, when the experts know that they don't know what we will get from a policy, how do you proceed? if our goal is greater economic growth, i certainly hope we can achieve that goal. but the tax reform too many

macroeconomists you mention open questions, what will get in? >> a follow up on that for the two runs in for april, how you proceed when you don't knowwhat you don't know and on an issue like this , where, where does it lead trump politically to be in this kind of position of not necessarily knowing the full consequences of these sorts of proposals and is there any chance to get the sort of bipartisan cooperation on tax reform down the line and that people have come to associate with let's say the reagan era. >> i think you start with what you promised voters in the campaign. i'm less interested in the core base from voters who love his anger, love is outraged and there always for him but they won because they're a bunch of voters who like temps but they were willing to vote for him and thought he could deliver change. what i can tell you is there virtually none of those

working-class voters in pennsylvania and michigan and wisconsin, the most important thing i need the next president to do is to lower the tax rates for big corporations to the lowest number in the history of our country. i doubt anyone showed up on a cold day in pennsylvania in november to put this man in the oval office to make the centerpiece of his economic plan of corporate tax cut. so he promised the voters a middle-class tax cut. he promised to fight to get past, he hasn't even brought one forward. government does it fully but i will say on day 30 of the obama presidency, they had a $300 billion tax cut and on day 30 of his presidency so it can be done.and i think something like that probably

would have bipartisan support but if his agenda really is a bunch of corporate tax breaks, a big cut in the corporate rate he's going to find a lot of fighting on capitol hill. last thing i'll say on this, i think democrats would be wise and i wrote a column in the washington post and you know i think this because i put it in the washington post, i think democrats would be wise to call trump's bluff on the link to the corporate tax cut and job creation so if that's what is really going to put forward, you should be if you are a corporation, and you don't make a lot of new jobs, you lose the tax cut. if you're a corporation and you make more jobsoverseas , you should lose your tax cut. there are a lot of ways to hold the own standard about job creation at this tax reform debate plays out and i hope that something democrats do. >> i take a different tack at this and i find it fascinating everyone's focusing on dolls on the first hundred days, what's the president doing and i look at this in a different perspective and i say this is the speakership and this is

the mcconnell majority leader led senate. we have a republican congress, republican in the white house. what are they doing in congress? so paul ryan full disclosure, dear friend of mine, sorry if i'm going to upset you with this. paul ryan put together a plan all the better waylast year and this is what the republicans ran on . and they talk about healthcare reform. that's what president trump is trying to do. they talk about tax reform, none of that is in what president trump was talking about and there's this risk starting to develop beneath the seams and is not being reported by the media but probably will be shortly of the risk to national republicans and the white house. and it's getting more and more pronounced. he had dinner with a good friend of mine was a member of congress from new york who told me the trouble people don't come to talk to us, they say you got to pass a

health care bill in the first 100 days, get done and they're not as interested in the specifics of what's in the bill and the trouble people come to us now and say we got get a tax build on, we're going to put our tax bill next week to wait a second, we haven't even gone to the ways and means committee. so i think there's an interesting dynamic that at play here with donald trump today byputting up his tax plan , it's almost like his shot across the bow of congress, you haven't acted, you have passed any legislation, now i'm going to use my bully pulpit to get you to act so be on the lookout for how republicans and those old cartoons when i was a cartoon, spy versus spy. now it's republican versus republican. the other able to govern. >>. >> would you like to jump on it on this, i'm curious about i guess this kind of republican versus republican strategy shot across about. this is a wise strategy? >> has told john to put his agenda and is something we're likely to see more of going forward. >> the president election is not for another three years and older congressmen are at about 18. >> so i've been a politician.

i know what i'm worried about when i'm getting ready to vote on something. i'm worried about whether my voters going to vote for me in 18 months because i want to keep my job. because it's the best job i've ever had. so yes, i think were going to continue to see that because they're very concerned. i think there's race in georgia republicans in a subway, this guy was not even living in the district can come close to winning, that means our message might not be great across america so were going to change. if you go back and listen to donald trump during his campaign, do we remember his campaign? i do. the first thing out of the box was going to repeal obama care. that was his message. then he came back and he said we're going to give a tax-cut , he didn't say how big but he said tax-cut. yay. >> and he came back and says were going to repeal obama care, to a supreme court justice.

>> i'm going to be elected because i'm going to give you a conservative supreme court justice and then he says i'm going to, we're going to build a wall and mexico's going to pay for it. and he says going to have $1 trillioninfrastructure . >> that was his message, that's why he got elected. so now he's back and saying yes, i don't know what the 50 percent tax is going to work. it's not going to work and if it doesn't work it's because the congress doesn't know, because he wants 15 percent because that's how he operates. and he believes that 15 percent to corporations will allow them to spark the generators and create all these jobs andthen all of a sudden will have all this income which wespent all the programs like we were talking about earlier today and that's what he believes . >> so the question is , is going to work with congress and is there going to be some bipartisanship? i don't see it for the near future. >> until there's a big

failure, you go back to arnold, arnold came in with the same message, if you remember his message he was campaigning with a broom around his face saying i'm going to sweep out all these politicians out of sacramento that he called them girly men. and then he came out and he said we're going to eliminate the vehicle license fee and he did. until he said i'm going to take on the whole world. and he gave his initiative and he took on fire and he took on police and took on the nurses and he took on every labor organization and he lost and that's when the transformation came into play. in california. >>. >> on that point a little bit, yes for my extensive reading of the art of the deal, one of the signature pieces of advice is coming in with a big proposal that goes beyond what you expect to get

and always be ready to walk away from the table. a couple times we've seen trump do what was once i guess unthinkable witches to pull the plug on something, back off and we saw that on the repeal and replace of obamacare and we recently saw a in the negotiation to avoid a shutdown where it seems any way that trump had backed off the wall, at least as the immediate, as something that he's insisting on immediately. >> is defined the typical of going baby and then if necessary going home on the issue? what does it do to a president bargaining position vis-c-vis congress? >> i'll start. we expected and art of the deal presidency and so far we've seen very little art and no deals so that's a big problem for him. i think that you know, he has to get, to be a successful president, you have to get things done. really is not much more

obligated. and to get things done, in washington, with problems with his own organs, problem with the freedom caucus, difficult democrats on the other side, you have to make deals. and so far, he's been unable to do that. unwilling or unable but in the end unable. and that is something that he is going to have to change he is going to rack up on the accomplishment presidency so a few things, i think the supreme court justice thing is a big accomplishment, especially for his conservative voters, he has foreign-policy at his disposal but in the end, to deliver the promises made to voters in the campaign, he has to find a way to start to get the things done and he can't keep on blustering day and then walking away, that's not. >> let me, i want to amplify that point because the presidency you have such a immense power your disposal to actually the deal and using the powerof the presidency , to get those

negotiations off a certain point, let's get it done. but give you an example as it relates to president bush, his signature accomplishment for him was no child left behind, what to get no child left behind through, a bipartisan effort to reform the education system in america. what was the first thing he did? he called up then senator kennedy and said what's it going to take for me to get a deal with you you're going to cosponsor my legislation in the senate to obviously send something to the house and he sat down with george miller , congressman from california time and said mister miller, what's it going to take for you to support my bill and get this bill through the house. and the president was very wise using the power of the white house. >> was one of the earlier things he did, he got the kennedy family over to the white house for a screening of the movie 13 days before it came out to get support from the kennedys. he renamed the department of justice after bobby kennedy

once apple asked him to do it and there certain ways that a president can empower people through favors, everyone loves riding in air force one but the art of negotiation is writing a way to break bread and a president trump is very well advised to sit down with nancy pelosi, to sit down with chuck schumer and say we're are some principles we can all agree on and move from there, it worked for us, it worked in the clinton administration and it can work for the trump presidency. >> one briefing, center kennedys access or in the senate is elizabeth warren and in the first white house meeting held in this administration when the president invited democrats to white house, he began the meeting by saying i guess the face of your party is pocahontas now. okay? our racial that fired at senator kennedy, that is not how he is going to get things done on capitol hill. >> one last point and that is with respect to the

resignations given the structure of government today. the structure of government with respect to party, who's in power. the previous president had worked under circumstances of divided government in other words, in under republican administrations which were primarily conservative and in this case, one way to think about the expectation for accomplishment weather is 100 days or all 365c, would be to consider the circumstances under which this president is operating, he had both houses of congress, a good majority. he has the supreme court and he also has nearly 3/5 of the houses on the state so under the circumstances, of the structure of government that is relatively speaking unified for the republican party, one could argue , one could argue that the expectations of legislative accomplishment done through congress rather than executive order should

retire. >> is president from getting his own way and is he coming up short in expectations? >> i think i said earlier, i think he's doing the job. i think he's learning where he's going and i think if you look at, we're talking about how george w. bush did this in the first 100 days, it's a former governor. >> he understood this in texas and i think as time goes on. he will start to get victories, i think eventually he will get to the point where he'll understand either the hard way by losing the house or with democrats or by a different way, by saying you know what, i got to work with democrats and we got to get this stuff done and start getting victories. it might not be as big as i want but we've got to get get victories because america's got to move forward. he's not there today and obviously with his comments in the white house, those are

productive and i'm sure somebody's telling you mister president, that's not productive it's just going to take some time and i think one of the things that he's going through, look, when i got to sacramento it was 1990 and i don't want you to look at this and take it the wrong way, we had some full there, we called them the cavemen. they been in office for a long time and they fought like hell on the floor but when the floor was over with, we were best friends. democrats and republicans and you look at washington today, if everything is a fight, everything is a gotcha, everything is about party, not country and he's dealing with that and i think once he figures that out, i think maybe he'll say wait a minute, we got to change the course here and get the job done. either he's going to do it or the american people are going to force into by giving the house to the other party. >> let me follow up on that

and asked the panelists if they think they can identify the one area in which president trump has developed grown into the role on the job or if they think it hasn't in any way so going from left to right again, we've lost a panelist. i think we forgot to mention that point. professor kahn is going to have to leave midway through the panel, i apologize. has he grown at all? >> so far, i do think that in the area of national security is an area where he has the strongest team. i think obviously being in someone who was on russia's payroll as your national security advisor was not a great move but he's corrected that and now has a well-respected team and he certainly i think getting up to speed there. more quickly, that would be one area where we say it

looks like he's listening to advisors, looks like he's taking that seriously but i am a little bit more about this question that we're debating about whether or not he is going to change or he's not going to change and you can't learn if you don't change and so far, he's not really changing. >> i agree with ron. i think the area he has shown capacity to grow in his role is in the national security and diplomatic front. i think it was very important for him to establish a good rapport with the president of china. even now the north koreans have destabilize the region and given their potential influence in that region of not only proliferating weapons of mass destruction but deploying them, i'm encouraged that the chinese seem to have been more supportive and open to the united states as a partner,

same thing with israel on the domestic front i think it's easy to criticize your predecessor in office about the use of executive power and the use of executive orders, then once you get in the job yourself you find hey, i'm going to issue 32 myself. how about that the first 100 days? i think the president needs to find a way to cobble together some legislative histories to prove that is not just by executive the yacht that he can work with the congress to enact legislation so he's got a long way to go but i'm encouraged and i want him to be successful and i want him to succeed. i think you are an obviously republicans early on and presidents obama's administration say i hope the president fails and if the president fails, the country fails so while mister trump certainly has an idiosyncratic style, i think it's a polite way to put it, i want him to find his way and i wanted to find his wings and strength and find a way to bring the american people together to get accomplishments for all of us. >> identifying something he's learned.

let's start with potentially the comparison to the first version of the executive order, directing travel from the most dominant muslim countries and you could argue that the use and the recognition offederal procedures , the use of the justice department and the use of a few lawyers was useful under those circumstances so i would identify a relatively narrow one, both by the way of course you know that there is an injunction against the second executive order but you could argue there's been progress. it's not in the president himself and those around him understanding what procedures are and what a constitutional question might be. having said that, i want to provide a response in a bit, from what the lieutenant governor has said that we shouldn't have high expectations. he's new, he's just started, he was a businessman. to the contrary, i'd like to say that my position on this is not whether he succeeds or

not, whether he gets an a or a d or an f perhaps but instead after 100 days, but instead that as americans, we should have high expectations of our president. we shouldn't say well, he's a businessman and he's kind of a wacky government. this is the most powerful political person in the united states and potentially in the world as well, the person has a responsibility for 300 million americans as well as others and in that regard, that responsibility should require high expectations, not low expectations because the office has potential for tremendous good as well as bad so i do think and i hope that the learning curve is steep not only for this president but for his path but furthermore that we should not give up and say well, he's just learning. you better learn quick because this is a position for which all of us, whether we voted for him or not, he is the president of all americans, not just republican.

>> before i give you a chance to ... [applause] to respond, i'd like to pylon and point out that himself, he repeatedly taught as though he wouldn't need this kind of learning curve, that he alone could fix these things given how they worked.>> speaking for myself as a person who came off a farm and became a state senator, it took me some time to learn and i came in with the same message of where going to run sacramento like a business. it's a great line. i said at the time and once i got sacramento, government does not run like a business and it took me some time to have a learning curve. what i'm saying is when i say give him some time, i'm not saying get him for years. he's getting his ground. he said it himself, he said my biggest mistake has been

my messaging, not explaining. i'm giving myself a c so just there tells me he's coming around. let's not forget the american people have a choice not long ago to choose the most prepared person to take that job who had all the experience to run efficiently with all the experience and they said no to her. they said yes to this man. so what i'm saying is that it's not that i'm going to give all this time, he's been successful with some of the things he's been doing. he's going to repeal obama care, it might not be how he said it's going to be repealed, it's going to be a tax-cut and if there's not, then guess what? i don't think he will be there for four years so he's going to make some changes, is going to make them soon and all i can say is that there was through the campaign, i was mind-boggling as well when he came on the scene. and i heard a song by bob dylan. >> it said, the times they are a changing.

>> and i went back and read the lyrics. let me tell you something, times are changing and he is a product of times that are changing. he's going to learn quick on-the-job were going to see some good things come out i believe and they're going to be bipartisan, they got to be bipartisan and if they're not, they're not with work. >> thanks, since we are in california, the heart of the resistance , i want to ask a question about how her trunk agenda has run into into opposition in the state and in localities and specifically on issues such as immigration and the environment and even marijuana, we see a lot of tension between the administration's objectives and what governors and mayors seem willing to countenance. how is that going to play out and when push comes to shove who has the upper hand on these issues and i'll start with abel. >> first of all i think

resident trump has a tremendous opportunity to work on immigration. >> i said earlier that it's mypassion, my father came to america in 63 . be cross-border a penny in his pocket looking for a better life, his son became lieutenant governor. the system worked. so i know that some of the wall and that hasn't helped but i think he's in this tremendous opportunity, he can work with republicans and the majority of the senate and house, we can get immigration system in place that works. obviously were not going to get amnesty like president bush , president reagan gave us but we talk about executive orders, look, executive orders, he likes them because their victories. >> but that's not the way to govern. so he needs to bring democrats together to get some kind of an immigration

system that works. i actually believe that we should have a temporary executive order to allow farmworkers who are not criminals, the opportunity to stay here on a work permit to harvest these props that we all love and maybe for some hospitality and so forth but i think he can, we can do it. >> it's just a matter of time. >>. >> he had the upper hand on immigration. around sanctuary cities and the like. >> it all depends. i think that in one of my classes, the concept of plenary power as articulated by the united states supreme court is interesting with these exclusion cases in the 19th century. the federal government really has full power and discretion over policies that are about immigration and

naturalization , having said that, the questions of a boat policy, how it is that we live once we're here, these are traditionally the realm of the state. you provide in-state tuition, you provide for college for example? you provide the ability to get drivers licenses? all these abode policies are at in many ways a function of how it is that states themselves decide what's in the context of their own political cultures and economies for agriculture workers and others. the patient process and i think with respect to a president who whose philosophy is to take regulation out, that would be ironic indeed if in fact a republican president persisted in altering how it is the state create policies for abodes, not for entry but for a boat, within the context of the tree, it is in my view i think and most people who study the federal government and know it, the privilege of the federal government in this case.

is the observation however is these executive orders on immigration have not been victories, they been failures with respect to the court and to the extent the trump administration intends to litigate this further it will remain to be seen whether the supreme court will hear and take grants to this particular set of cases. >> issue here with respect to plenary powers only, the circumstances to which relations of individual rights are a function of those executive orders but within the context of immigration policy is usually the federal government has the power onentry and on naturalization so i would expect that to be the case , the question or anybody who studies congress in the afternoon would be and who observed congress to the extent to which trump can put forward an immigration policy that is both comprehensive and palatable to both parties and i remind you that it's been 20 years since the last major immigration reform and

that is the 1996 law. so it's been quite some time and there have been other presidents perhaps more skillful in negotiating with congress precisely because it is such a difficult issue. >> iq, any other remarks from our panelists before we go to q&a? >> any others? >> all right, oh yes. >> will start taking questions from the audience. >>. >> i think were going to have a, we have a microphone coming around i think. there it is. a lot for one second. >>. >> i read as extensively as any human being can. iread the new yorker , i read the wall street journal which is right, i read the "l.a. times" which iscompletely unbiased and wonderful . christian science monitor

which is the most unbiased reporting in the world. yet i wait to see who among the politicians are the journalists is going to ask the most important question of all, as far as trumps personality is concerned. what causes this intelligent man to make such stupid constant remarks? is it up to a psychiatrist to write a biography telling us what's going on here? >> kane, i'm afraid you're the closest thing we have to a psychologist on this panel. >>. >> i don't know, i know that there are psychiatrists who have suggested that presidents be evaluated but

let's not forget there have been plenty of other presidents and people during the time in which they were serving who felt they were unstable. lyndon johnson, richard nixon, woodrow wilson was right up there in the crazy department so there are plenty of potentially and prior to that, certainly so even if you were to go in that direction to wonder whether there was a level of intelligence and capacity to reason and decision-making, that isn't necessarily a function only of the resident , that there may have been prior to this particular president a series of pretty levelheaded human beings running the government. having said that, all we need to do is look to watergate, we just need to look back to in particular on being gay some very interesting commentary on the nature of, not by nature, the kinds of conversations that were had in the white house that were originally taken from nixon but nevertheless the notion

that you might get a disconnect between personality and rational reasoning. i don't know that it's uncommon. i think it just happens, you probably know a lot of people who are capable of flying off the handle or saying things they might regret later, they just don't have the office of president, they might be your uncle or cousin but i wouldn't say that it's an uncommon trait and it is as the lieutenant governor said trait that people embrace, the american voters did embrace that element of his personality, at least some of them did so i'm afraid i can't, david lauter asked this question and pose this question to psychologists or potentially to other political observers as to whether or not he is extent to which the personality that he's displayed is will be useful or not useful to the country. >> i will use the chair product.in a quick follow-up to ron klain and

ron christie about what indication do we get an indication of the presidents personality from what we see in the media and to what extent is there a very different picture behind the scenes, not necessarily pertaining to trump but to your experience? >> i do think there are presidents who are different in private than they are in public and i'll say the president, one greatexample is al gore . >> they know that actually he's kind of funny, likable person in person even though thereputation and robotics . >>

all the thousand pop psychology things that are being thrown around come in the end there's a bottom line, performance is not meeting the bottom line standard. >> i was always fascinated looking when we came in on day one of george w. bush, dick cheney as darth vader calling the shots behind the scenes and you get in the oval office and you recognize how powerful the president is and his command of the facts and his command of the step and of his cabinet. one of the funniest stories i love to ship is in early cabinet meeting and everyone thought colin powell, he didn't run against bush and able kind of have upper lake anna. i remember being in the cabinet room and president bush being early for him was being about ten minutes early. if the meeting was supposed to start at eight you dedicate their 7:45 because if he hit the door and you're not there he might lock it.

in this particular instance as exact what happened. we had a meeting, everyone was there. the present documents as well as the secretary of state? he's not here. he said lock the door. and that was it. then about five minutes later you heard this -- and bush let him knock for about another 30 seconds or so to open the door. he looked at him and said don't ever be late again. and so the impressions that you have of a president about the public perceives them through the media and what they're like when you work with them, it's something else. as a relates to dick cheney i would have to say i can't think of a funnier boss than ipad with a more wicked sense of humor than him. >> thank you for illuminating my bush and powell didn't necessarily get along. in the back. >> thank you very much for having this conference,

especially 100 day of every. thank you very much. you have vision. anyway, you finally less than one minute. he was opposed by everybody, even ridiculed about his own party leader by the indoor to through and won the presidency. he's very -- i voted for him. after he became president first 100 days, really disappointing. [inaudible] be a man of president of the people, for the people. as abraham lincoln said. no candidate said for the people, of the people for the people. anyway, first 100 days it's time

to -- [inaudible] listen to everybody about whatever after 100 ac should have said i have understood enough. it's time for action now. he should say that. [inaudible] i have to say second term, i had to say to them, adios. thank you. [laughing] >> thank you. one question to come from it is to what extent is trumpcare in a following in the footsteps of someone like reagan or someone like schwarzenegger? to what extent are these pickups in the learning curve to be expected quick she said are but in what ways maybe also is the experience we've had so far different? in that vein, has trouble making them to put on some things we should be taking stock in learning and trying to work on the scene? >> i think it has and it's

because who he is and his business background. i think the travel ban was written up quickly and it was put out, and it starts at the top. i would say it came from him work i want out by this day. it's got to get out. i've done it myself when the was an initiative working on 8109. i center you can we've got to get this done by the state or it was a mistake. i made a mistake. put some folks out there were not part of 8109. 8109. it's a learning curve. i do want to go back to say well, we elected somebody that shouldn't have to learn on the job and blah, blah, blah. at the end of the day give him some more time. i think we have three and half more years of him, okay, whether we like it or not. we will start to judge and after about a year or two to six okay, he's getting and his group get some action but i went through arnold. i don't remember reagan. i was too young but i went through arnold.

at the end when you like it or not, he understood the process, the legislative process and we have a lot accomplished. it was bipartisan at the end. he became a big climate to appear key didn't start that way. >> i'm sorry. look, i think there are some things that are involved in learning. this is still scared to have a president learn on the job, but some of this isn't about, let's just be honest. some of this isn't about blurting. it's about a core agenda of hate and division that he ran onto the campaign, that he is coming on as president. nothing with him to get more expertise or more learning. the day he launched his campaign he said that mexico was sending rapists and murderers to this country. that was day one. and every day thereafter he has put a big not welcome here sign in front of this country and

made that the centerpiece of a lot of his domestic agenda. if you believe mike i believe that immigration something that makes this country great, that's what makes this country over later, that's what makes our economy vibrant and vital, it's what makes great stories like lieutenant governors personal story. it's what great our cultural strength and our leadership around the world, then he has been wrongheaded from day one and he is showing no signs of backing off that. we are receiving a backing off about, but indeed a doubling down and a doubling down on it. and so i think that's not a question of staffing or learning. it's a question of perspective and to think a lot of what's going wrong with the trump presidency comes from that. somethings can be learned, somethings can be improved. i hope he does but some things are just wrong and he continues to pursue the wrong things. [applause] >> i'll give abel a chance to

respond quickly to that if you like. this is basically the agenda and the legacy of the first 100 days? visit and not welcome sign and selling hate and division? >> i didn't see the poll that was put up this morning. unfortunately i didn't see it but i figured someone would i set down say that one of his positives of that poll is that people believe he's keeping his promise. i mean, that's what the poll says that he's keeping his promise. so is doing what he said he was going to do. some people never going to like what he promised and never going to like what is going to do, but i'm going to go back to this learning curve. i do want to say that we put somebody in that has to clue about government. i mean, you've got remember at the end of the day, he worked with the government on certain issues. he just didn't govern. and the governing part is where it gets tricky. i will repeat it again. government was designed to move really slow. and when you move fast you make

mistakes. so i see good stuff coming up on the horizon and is going to be good stuff with democrats. i think chuck schumer is going to work with either they don't want to be sitting there for the next two years doing zero. so on the words of division and eight, i mean, i'm not happy with some of the things they say. he's actually said. he said it himself, i wish i could explain myself a little bit better sometimes. i say things that sometimes don't come across will. he said that an employee to give myself a c. so i have some hope. i love my country. look, we've gone through presidents and we will go through many more president. i still have hope that there ths some great things coming abroad, and i can say this. the people of our country, maybe not in los angeles in california, maybe not new york, but a lot of people in our country voted for change and voted for him.

and they said we want a new direction. so let's give him a little shot at this new direction. and guess what. if he doesn't do a good job, there's an election in three years, three and a half years. maybe things will change, i don't know. >> thank you. >> thank you all for being here. something that's been coming up a little bit was the notion that there are good people advising trope at least in the foreign-policy sphere. and i can't help but notice that while it seen some of the advisors at the top level are pretty top-notch, there is nonetheless still factor hundreds of division set up an unfilled, a lot of work that seems to not being done. my question and particularly to everybody, i'm curious amendment some this, is as the 100 days

closes up and as other spots get filled, can we start to pick the little bit more continuity in the administrations messaging and policy administration? can we expect for there to be kind of a return to normalcy of sorts as more experienced professionals get into government? >> let me just add to the panels can keep your answers brief so we can work in one more question. >> the answer is yes. i think every day is going to be a better day for president donald trump and is going to get better every day. when he feels his administration -- feels desperate i think every day will be better policy days. in the next year we'll see a complete difference in what we have today. >> i guess we'll have to hold you to that, abel. see in the year weather has been a complete difference. one of the most interesting elements to the question of change of the relationship between change and the desire for change and the idea of

repopulate the federal government with experts come up with people are confident, with people of knowledge, and that seems to be calm seemed to go without saying that we would want experts whether the on security or whether they are scientists. but at same time there seems to be a swell of discontent among voters, particularly trump voters, against those very experts. and i think that creates a significant tension not only in the question of whether we are replicate and the way the federal government ran before, or whether he's going to change it. everything i think an interesting question one year later. >> to answer your question of course i think in your phone up it would be much better and much smoother. you can look no further than the first executive order as relates to immigration, right? they did not have the people within the white house. they did not have the betting system that should've been in place of an order of this magnitude, particularly given

the topic and some other things the president has had on the campaign trail that it should've been vetted much more carefully. i do share the lieutenant governors optimism that in the years time you get some very bright people in positions and to know what they're doing and their staff of that they will guide his coat and a much more smoothly than what we've seen thus far. >> well, it's hard to imagine it getting worse, so i suppose in that sense it has to get better. but i mean, it does matter on who he picks. i will say, like his pick some good people. he's picked some horrible people, too. i think it's just come mostly he hasn't picked people at all. so it's kind of hard to know what is going to look like once he starts taking more people. >> thanks. one more question. >> trump 2016. >> hello. so obviously i support trump, by

the trump 2016. my question goes, most people are happy with them so far, police people who voted on in. i feel so. people feel that is keeping his promises. i see the other side saying he hasn't accomplish everything he said he would in the first 100 days. what if he accomplishes those banks in the first 200 days or in the first year? will the speakers change the narrative if he is actually able to accomplish what he promised, even though you may not agree but he promised in the first 300 days, or one year? thank you. >> start with ron klain. >> my assessment would be very different if he accomplished the things he said would divert some of those things i would oppose still but i would have to give them credit for doing thin. i think the most striking thing is he hasn't even tried to pick you said would pass kindles in the first 100 days. he didn't even send night of the new congress.

if you don't even send them to congress you can't get the basket that's like a big problem. the last thing i would say about this though is some things he promised, you know, he promised not just repeal and replace obamacare. he promised that everyone in the country would have insurance,, that would be less expensive and it would be better coverage. and if he delivers that, i will come back year a year from now and give him a big bouquet of flowers. but i promise you, no matter what's happened with the freedom caucus he is not going to keep his promise, that everyone will have insurance. it will be less expensive and it will be better coverage because not that he's talking about will do that. >> i remember a president who said that he feel like a healthcare plan you can keep your health care plan, if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor and we will cut costs by $2500 and don't member the same sort of media attention president obama not keeping his word and not keeping his promise. [inaudible] >> hang on a second. to answer your question necessity looking at the front page of "usa today" that the

interviewed two dozen trump supported in 100% they think president has done exactly what he said he was going to do, and where i think ron and i would agree on this is that you are not just playing to the long list of not just playing to the base. you are now president and jeff to govern for all of americans. people are very, particularly my beloved california, very concerned that he's only governing towards trump supporters. there needs to be a recognition by his white house staff that the campaign is over. it's time to govern. campaign is over and yes your promises you've made and yes, you obviously haven't counted but with the medical people but let's govern. so again i want him to succeed but he has got to move beyond promises to his base and promises to the american people. >> well, if you go back and if you look at presidents, barack obama will be known for the affordable care act. he will be known as the big

bailout which is done by partisan, with bipartisan support. the first one in 50 days his bill. bush will be known for no child left behind and you can go on. this president is going to be known for either big reform in taxes. he's going to do something in the next year or two that we are going to i get by with their easy going to commit to everything that he said? no president gets everything he says during a campaign. so he'll get around the edges a little bit here and there, but he will be a different man in a year. and i think, you know, like that paul said, he's keeping his promises and there's still, yesterday i drove, i'm in santa maria. there's a gentleman parked next to me with two trump flags in an area that did not vote for trump. trump. and i says how is he doing? i mean, it's, it's -- i was a seat and watch it or i'm still kind of a cnn guy.

there is that one second that goes by a don't beat this guy up on everything, even when he does okay. they're beating him up. i think people are going to give him a shot. you are going to give a shot. i think you'll be a different present in about a year speed as we believe the last few moments of this and take your life to the house for the briefing with sean spicer. >> before we get started i want to bring homeland security tom bossert back of her to the vexations response to the ransomware hacking and then i will go on with events today and answer questions. without further ado, tom. >> thanks john. thank you. good afternoon. if i could i like to start today by acknowledging the fallen police officers the president vice president acknowledged today. they are the front lines of our homeland security and today's event was off me to attend.