"washington journal" continues. host: . >> joining us from philadelphia is dan rather author of what unites us. good morning. >> guest: good morning. thanks for having me today. >> would compelled you to write a book?. >>. >> guest: but compelled me was the realization that we have come solar divided with

a very partisan and ideological positions i am not shall we will decline and disintegrate but number-one we're becoming so divided we could slide into authoritarianismis or economic nationalism which could lead to further decline. so i care about the country and i asked myself the question what is patriotism in the second decade of the 21st century? as i explored that iy realized i didn't know so let's start a conversation what patriotism is and is not and remind ourselves of the volumes and the cohesion.

so my fear before the book was those values that have sustained as over history. that is the reason i wrote the book. one motivation was a facebook page which i tried to bring some context and perspective and a reasonable voice and frankly the social media site was so successful that which is what it is patriotisms or started to write the book. >> host: going into the of book what did you find out. >> guest: what i found out

there is an interest between patriotism and nationalism. they are not mutually exclusive they overlap but the biggest difference is humble but patriotism is modest and grateful for where we have been in the strengths of the country but recognizes we're not perfect but are nation's history is constantly striving for a more perfect union. that led me to say to myself i need to think of my own patriotism because suddenly it is a deep love for your country is far developer -- part of it but nationalism with its most extreme version with those most powerful positions in the

country budget nationalism has a certain arrogance taken to the extreme. we may not be perfect but as close as we're going to get. so one big difference is that it includes humility. doesn't mean we're constantly criticizing ourselves k but we question ourselves how to make the country better as we move along. >> did you write this book with the trump administration in mind? when did the thoughts come to you. >> guest: no. i cannot and will not deny concerns where our administration particularly the tone but it was not a motivating factor. it is not a polemic.

actually president trump is not even mentioned in the book but but to make a book that's is the most forceful and dedicated trump supporter care read the book with those disagreements that say that is something to think about. i will give you an example. one of the things that made america of what it is is the strong sense of empathy and compassion. so that is one of those words a lot off people don't even know the meaning of the word. so they compare empathy with compassion that is what holds us together.

it has been a strong force for good overall but dissent is the key to who we are as a people to equate this to be unpatriotic so that is the discussion we can have in the context of the present administration because they do have concerns of the tone. it does have some elements of demagoguery to the worst elements of bigotry is and prejudice. so this is something, i beg your pardon. i thought it turned off the phone.

but on one hand it is inevitable. they will say what do i think about what is in the book?. >> who is eliot?. >> he is a long-term friend in compadre and a fellow worker at cbs news. the important part to put this together. i do give him full credit. he isg good at taking what i sayy to say this is too boring and then sharpened set up. >> independent line you are on with italian rather. >> caller:. >> i appreciate the efforts of the book and i would ask about the connection between

patriotism speaking about dissent i completely agree. so now we know from "the new yorker" article talking about somebody like harvey weinstein would go to cover up sexual problems with the corporate organization and then even with september 11 or the ex massaged officers. >> host: the question please. >> caller: sova could you talk about the pressure wordy allegations of september 11 with building seven as a controlled demolition. >> host: you maywe answer if you wish to one i felt no pressure particularly since

i left cbs news not they felt any while i was there but i was there 12 years on my own news and gets is my company owned completely by me an answer only to myself and i have not felt any pressure within a thing with 11. there are some false rumors but in direct answer i have not felt any pressure to report anything other than what i believe to be the truth. this is where i will be going. >> we elect to these people into office.

so reporting the news is different now. everybody is against each other and once their way but to get god back into the country. >> guest: i certainly agreed that is one of the fundamental pieces of what unites us that we are a new experiment in history. the idea we could have a country that is a strong mix of racial and religious and ethnic differences and to hold ourselves together united, we understand divided we fall in united we stand. level to our country together but in the present

environment they can take up position don't bother me with the facts i have my mind made up. and wedo have to get along by listening to one another. so to have a more civil tone for those of us with a population to listen to one another. but it does mean a civil tone or find common ground. this is a general proposition to say we may disagree could we find to were threeea things with common ground? so in many

cases so in their own political futures and a party particularly those in power in a larger since we have to get along. this is reflected in the polls this week that there was a yearning in theun country to hear more voices and action to be united rather than emphasizing with these divisions. we cannot continue, we know

somewhere deep within us getting along to reach common ground. to reach a piece of legislation seven go to the news and gets web site so tell us about that. >> when i got into social media with facebook end twitter what i found is there was a position for people and i'm not the smartestpl but i have been around so we try to put some context and perspective into a steady and reliable voice. so with my own personal

facebook page there is an audience for that. so using "news & guts" to expand on each day's news we believe to be the most important of the day and add some perspective so that is what "news & guts" is also the name of my company which i own and operate completely trying to develop a news presence. >> host: that the republican line go-ahead. >> caller: the best to you all these years. so your reaction to why 9/11 happened on letterman represents the disconnect the american people have our role in the world because for example, when george

bush led us into iraq with the abuse of patriotism that george to be bush we allowed the neil:to get this into iraq which was a trap also freedom of speech to criticize our government or foreign governments that goes to others every year the best way is to get control of israel in their views of the people. and people have a hard time expressing that to be smeared and demonized. >>. >> guest: there was a lot

in the question but one of the points i make i'm not sure i stated that directly but number one, by any reasonable analysis with iraq was a strategic disaster of historical proportions. we have paid the price for that for very long time so i along with others in the press did not ask the question was we were taken. that was the mistake on my part. but the question now with what unites us is to keep in mind what you just said.

a fiercely independent press with freedom and democracy with a check on power to ask the tough questions and don't be afraid to ask those questions. but a leading up to the rapport that those in power that to question that strategy is unpatriotic. but for them to say i love my country but any time they put that in danger but as a member of the press i will ask the tough questions. >> you write in the book

when it comes to the institution of the free press of america great then i have ever seen in my lifetime. >> guest: that is based on what the president has said and done. they have not had is difficulties of the press. we never had a president who purposely or relentlessly attacked thee press with those individual members of the press with the members of the press are among the most fickle in the country. so that kind of rhetoric but

to have that attitude so the reason that i say that the crisis of which i have not seen but that is what the fax when he singles out those individual reporters in withhy those physical challenges this is not worthy of any presidential candidate. and him threatening "the washington post" repeatedly because he does not like what they're reporting. so this would include certainly many of those that support president trump. but the tone of the presidency toward a free press is the power of the presidency he has tremendous

power to the regulatory agency to put pressure on the press so blatantly trying to intimidate the pressno and not ask the tough questions so with those relentless attacks are unprecedented in american history. this is not normal. this is unique and is very dangerous for the country. >>. >> caller: republicans carried the constitution in their pockets say we need to go back with the founding fathers. but they're out the amendments look at the original constitution with

the property owners were allowed ton vote for or not women or not blacks when they say go back to the constitution i say go back to give everybody the right. >> guest: this is a good point to think how important principal dissent has been in the progress of the country. i like to use that instance of women's right to vote. starting to talk about this in the 19th century to say they have the right to vote there were castigated like the called unpatriotic but that dissent eventually

resulted in women getting the votes. but time after time when principled dissent was seen as radical if not unpatriotic over a period of years to be a way to advance the country to make a more perfect union. so when i wrote the book and wanted to put in a chapter of dissent it is deep in our id to want to improve the country. when we listen to the voice of leaders we don't want to return to yesterday's bid be the america of 1957 we had problems during that time.

but even if you could go back you could not do it. the demographics have changed tremendously. with that mix of diverse religions and ethnicity. so any citizen who stops and thinks so let's return to the glory days has a way to manipulate public opinion. >> we have to look forward united. >> host: republican line go ahead. >> caller: is there any have that empathy with the economic divide?.

>> i think there is a way to use -- take a deep breath to be civil with onend another to recognize we have a problem with that deeper economic divide that the lowest end of the economic scale and those in the middle sometimes called the middle-class is shrinking role the wealthy members, we all know the situation that we haven't had that international leadership that say we recognizere this is the problem and we will address the problem and find

common g ground and stop the trend downward with the of widening gap with those who have or have not. it is been a constant since the very beginning. if we don't stand united in our children and grandchildren will have a different country. >> host: dan rather. thank-you. >> guest: i appreciate it.

. >> naomi start with the house and ways and means committee. what are the highlights at this point and what changed about that bill during the

process?. >> is the overhaul bill reducing the tax rates to cut the corporate tax rate from 35 percent down a 20% with those tax breaks in the existing tax code and that includes the of adoption tax credit with more tax relief for small businesses and they changed the rate that companies could repatriate. >> what is the biggest criticism? and over to the house floor next week?. >> democrats have criticized this bill as a bill that would largely benefit large corporations as opposed to the middle class. they also had some criticism

that republicans of doing pain since secret. so along those party lines i would expect to get democrats but it looks like they are on board with the bill with those that have come out against those measures from states like new york and new jersey and california. currently you can deduct property taxes as well as state and local income tax and sales tax. and then capped the property tax deduction at $2,000 and

republicans don't like that because they are a the high tax state. >> there is a very busy day on the hill with taxes because at the same time the senate finance committee introduced publicly its version of the tax bill so how was that different?. >> there are a number of different changes. the tat senate bill does keep some tax preferences like deduction for medical expenses. the estate tax is not fully repealed in the house but it is in the senate or to fully repealed state and local tax deduction that is allowed up

at $10,000 a there are differences. >> this will make for quite the conference how do those come to an agreement?. >> i think every means to be determined with their own sticking point on the house side they will push to have a compromise to keep that $10,000 for property taxes in the bill because it is important to have some lawmakers that is not an issue but there are some house members. on the senate side there is little room for error.

so they both want to come out with a final product that could get the majority vote in the senate. >> finally we know the of president has been in a show all week but do you expect him to influence the process at this point?. >> president trump at some point during this process makes some comments he would like to see the repeal of obamacare. that is not a part of either bill. that is still under discussion. so perhaps we're waiting for more on that. >> that is a lot of detail things for your time. we appreciate it. >>