great gift. note how the presidential historians rank the best and worst chief executives from george washington to barack obama. explore the events that shaped the leaders, challenges they faced, and the legacies they've left behind. c-span's the president is available as a hardcover or e-book at c-span.org/mac the president, or wherever books are sold. .. is

i'm not a scholar. but there is a connection. i would say america after world war ii this country coming into its own. that fascinated i me. what's it like to be a leader in this world? your time, your world. so initially to the wiseman but even he is a study in leadership. and i am fascinated by the burdens of leadership. because it's hard.

and then to be a man. and it is up to her. and then to deal with these enormous pressures. with some bravery but this that interest me how they respond to pressure. >> let's go back to the first book the wiseman. karen atchison and it seems looking back now there is a coordination for thend process into their goal and it was a shared goal. . >> no, no, no. i get the point but imposing order on chaos actually that

is just years passing but i take your point. but actually there was a shared worldview it is america's time. chaos in the early 20th century. so it's our time to do some good and idealistic things to bring democracy they were seriously idealistic about this. it's also true they would make money doing it. these are people from wall street and making money but

part of that global vision is free trade in which they trade with each other.et america will do well so there is a lot of idealism. the third piece is power. in order to do all this, that's a power when is it military power? when is it diplomacy? and those are huge challenges that they met pretty well initially to celebrate the war that they made because by and large created decades of global peace in the world wars.

but also benefited europe that was rebuilt and asia and africa. there's all these new books in the global standards of living have gone up. democracies spread after world war ii. and for the whole world because of the system. thoseie important exceptions it's not a disaster. they make mistakes. >> from the book the wisemen you write even the most careful scholars are particularly the most careful , sometimes they seem to forget in the momentous forces that shaped the modern world for acting on imperfect information. >> is of thatha life?

certainly my life and those who have to make these decisions. what is russia really up to? it was a closed society the soviet union was a closed society. we didn't have spies. the first american station chief was caught in the honey trap it was a sex trap. so until there were spy satellites in the late 19 fifties but when they were building missiles to kill us. we had nour information and then of course, after that we make

mistakes but had it not been for the good judgment of eisenhower or to the nuclear president to be a smart soldier to understand were to keep out of war. we are not now a radioactive gust. >>host: before we get too far from theha aside, you mentioned democracy is receding. . >> and there is a professor i was at my wife's reunion with a big track of democracy and it was disturbing.

and eastern europe like poland and hungary their democratic norms eroded. 's or had it taken phone calls?he justice o'connor called telephone in taking orders for the party? d and i'm very sorry to say i don't think it is necessary and of the world are cataclysmic. but with this great spread of democracy. >>of so how do you describe the

fifties. >> because my generation grew up in the fifties, it was boring. american prosperity is amazing. american income roughly doubled. america did a spectacular job of creating and growing and of middle-class. and houses and that is the positive view. but of course, it was a scary time with nuclear weapons to kill us may be.

and at this game - - the same the aftermath with british to be american is something else. how can you shift from a system of colonial rule to self-rule without agonizing growing pain also exploited and manipulated by the communist in moscow and beijing playing these countries against each other. . >> does that world still exist today? . >> are we feeling the effects of that generation? . >> yes. the world is still a place that we still have to an older person like me it is alarming

that you can get overwrought about these things we still have an international trade order we still have conventions that bind us they may be dated but theyst still exist. and before we get too upset we have to try to step back to see the broader picture of the world order. it is a terrible process of evolution that bad thingss may happenen but the basic part still exist. >>host: november 1989 did we enter a new chapter of world history? . >> i thought we won. democracy one. freedom one the rule ofhe law.

but as some people warned other forces were afoot the darker side of human nature. tribalism fearfulness of the other these never go away because the political systems we try to affect and many do a good job with these terrible human urges but they are there. people are tribal. they don't like the other they want to stick to their own kind and easily fearful. i'm describing every human being. that's the way we are. so we are hoping we are past all of that and of course, we aren't. with a clash of civilization so there were some smart people who said don't declarear

victory. we have some rough stuff. it is a "twilight" struggle you will always struggle with ourselves. i . >> what was ike's bluff? . >> only he could have pulled it off to threaten the soviet union with nuclear annihilation to keep them from either attacking us or to be too aggressive later on. >>host: how did he pull that off quick. >> he let it be known that we have a lot of nuclear weapons and we would use them. now this is not a bluff that anybody can make in our case it was made by the supreme allied commander in world war ii, a five-star general who had conquered europe so if you are that man, your bluffs have

credibility. not every leader not even jack kennedy had that credibility. this is a very eisenhower thing to do. i say this because his policy that worked for him i'm not sure for others he had a particular credibility and coolness. because i think we had some great kansas virtues growing up in the midwest but a soldier who is seen a lot of war. never a combat zone but sent thousands of young men off to die. so he had to live with that he would lie in his bunk on d-day, one man.

it wasn't that grand but he has to live with sending not just a few but whole armies off to die and hopefully to win but he bear that burden. things that don't break you will make you. so he paid a high physical cost for the tremendous pressure he was under and he handled that pressure. >>host: you write in ike's bluff that kennedy or johnson could not have done. >> i don't think so. this is now speculation and counterfactual's, but what would eisenhower or johnson

been like? they certainly conquered europe. they didn't have ike's experience did lyndon johnson of vietnam have that? i don't think so. >>host: you spent 45 years in the - - as a contemporaneous journalist how do you make that to be a historian as well? . >> it is not so easily divided i worked for a "washington post" company and her husband said journalism is a rough first half of history. and in history or journalism a journalistic historian. astutely use the archives that i depend on scholars when i get into a subject and who has

devoted their lives to this that will know more about this than i do. so i am a historian who goes to find the deep dive and i find them and i talk to them and i'm doing it right now actually. swam a journalistic historian and who tried in the pages of time and "newsweek" to bring historical sensibility. but at least some sense of detachment. we come in after the weeks. but from a more familiar position trying to get perspective and sometimes we are right about that sometimes we are wrong or half wrong.

so you could call that historians work as a journalist i am oversimplifying this but. >>host: before we leave president eisenhower one of the things i learned you report in his memoir he was opposed to nagasaki and hiroshima quick. >> yes. there has been some scholarly debate about this. his son john remembers a conversation where ike said we should not use this bomb. but i think the scholars are skepticall because he did not record that elsewhere. i'm trying to remember but i remember reading a scholarly journal article that said did he really? don't know.

>> he's not the only president you have writtenut about i don't know if you knew this but our newest book theth president' president's, your chapter ons richard nixon is our featured chapter. he is ranked in this survey of historians as number 28. would you put him at 28 quick. >> that's a hard one because nixon did some amazingly big stuff. and opening up china was an amazing act. and also if the united states goes to moscow to negotiate the nuclear arms ty. treaty how many presidents have done that? a worldviewas

that is amazingly robust working with henryry kissinger , very ambitious and a very successful domestic politician. but only franklin roosevelt has done that. >> winning by the second largest landslide in history to pass domestic o legislation. he was much more effective with civil rights but i feel becausee he doomed his own presidency with his unruly emotions he let them carry away and he wrecked his legacy he is number 28 from a self-inflicted wound not dealing with watergate.

>>host: you also have a new personal connection what is tha that? . >> my grandfather is norman tyler who was a socialist candidate for president six times 1928 through 48. that sounds impressive the closest he ever came that roosevelt 22 million versus 800,000. a very unsuccessful politician but he did stand for something not that i personally agree with i'm not a socialist. but i loved him and admired him. >>host: do you remember your father's reaction? . >> evenm my reaction he loved his father. he did not agree with him but

he admired him. >> was your grandfather socialism to today's socialistic movements quick. >> i don't have a good answer for that. it certainlyve involved more government with your social welfare for sure. more medical care. 's platform in 1832 looks like a standard now that there was just any social welfare. so if you just look at the socialist platform of 32 not only far left but the middle so that general notion of helping people, yes but a different age, different situation. >>host: evan thomas your book coming out in 2015, i think

it's fair to say that it is sympathetic. . >> my aim was to be. why? i think it's the 13th nixon biography. this will sound weird but i represent the east coast of the establishment of the press. i'm not sure i have any politics but i went to harvard. i am the type and i am the type that nixon hated. he hated people like me. not personally but he hated people like me so trying to reverse engineer this, how did he see me or the establishment

or "the washingtonr post"? how does that world look to him? what is it like to behy him? so i made the best effort i could to switch the lens so instead of looking at him, he had to look at me so that is the impetus of the book and the best parts of the book are sympathetic about theseok moments and then you begin to understand why hebl was resentful that i am sympathetic he was treated badly by my kind. why? stupid and the type that we are talking about earlier but

in the 60 election they are at garden parties and arthur / juror they all suck up to jack kennedy there's something with that smugness that aren't we better looking aren't we better dressed?se we are just better. of course, nixon would know aboutt that. and there is an arrogance to that. but also cleverly played off of the politics today is the descendent of richard nixon with the establishment or the mainstreamam press. this can work for you.

and he discovered this at whittier college. he's not that likable, but the issue was dancing. nixon runs on the pro dancing ticket. because he realizes the kids can go dancing or going to the clubs or the country clubs but it's the poor kids who cannot there are a lot more poor kids than rich kids that williams college in 1832 nixon wins in a landslide. but to be sensitive to the needs and with those paternity calls. and the little man's party.

but there were more of them. do the math. smartor politics he coined the word the silent majority. and he happened to win after the next election more than any president in history but lbj and 64 he fared better so it worked. >> from your book, nixon refused to cash in as an ex-president by sitting on corporate boards. >> that's interesting. somebody was telling me that wasn't 100 percent true but nixon in his own way i am a

crook.k. he did that because he did not see himself that way at all but somebody who did not do that and there arere endless debates. so i don't want to get too far into this. so do you want to make as much money honestly by writing books so now before you break from this topic is relationship to reagan's successor was problematic he told his family he thoughtou bush was the perfect vice president bush had his own doubts about nixon which he wrote in a letter july 1974 cormac george h.w. bush writing to his sons about nixon.

he is a nervously complicated and capable of great kindness i am not that close to him as a personal friend but he holds people off but i have been around him enough to see some humor and feelnd kindness and it goes on to say deep in his heart richard nixon knew that george h.w. bush, he was not willing to do what political instincts require. >> a very astute letter. george h.w. bush wasn't astute judge of character. . >> but that is an accurate portrayal. >> in the hardball nixon never went away and then going public and did not follow his advice. >> nixon was nixon. >> so bill clinton would not

take his calls when he first came into office at pat nixon's funeral was that ever resolved quick. >> yes. clinton ended up waking nixon. initially clinton was a snob actually and dismissive of him. by the end of his presidency clinton was praising his advice on the former soviet union president clinton trusted his advice he was smart about the populist forces as pro- yeltsin and i don't know if they bonded i'm not sure if that's the right word but there was some.

>>, us presidents have you met and interviewed quick. >> i have to count them. i met nixon. and had a brief conversation with him. i met clinto clinton, reagan, george h.w. m bush, pretty much all of them through a bomb i have not met donald trump. >>host: evan thomas is our guest he wanted - - we will show you what heki has written arthur isaacson was the first. the man to see the life. 1982. the very best man the early years of the cia. robert kennedy, john paul jones, 2004 for naval

commanders and the lovers with the russian empire in 1898 that came out nine years ago so beating nixon in 2015 and the most recent just came out this year about sandra day o'connor we will talk about that in a minute plus i do want to mention that evan thomas is a historian that c-span has chosen for this chapter on richardrdne nixon. the new book is called the presidents how noted historiansns rank america's best and worst chief executives we have a different historian for every president evan thomas information about nixon is our chapter in that book.

who was edward bennett williams and shouldn't we know? with the consequential in the long run only among lawyers. he was a figure's book was a man to see because in washington if you are trouble you get william bennett william because he gets you off. jimmy hoffa adam clayton powell the congressman who got himself into trouble, john

connollylo a lot of people. he was a unique figure because he represented the mafia figures and to advise the president of the united states with the unusual combination that doesn't exist today. but maybe he should be because he was incredibly good lawyer. to take his lawyers up and be like you and said he can't. so really saying we don't have layers like that anymore you can't be the lawyer to represent the mafia don and the president of the united states and everybody in

between. that his general practice law. . >> word robert kennedy have been elected in 1968 to say yes because it is romantic to think so but by his chief advisor they told me know because we forget the democratic party was still the party of boston low - - bosses the city machine buses and union bosses and those people were pledged to hubert humphrey. so it would take quite an earthquake to dislodge hubert humphrey. now maybe he would have done it he went to california right before he was shot may be in new york and the mythology has

been to pledge his support i don't think that'sll actually true. so he would not have even won the nomination. and bobby kennedy and nixon might have been cooler. and he got out there. he would overheat or stutter. he wasn't that good on tv. jack kennedy was unbelievably

good. but bobby kennedy less so. t7 bobby kennedy was one of joe mccarthy's children he was the godfather. >> and with that internal investigation so with a working relationship, joe mccarthy went out with bobby's sisters, and she remembers him saying that he kissed very hard. [laughter] . >> and then to show the kennedy family in hyannisport on the weekend he did not like to swim. but there he was. and then the kennedy family

supported. t7 let's take some calls in here at the viewers have on their mind. the caller from california good morning. >>caller: thank you for taking my call. it's fascinating listening to mister thomas. and ii am thinking it would have been stevenson for glide typically agree he could not pull off ike's bluff att all. he was absolutely brilliant and capable but looking back at it i was seven when elected

presiden president. and you also talk about with ike's bluff didn't reagan do something similar with gorbachev at the end of the cold war. ? t7 thank you for the call. >> yes. i share most of what the viewer said. i agree with. stevenson had many qualities and was intelligent and good things in other realms. and these counterfactual's are hard trying to imagine what would happen. may be being better about using the united nations and

diplomacy diplomacy. maybe he would have been. i doubt it. but maybe. and you can overstate that. or maybe to do with them collapsing. >> it is definitely true but to build up the military is always intimidating to they soviets like in the kremlin i can even have one telephone and they are spending themselves on military spending into ruin and could not keep up. so to make an argument to out

bluff the soviet union so we've heard that criticized this is not a. i am well-versed t7 so given your 50 years of being a washingtonian and insider , what is that one quality every us president seems to have quick. >> what we need is judgment. it is a broad spectrum. we all have ambition and a lust for power they could not get there without that. it is necessary. i am not critical for that list c of power but once you get there and a sense of power can help you.

if the judgment is poor they will get yourself into trouble. so it is a extreme example that johnson was an extreme president and he just melted down over vietnam. >> the next call comes from milwaukee. >>caller: thank you for taking my call. i have seen evan thomas on other shows and it is an honor to speak with you. i want to talk about justice o'connor. in the book about a for the supreme court one dozen years ago she reported that justice brennan that influenced her to

vote more conservatively in the eighties but in the nineties justice thomas did not get along veryus well with justice o'connor she had issues with him that help to enforce her to go to the liberal side in the nineties. so i wondered if in your research you found evident any evidence to corroborate that claim quick. >> there is some truth to both of those things. but in brennan's case it's true justice o'connor did not trust him right away thinking heo was so putting out his opinions for the agenda and she looked for the footnotes

so at the same time. a warm guy. >> yes justice thomas was like justice scalia a conservative, andd originalist and but then to tell me a story about and to get the confirmation hearings have been tough and she made the one and he said that changed everything.

my life on the court got that much better. there was some but traveling around the country and then spending the summer in his rv. the o'connor family would have gone with him personally. but certainly in the nineties that she has alzheimer's - and dementia and probably alzheimer's. >> i get the idea from your book that she has that been a warmce and she can be very

intimidating and can be scary. she has these flashing eyes and but, there is a loving side to her that those and all the a clerks loved her but then they realize how much but then that meant the world to them. i watched her. in fact, i saw when she had

alzheimer's. you would never know that. but she is complicated, she has different sides at times at different way. but her time of the arizona legislature but to be the most in history?y at time and then he let it be known he was r serious. but the one time but talking

about the state of appeals judges that time. the profile has to get under the radar very. >> you can imagine. and a lot of obnoxious men who are hard to deal with and how do you but there was a house

appropriations but she called him on his drinking. if you were a man i would punchh you in the but she wasn't trying to get them to fight but disarmed the theory. talk about her coming down the hall and whatever clerks saying something in that as your very quickly to but every

8:00 a.m. every day they were out there with the justices and then whatever but then tells us they went in. >> how did you have access to her husband quick. >> we had access to her papers because this is a book with her papers in the library of congress they are close they open the papers. i say we my wife and i was deeply involved. we were aware. i took a siebel procedure class at the university of virginia law school she wanted to comehe along. i never practice law but she is a real lawyer. i am n. not she carefully read the cases. more than that she ghost

interviews with me almost all of them but this was different because. and from the west cap california, stanford and this help me to understand justice o'connor better. >>host: next call thank you for calling please go ahead. >>caller: i've been enjoying the conversation of o'connor but i want to go back but when he granted a broadcast license to william banks which was the path for doctor banks with the

first independent tv station in the united states. went on to air from 1870 are but they were the pioneer of broadcasting but today there is a museum to the original studios of the station devoted to that history. and we talk about banks was invited to the white house atnv the time. and nixon told him he would go helpul which ultimately did happen. so i thought you might have beenth interested. as a quick footnote in detroit history so i was just curious

if he was aware of that. >> parted me you seem to have a pretty intimate knowledge. are you part of the family? did you work there quick. >> it was my first job. i didn't work at all - - i worked at the station as an intern. i did know him at thes time. his granddaughter has written a book about him and executive director of the museum and that tells the story but really of the stations history there is another republican who has a footprint at the museum of gerald ford sending a broadcast mission

congratulating the station. >>host: thank you for that. >> i'm fascinated to hear that. so to have a much better civil rights record. politically nixon is known for the southern strategy to stir up white votes in the south in unattractive ways. . >> nixon was a guy who made immigration happen in the south even though the supreme court had ordered him but nixon madend it happen and the courts ordered that. and interestingly with the reports of the viewer that in

the fifties and with the party ofmu lincoln has some ties to the community and the base of the democratic party. and for political reasons that when nixon was in college to make sure his fraternity had a black athlete as it happened orer two there is a record of nixon being progressive as a young person to be forgotten.

and then to make them uncomfortable but i cannot tell you what an uncomplicated guy hehe was. because nixon understood it's important to have economic benefit. but nixon he cared about to make sure the wealth was spread around not just something that whites had and blacks did i not. >>host: that goes to your point ofn the election and also gerald ford had the early connection.

>> i know less about ford but there was a strength to the republican party to be branded with a party of african-americans but that's not the way that it was. so if anything it wasn't reversed that was for those complicated reasons and he blew it but to be more complicated than we think it is. so to talk about eisenhower and nixon in that relationship quick. > murky. because because nixon ended up marrying eisenhower eisenhower

endorsed nixon but when he was the vice president i could be called.ni he didn't knowut nixon. and those younger voters and then after i dump nixon a couple of times off the ticket and then to be secretaryn of defense, but to nixon it was very fruitful. i'm not really sure but then

said he made himself order to like - - like nixon and he may have been exaggerating but he was not always the most likable guy. so there was some coolness. from youngstown pennsylvania go ahead. >>caller: my question is it has been written add not see him about nixon and the kennedy's and johnson and the kennedys. so my question is what is the relationship between nixon and johnson? they had similar backgrounds are not that different with how theyth governed.

>> the relationship was surprisingly good. and they have test --dash they were both tough politicians. and with that vietnam war treaty. and johnson wanted to stay the course and he felt nixon would be a smarter, tougher, prosecutor of his policies in vietnam. then humphrey. so, right there, the democratic president is in some ways more sympathetic to the republican challenger to his own vice president. we have to stop and think, how these pieces fit together. but i think that's true and there's historical evidence. i know my friend luke nichter

at texas a&m believes that and is working to show that. so there's that. but there is an so, there i there's that there n affinity for the club of very practical hardball politicians but t be tough and not get so o. >> host: evan thomas, could you ever attend being mixed in and called it being johnson about the same type of approach to the buck? >> guest: certainly johnson's resentment they have a love-hate relationship. she liked being surrounded by them that the crudest example is where he summons the former dean

at harvard while he's going to the bathroom in aro way that grossed them out. it's a very crude image, i apologize for mentioning it, but it is a stark one that shows johnson's beard almost relationship to the east coast establishment, presenting them, fearing them but also wanting to control and use them at the same time. complicated. people are complicated. >> host: mike, san diego go ahead with your question or comment. >> host: >> caller: you mentioned a moment ago about being the medium and i wonder if that is true or is tv secondary for him for the rallies and social media as a media strategy.

>> guest: tha >> guest: that is a pretty good point. >> host: what is your take, where do you put him in history? >> guest: it's too early. >> host: but when he appears on tv. >> guest: it's hard to compare him to anybody because he doesn't fit into the notions of the presidency. i say when this all began, people kept writing president of trump needs to become presidential. >> host: did you ever write those words? >> guest: i didn't think that is what he was bringing to the table. i didn't write that. he was clearly selling something else. but it wasn't presidential. he's changed the game and for that alone he is going to be remembered. and he is an extremely effective communicator. but that is compounding.

he is a pretty effective communicator, so that is kind of ae point that he has broken the norms. we can get all hot and bothered about how he broke the norms but the fact is he has broken the norms and that is just an example. >> host: you have to say my content of any of thi necessitif the presidency that i want to make sure we mention, and thatt includes barack obama and back from the dead about bill clinton. >> guest: every presidential election year, "newsweek" much to its credit would dedicate an enormous team of reporters to do a single article, one article that would appear on election day and we would have maybe fouu or five reporters and my role of

that is to be the person that he there reporting into an article for the issue. a 50,000 word article and a couple of times the reason that was just a magazine article printed as a book. we added a tiny bit with a magazine article printed as a book. my name is on it but it showed the iam the rewrite guy taking other people's reporting and i'm very proud of those things. "newsweek" spend at least a one of dollars on each them. that is a big journalistic commitment . >> host: please speak about your writing process and do you have any advice for marshall in houston texas?

i'm not going to be very helpful on this because i don't suffer writer's block, i just don't. i don't have trouble writing so i don't have a prospect i proved so much for newsmagazine. whatever writers block went away for so often and so much that i don't suffer from that, not saying the first draft grant any good i don't have any problem i'm notha that helpful giving people advice because it's something i do naturally. it's one of the few things. i'm not good at golf, but i am good at writing. >> host: do you take a

notepad? >> guest: on the books i spend a lot of time putting together the chronology, but there is no chronological finding it. endocrinology year by year it's fair to find stuff because when you are writing a book, you en masse the notes and interviews. where is all that stuff in my study, and if i remember something where did i find it? so it is helpful to remind me where did i find this so i can go back and look at it and i write in chronology i write narratives in chronology so that is the one advice i would recommend. >> host: how do you avoid thinking with your fingers as you are typing. does that work for you sometimes

if i'm writing something i have to sit and think about it at first before i start to type it otherwise -- >> guest: sometimes i type before i think and that is a mistake. i tried to slow down and think. that is a good idea, think before you write. when i'm getting ready to write something difficult in the op-ed, i will walk around. i will wander around and play a round of golf or try to walk on the beach or at the neighborhood and just sort of walk around because it is a confusing cloud in my head. it always is a blur of white noise. but after a while it will settle

and i will see some water. it isn't always the correct order. just as important asrn that was. then my wife gets involved or others. >> host: 74-years-old thinking of what comes next after listening to evan thomas i decided i wandecide i want to cs michael hill. >> guest: he is the most wonderful humanhi being ever. he just is. including i'm happy to say me. he's worked on a number of books with me and he is a genius at

finding stuff. it's so much they don't want anybody to read them. mike is great because he is such a decent person and he is a smart guy he can find stuff and get to know the archivist so popular stories primarily primarily david mccallum and then jon meacham and evan thomas i've used them a lot over these years and i hope to use them in the future because he is a wonderful resource. >> host: next call in ireland new jersey.

>> caller: question is about [inaudible]t don't we know that in the fbi they got them the information and feeding that the steady stream of information and they were simply dupes of the fbi like with the fbi have tried to do to trump. >> guest: he wasn't the only force. woodward and orenstein and they also talk to cindy smith and maybe some others. woodward and bernstein were

knocking on a lot of doors so this was not by any means purely an fbi thing. the best book on this is called weak by max holland. he wrote a book that basically max holland really got into the question so i would recommend if you want to know what really happened, i found that to be the most useful book on how watergate is a big topic and seemed to play a critical role there were others involved. >> host: we will let you know and then you can watch it on tha website on booktv.org is jon

meacham a friend of yours? >> guest: id inhabited george h. w. bush. they offer inhabited the person not uncritically, but the heart and soul and mind of george h. w. bush, you want to know what it was, that book.

they don't have both have a stg personality they would use on occasion and sandra o'connor was a little more politics and barbara bush who was more outspoken. anyways, they were good friends. >> host: after an appointment and confirmation of the supreme court of justice do they ever see theirem patron again? do they know ronald reagan in any way for the justice? >> guest: a little bit. for new year's eve at the annenberg estate in the first

year she went to the white house a couplee of times. they would talk about ranching and there was a natural affini affinity. we will stop and think about this for a second. the justices do not spend time hanging around with the president. they have to keep their distance. they have to make rulings that affect the person on the white house so they keep their distance up with all that i remember when they had a telephone that connected them to lbj that was a mistake and that was wrong and unusual. a one off that got us in trouble. that is the exception that proves the rule.

>> caller: thank you for taking my call. i read your book when it first came out and i remember being so impressed with a wide variety of cases that he handled so after about 25 years i finally got to ask you are there any publicly available transcripts of those trials if someone wanted to see how we handle them and that sort of thing? >> guest: i'm sure there are good. i had access to the papers into the wall for them so you are asking where would we find them today. there are court transcripts for sure. i'm giving this off the top of my head here but if you google the case, i bet you could find

transcripts just through the internet. in my case i'm giving this pre- internet since 1989. so i'm working on the papers but on the internet you can find transcripts just buy google. >> host: max holland, go to c-span.org, booktv.org, you will be able to watch. just look at the search function max holland. the video will come up and you will be able to watch at your leisure online for free. next call norm in washington. you are on booktv. >> caller: >> host: i get it wrong every time.

>> caller: on the legal system i have heard to sayings and i'd like to get your. feedback. the legal system is a spider web which the flies past and get caught and another is if you can't find a lawyer that knows the wall find a judge so is there any accuracy at all to those things? >> guest: there is accuracy because all of them have a kernel of truth. there are stereotypes that are true, butcu the important thing here is how they are wrong. the statements are in a large sense the medicine that make this wrong more than any system in the history of mankind the system is fair and it does catch, not all of them. some have good lawyers and they

get away with stuff. that's true and it's certainly true after the 2008 financial crisis and if the big investment bankers. i do a lot of examples of people for saving justice, but it's stepped back and you look at tha legal system that is remarkably effective and it's worked in ways that no other system has. the history of mankind is power. people who have power and use their power to reward their friends and punish their enemies bl our system more than any other has been able to mitigate the power by a rule of law. we are a government of law and not men. i know that sounds like a cliché, but by and large more than any system in history, we have a system where it i is the wall that matters and not always but more often it is the

greatest creation of liberal democracy. >> tehost: after doing your book persona sandra day o'connor, do you have any opinion on lifetime for supreme court justice and judges in general? >> guest: i can see the drawbacks because there are all these people that don't want to leave because it is a lot of power. those stories give me pause and we live in an age medical science can keep you going forever. so, that does give me some pause. on the other hand i want to de- politicize the court as much as possible. and i kind of like its remoteness. i like the idea of keeping people free. i'm not for expanding the court.

i know that is one of the current ideas but i don't think it is such a good idea. my goal was to preserve the judiciary so that ites can perfm preserving the roof off. however we do that, that is the goal. if you are not retirin they are, i'm for that. but how are we going to preserve the will of law. >> host: if you lived in the east and central timeast and ced have a question for the historian and journalist, (202)748-8201 in the mountain and pacific time zones. if you can't get through on the phone lines we have about 40 minutes left in the show today if you can't get through you can get through on social media we have a great e-mail coming in on micial media so that is a second isenue for you.

this is going to fit right into the conversation in the last ten minutes or so this is from gary and he e-mails are you a proponent of the great theory or that the times makes the leader? >> guest: this is one of those questions that historians have. as a biographer i tend to be in that to take a step back. it is that great men make history, and of course ever since then, scholars have rightly said wait a second, its resolution, it's a million little things. it's the enslaved americans, everything that great men that make history. so there is disquiet in the academy certainly among academic people that they have long since

discarded the great man theory of history. historians like me cannot go with the great fury in the same there are lots of times in history where personality and character of a man or woman do make a difference in the weather or social forces, rising seas or all these things. it is the personality of the person in the chair that have the power to make a decision to integrate the schools or declare war to do this or that so character does make it different and in that sense it's all of the above. sometimes it is a person and

sometimes it is a broad social force. many people have come to office, senate, presidency to drain the swamp. is it drain of? >> guest: of course not. >> host: you are a washingtonian. >> guest: i am all for reformers. there've been those in history where the whole drain the swamp notion blows up and it was important. let's take the 80s and 90s '90s it was too big for the money to buy congress. like a railroad could buy a senator, and so they put in briber[inaudible] they tried to drain the swamp. the progressive era where they did a lot to make the government cleaner. did it succeed, for time.

you come in and try to clean things up partial success, never total success because the motivations never go away but then you get partial success and that's important because you got to try. if we just gave up and said forget it, washington is corru corrupt, that wouldn't work either because he would get more corrupt. get rid of the free press and free form movements and you will see real corruption. every country in the history of the world that didn't have a free press had tremendous production of power and money that even as distasteful as the press can be it can be pretty tasteful it performs an important function. it is an impetus that can be

political movement. it's not t going to work it's important not to be disappoint disappointed. you have to be physically engaged, keep working at it in our countries history it took a hundred years to free the slaves and another hundred years before african-americans in the country were given the rights that they deserved or were entitled to. you have to pay for generations sometimes. it does tend towards justice.

things do get better maybe very slowly, but i have a weak theory of history which is that it does get better two steps forward, one step back. jon meacham has written a wonderful book about going back and looking at critics in the history. where a president was able to do brave things one man or one woman was able to make a difference and that is the history of the country. >> host: let's go back to your favorite books because we looked at three fm that you discussed

debate could send us. we didn' didn't hook up a fourte and this is by john and a woman named lisa. >> guest: john, he's really a fascinating guy. he was a professional nfl football player, lineman for the baltimore ravens. he started mostly as a backup lineman but then had 13 games or something like that. at the same time, he's getting his phd in mathematics at mit. he is a math genius. he's written a book with my daughter into its two stories. it's his discovery of math in

his place in football and there is a commonality. if the key was getting his doctorate. i don't know quite how she did, but it was a great start. we host: i'm going to ask the producer on this one as well. did he cover mind and matter in case people want to see it, because i can't remember if we covered of? >> guest: the book is justju out. >> caller: good afternoon first let me say how much i enjoyed booktv and how much i and listening to

him speak and along those lines i was wondering if he had any thoughts on the passing of tony horwitz this past week. >> guest: i knew him a little bit. a wonderful man for both life and unusual approach to his reaction. there's an expression journalists sometimes the use of the battlefield going to the place the conference and he really did that. he went to the pacific. the most recent book if i remember this right he was a "new york times" correspondent

pre- civil war and what he did is retrace those steps and get to know people in a way journalists often don't. he was the journalist who actually went and talked to the people. i could see him well enough to know he had a tremendous personal warmth and curiosity it was in a way that didn't judge and it was warm and smart. such a tragic loss.

he was just walkingar around bethesda. >> host: pulitzer prize winne winner. >> host: tony horwitz was at the center in atlanta the week prior to his untimely death. booktv covered him here so if we want to see one of the last appearances talking aboutan the newest book. you will be able to watch online. when she was on booktv, she told us that she had finally reassigned herself to going through antietam battlefield with her husband and she had been there countless times and would finally get out of the car and go on tour with him.

>> caller: i think richard nixon didd quite well in 1959 he handled it quite well. he confronted the head o confirf the soviet union and cold war and it really helps thent political position he was on the cover of time and it was an important moment for him in that highly charged period of the mid-cold war 1959 with the soviets were our great enemies and the important thing was a

day actually talked to each other. they were on separate camps but to bring them together face to face at least they were talking. >> host: your father at harper did something very unusual. he gave somebody a million-dollar advance for the buck. my dad was the number two guy. the she had just gotten off the

plane. i was a boy on my way back to and patricia inon long island i had forgot that they paid that much money. the [inaudible]

when i was starting out in journalism there was a rule against it he's been forced to make a choice even of course that hasof all changed because f steve roberts -- it was a different era so as time went on

then newspapers changed their minds and they want you to go on tv because it's a way of getting the story out and it's good for the egos and people doing it so journalists now get paid and have contractse with msnbc. i just read the other day they stop somebody from going home rachel no madoff. my point is the pendulum swing. it is a little bit of a complicated question.

it became less self-consciously objective and more analytical. analysis gets skewed towards opinion, and it gets kind of messy. i don't know what i think of all of this. for 20 years i would go talk on a panel with some otherst journalists and it's not a big deal or huge success. it's fun to do. >> host: but he also appeared on all of the cable channels. you've been on c-span many times as well. it's an issue to talk about and i've been in newsrooms where they talk about it.

the credibility of the news organizations is important and if people don't believe you, that's not good. going on tv doesn't make you unbelievable. journalists go on tv and explained it that kim abbott to the credibility of the story that "the new york times" itself has a story called the weekly where they explain why they did what they did. i can see at the same time if a journalist covers the white house, that would make the editors of little uncomfortable. it's hard to have a hard fast rule for these things and i try to think these programs we talk because i'm not sure what i

think about these. >> host: let's look at the relationship between teddy roosevelt. >> guest: hearst made a lot of money by selling two things, sex and crime and realized he could make even more by selling a third thing. it's not really true, but he claimed it because he thought the american empire neededre to grow. roosevelt looked down on her self patronized and a little bit like richard nixon actually.

so they didn't have a cozy relationship to put it mildly, but this is a great country and the press uses politicians in place of those roosevelt. >> host: next called janice in new york. you have been very patient. >> caller: thanks for having me on. i have a question and comment and by way of grounding idna for mercy's been just as an author and historian and ironically, i coanchored watergate which brings us to my questions regarding your comments about nixon. i am a little bit concerned about the way you think it used the phrase tribalism to be dismissive of some of the

serious flaws not only in the isuntry, but in our understanding of what this country has historically done and is still doing. nixon by way of example wasn't responsible for being the league president on the civil rights of anybody. if the people who state people s were washed up by the backlash is nixon helped fuel -- >> host: very quickly if you could turn off your tv, it is a little difficult to hear you and the tv at the same time. can you give an example what you mean by that use of tribalism?

>> caller: earlier he said that essentially what he was referring to i can't be absolutely specific that i will telbut i willtell you when i hen n context, i said that is white male supremacy. it was in that context. >> host: thank you for calling and let's see if he has anything he would like to add. >> guest: if i sound like i'm guilty of white supremacy, please that's not me. that's not what i'm saying. mixing with and believe you are rght on that. but nixon is relegated and made

some racist comments on those tapes and nixon wasn't blameless idin this area i. my point is nixon did more than we realized. he was close to martin luther king and in the 50s i wouldn't say that he was an activist for civil rights but he wasn't friendly to the cause. when he became president, he made sure the school that the se integrated and you can look at the statistics it was a tiny percentage that were in integrated schools within a couple of years there was a large percentage. he really moved the numbers. that has been overlooked.

i think nixon deserves some credit for that. people naturally want to be part of their own group and they look at their tribe as their group and that they look back that can be this religion or that. i thought my group and others that group. sometimes there's interesting mixing between the group did when i use the word of tribalism that's what i'm referring to looking down on the other end picking up your t own group. we had hoped at the end of the cold war that we were going to go to the new era beyond tribalism. that didn't happen and in the united states today there's a lot of tribalism.

>> host: with the knicks in the example we were talking about the easternxa establishme, the so-called eastern establishment. >> guest: nixing regarded the establishment as the other groups and he was fearful of time and he was not wrong about that. i've worked for a "washington post" company.i believe me. >> host: did you have that feeling inside your house while? >> guest: i was condescending and i don't think that was rig right. one reason i wrote the book is to explore those feelings and to understand that and understand it better. i'm guiltyty i'm sure of all sos

of assumptions, prejudices, whatever you want to call them, as is every human being. they just go without. we may not like to admit it, but we've all got them and as a journalist, i want to understand better and geit better and get s of it. that is my context. if i've miscommunicated that. >> host: evan thomas is currently reading a book by the pulitzer prize winner. >> guest: i just started reading it, listening to bid on the honorable. he can really bring it because he isn't just giving military history. there's a kind of literary quality and a depth of storytelling and you are right

there i felt like i was marching down that road from lexington back to the austin taking cover. that is a gift that he has. i know that i'm going to love this book. he hande had the introduction to enhance the professional actor reading the rest. >> host: do you find yourself doing that more and more than you are sitting in traffic during the audible version packs

>> guest: my daughter sends a small bowls she thinks people like so we do some of that. i generally do not, i am in this case because it is so good it's like fiction and so memorable and gripping, but mostly we listen to nonfiction. >> host: this is the first in the trilogy. jason in salem, oregon youre are on. >> caller: thank you for having me on today. i have several questions for you. you were speaking in 1959 and i wondered if you see a certain

correlation the second question would be do you see yourself correlating with certain things that happened today as they have had in your long career making conclusions about that. >> guest: to answer both questions at once, there are patterns but it doesn't repeat itself but sometimes you can overstate them and it's a problem for people like me. in other circumstances to chan change.

they can get into areas that will cause trouble. i am personally torn about this. if the theaters debate coleaders haven't figured out what it is they are trying to do, reagan and gorbachev thought it was

sort of an interesting moment and i think it is great that they went to moscow and negotiated the first. in the current day i don't know what to make of president trump. i would like to envy in north korea nuclear threat aimed at me. how do you dome that, it is a hd problem. they are a closed society. they are not really talking to us. it is a problem that has defeated administration after administration having gotten nowhere. he's being ridiculed in some camps for doing that. the answer is i don't know what's going to work. it's a good thing to try.

i hope you doesn't mak he doesne but this is a hard problem. and i sort of feel you've got to ptry everything. >> host: eisenhower was dealing with theow north korean. can you talk about that, have we over the years had a pretty sturdy back channel into north korea? >> guest: no, we have not. we have had to go through other stories that he threatened his nuclear weapons in north korea and he sent that message through the indirect channels aimed at moscow and beijing. it was aimed at all three of thoseme parties. we could go on for hours confusing everybody about that, but that shows the difficulty that the diplomacy isn't easy

and i think he was a master of this but i'm really not sure whatff happened there. international diplomacy especially when the nuclear weapons are in bold are tiitically important and really hard to do. >> host: if you think about one of your favorite journalistic stories you've covered over the last 40 to 45 years as we take this call from rachel in tucson. hello, rachel. >> caller: thank you for taking my call. i was wondering what does mr. thomas think about historians going on tv voicing their opinions and then hoping that they areok giving in objective opinion or read and also what influence did his grandfather have on him i think

that he's best known for his grandfather was a socialist at the time, and also has he read the book on freedom of the press, and that's it. thank you so much. >> host: do you think that it is improper for him to be here taking calls and having a chat about his work and things like that? >> caller: absolutely not. i'm talking about when i ask -- >> host: with that, we lost you. >> caller: when i asked aboutg historians going on voicing their opinions particularly about donald trump, iranian where they go from msnbc, cnn, many other venues for people to see them. that's what i mean. i love listening to him. >> host: thank you for calling in, rachel. >> guest:, i go on when i

publish a book i go on any tv show i've want. [laughter] because i want to solve the book. you can get control and integrate politicized discussions. that is what cable tv is selling. that is what they are doing so you get drawn into those things. i'm on the books trying to sell the show and not get drawn into that argument. i am not a journalist anymore. i read the paper and try to stay in the form but my opinions now are about my books, they are not about donald trump. i am not sure what to think about donald trump.. >> host: the new book have you read -- >> guest: i don't, tell me

what it's about. >> host: we have covered or we are told to cover it and i can't think of the name offhand. i'm sure my producer will put that in very quickly so we can tell you that. the unfree press or something like that. >> guest: i'm sorry, i don't know. >> host: and your grandfather, any influence with her grandfather had?ra >> guest: >> host: was he the crazy uncle in the attic? >> guest: >> host: you have not at all. >> guest: he was a wonderful grandfather. >> host: what did he do for a living? >> guest: humorous. he lived off the great socialist left off i think checks from his wife whose grandfather founded the u.s. trust company. so basically supported by i

think dividend checks from u.s. trust companies. he has all sorts of books. but i think, i don't mean to imply that, they were not rich but they had a comfortable middle-class life and i think that is where the money comes from. is ironic i guess. my grandfather is a wonderfulul man, to me growing up. >> host: that is the journalistic story and the next 3in the next30 seconds but you e with us?wi >> guest: i didn't see the plane hit the pentagon, that i saw a fireball out of my window i overlooked the potomac river and it was a horrible to be a journalist it was unbelievably high we produced like three magazines in four days or something like that. and we just worked around the

clock. it was exciting and i remember thinking i was getting a little bored with journalism. maybe i should teach one board after 9/11. >> host: what is your book? >> guest: dropping a bomb on japan. i'm really interested in this string of moral men doing things that were arguably not so moral. how does that work? like? e.hope from the american side but also the japanese side. >> host: evan thomas for the last two hours has been our guest on i in depth. first up is sandra day o'connor. we appreciate your time this afternoon. >> guest: it's great to be here.

.. . >>.

>> god it's great to see you. . >> thank you very much. great to be with you. that 25 years ago i was a young reporter trying to build my