book tv and primetime stars now. first, history professor donald johnson was that life under british occupation and several port cities during the american revolution. and then journalist dan rain discusses the life and career vice president, harris. also tonight, american conservative senior editor, helen andrews provides a critical look at six baby boomers and their impact on society. under weekly author interview program, afterwards. new york times columnist charles, makes his case for blocks to mass political power. in combat whites from sebring and later, sand other discussion on whether the global economic environment is on the path towards higher inflation. find more schedule information online a booktv.org . or consult your program guide. now here's a look at occupation during the american revolution. donald johnson "occupied

america" . >> good evening everyone and welcome to book talk on tuesday. my name is jim, at the washington library. happy new year to all and were glad to see back in his new gear and glad you can join and glad you're spending your evening with aspirated china really excited because will have an opportunity to explore the challenges, distresses and the opportunities that early americans faced while living under british military rules new american revolution. before we get to that, and our distinguished guest this evening, only courage you all to join us on january the 27th of next week. will have a special imposing and tidal leadership for more perfect union. this is a one-day symposium . in the partnership with the brookings institute . will be talking about serious issues that are facing this country at this time. and solutions for the way forward. fully joined by esteemed figures

from government philanthropy and business including former secretary powell. governor of maryland hogan and current associate justice sonya . so please go to mount vernon .org and check us out there . you can register for this free event and we encourage you to join us these important discussions. we look forward to seeing you there. i also want to encourage you to help support mount vernon in a public history sites over this difficult time. were delighted to bring the programming like this to you free every so often. but that does come with a cost. so if you're able and you have the means to do so, we would appreciate you throwing a few clams our way and you can find a way to do that by going to mount vernon .org and clicking that donate button. let's talk about tonight main topic. in 1816, any of you might know, john adams wrote to thomas jefferson then he argues that the revolution was in the hearts and minds of the people in the

16 years before a drop of blood was spilled. and he also argues that the independence in the revolution are two different things. for the really . that's the things that we will lease for tonight. also other questions. marcus evening is doctor donald johnson, an assistant professor at the dakota university. he and his fellow and author of an branded new book "occupied america". and the experience of revolution published in 2020 by university of pennsylvania press. if you'd like to purchase a copy of that, will drop a link in the comments at this time. my distinct privilege to welcome doctor johnson to the screen. hello there sir. donald: thank you. jim: you coming to us from fargo this evening? donald: yes . jim: what is the temperature there. donald: this morning when i

drove to work was about 5 degrees. it's a little nippy. jim: d of a heated garage. donald: yes, i do. jim: [laughter]. all right. thank you very much. i'm excited to tal with you about this book. i'm really fascinated by findings your experience the people faced during the occupation during the revolutionary war. i want to start with this question. a lot of her colleagues in the historical profession has been running a lot these days about loyalists is that about the ordinary americans during the revolution and looking at the slaves who were escaping and pursuing freedom. what was missing. it was from the conversation. donald: from loyalists and patriarchs, the people who wouldn't identify as either low

could've identified is both at various points. there's this whole category of people called different things like neutrals or like eric sullivans, disaffected. these people who are at certain points side with the ground as certain points . they side with revolutionaries at certain points . foresighted neither. i felt like those types of people were not well served in this canonization that we have of patriots on one side loyalists on the other . is a much more complicated story there has to be room of change over time for people's loyalties to be much more complicated. by the very existence. in terms of the experience of the women and enslaved people,

and the native americans. there has been a ton of history of that. in the last decade yourself. then i felt then takes the exceptional. these kind of disenfranchised kind of groups. it doesn't integrate their stories into a narrative. doesn't integrate it with what kind of everyone else is doing. his eyes trying to get out that an ordinary people in different races and genders and backgrounds. and get it kind of how the ordinary experience of evolution really shaped political allegiance. jim: i'm curious and how our early ancestors and the ancestors being our predecessors in historical predecessors shape this narrative early on . because you said we been accustomed to thinking of two

categories, the patriots and loyal test . and people in the great area kind of get lost in the in between. but later on, people started to write histories of the war. and they those determinations and help shape the stories you were telling even up until recently. donald: yes, absolutely. two of the earliest historians of the war were actually ones were you involved in military occupation themselves. and they knew well that ramsey rights, the history revolutionary in south carolina in 1785. in the history of the nation of the market revolution of the first decade of the 19th century. ramsey himself was a prisoner of war occupied in charleston. unwitnessed tail a lot of the trials and tribulations of pecan and occupied boston in newport.

they knew from the personal experience kind of the nuances of allegiance. what is in their interest is kind of the ruling of the elite of the new republic after the war. and not to cast the struggle itself like that. it's kind of like the quote that you opened with. adams writes, i will return this year brett, the revolution was complete before the first shot was fired. everyone had turned against the british. well before the war. the war was an after effect of this kind of change in people's minds. and people like ramsey moran, was in their interest to create this narrative of patriotic revolutionary hungering jewish people to claim and the experiences didn't necessarily

fit that the claimed after the war that always a patriot or on the side. it is interesting in reading history this one of the things that i found in going back through with a night to learns how their defining loyalty and political allegiance, is actually how very few loyalty to this actually did this out right. any times the people that they name are either notorious loyalties people like joseph galloway in philadelphia possibly. have already fled the united states. or else this co- hate group of kind of the loyal tests. they never kind with an actual definition. they been over backwards to forgive people to stray from what they see as is patriotic path. sue and to think of doing that

because after the war, there is a chance of reconciliation in both places are all across in the states. donald: absolutely come is one of the things that even some of the kind of high-profile founding fathers are involved with. john jay, alexander hamilton. a lot of these figures in new york are out making the argument that you can really alienate some of these people who sided with the crown early on in the war. because, they are contributing a good deal to society. the money, they have expertise. they have rules the people made to build a nation. so you're going to have fun of this strict crown during the war coming cannot be part of the american thing, not to exclude the decimated a half million people who have either served in arms the ground or support of

the ground took action. that could be construed as the losses. if you going to exclude the any people party that is a quarter of the population. jim: yes but he fast so want to take this opportunity that they'll have an chance to ask questions of doctor johnson presupposed your questions and comments on facebook, twitter or youtube or or where you're watching from us this evening. your book looks at port cities exclusively. why port cities. when you get from these urban states. not going to get from the back countries. donald: silent urban spaces for two reasons. first records are more likely to survive. and in greater concentrations. and in kind of the hindu lands.

and really they existed and survived. and second is they were places where occupation was the most intense and had the highest space. in terms of intensities, the british occupied elsewhere in american, rural america . much the entire state of georgia. south carolina, large parts of new york and most of new jersey and also pennsylvania. any countryside in places that were occupied by the british, ordinary people michael months or weeks without saying a british soldier. whereas in cities where people are kind of living cheek by jowl, you're interacting with the occupied course, everything will date. as things move more quickly with

greater intensity. in the cities were crucial to the plan on both sides. for the british common strategy was going to take the cities and use them as a basis to conciliate the loyalty from the surrounding countryside. and if there was anywhere that would be welcoming the british army, is likely to be these port cities. much more kind of transient in the population. they were largely dependent on the trade of the british empire for their livelihoods before the evolution. in any places for example, they welcomed the british army with this kind of counsel in the higher citizens in the proclamation of when he lands.

so a lot of these places, the words these kind of people who were welcoming the chance to get back to business when the british arrives. but of the course of the war, the kind of realized that the cost of having soldiers cornered their and the experience of the occupation it made them realize that the empire was that kind of a place to go back to. jim: i want to come back to the british occupation a second. about one of the things that struck me about your work and maybe think about things in a different ways is to the extent to which the revolution resume regime in the game early months of the war were themselves kind of occupying force. one of these governments look like. how did the people responded to them with this dramatic change in 75 and 76. donald: a lot of people didn't know what to make of them.

they were groups of citizens that formed themselves into committees and councils and militias. kind of a resistance organization. and starting around april of 75 after the battle of lexington and concord. they started the apparatuses of power. and these cities that are looking at here in the book, were each capitals of their colonies. ... ...

the person in charge of record-keeping in savannah, open up in the morning by one of the neighbors saying the congress, this resolution organization, broke into the courthouse, who want to use your office to get the clonal record. that basically says no, i'm not going to give you the keys so he comes back hours later and threatened his life and if you don't let us in, to give us the records, then he still says no, i will give you the keys to my office. they come back a couple hours later and said we broke into your office, at least show us what's what. he said all right, if you already spoken, at least you're not going to make a mess. they organized the records for them anything that's private for

him to go about his way out of this false accusation, almost, using of public buildings and records and the power of the beginning of the revolution. >> he didn't have an accusation with the british take new york, these other cities in philadelphia, what does it look like? you mentioned a moment ago one goal is affiliate the american columns back to the king of government. what does that look like and what the role of collaborators in this process? >> is a great word. i used it in the book in the sense that occupation of france and almost everybody living

under them living to some degree or another. pretty much immediately when they land and retake these cities with new york, philadelphia, savannah and charleston, they start distributing loyalty. they go around first in new york and fall of 76 and they get people to sign these. they give out these things, these little pieces of paper that are in duplicate. one is the military headquarters and one is given to the person assigned to them. they renounced any loyalty to the revolutionary so the crown

in some cases, promised to defend them so they are not usually interested in making people with those loyalties fight for them what they do, it's kind of an affirmation of their acceptance of loyal rule and its the hold out for returning to peace, reconnecting to the old british empire, getting back that access trade group, getting access to will quotes, the ability to property that, getting back these old connections to the british empire. for a lot of people, especially people in urban centers, this was attractive. a lot of them made the living based on transatlantic trade and depended upon the british empire

for the livelihood so for a lot of people, the kind of signed on thinking they would get their lives back, essentially. it turned out to be very different. >> how successful were the british in the best sense in their life? restoring civil government, maybe we can look at new york city and savannah, which are two critical places where these experiments are taking place. >> compare and contrast, they are different in the ways they succeed. the british invaded in 1776, manhattan island, staten island, what we think of new york city as well as surrounding areas they are never able to penetrate

into the country so there exists this kind of no man's land, hard border between revolutionary new york and british occupy new york. because of this, the british are unwilling restore civil government to the areas they occupy, they mix military government led by the commanding general of the army and the city of new york itself order on the street. they work with a group of civilians and former officials led by elliott, a customs collector given the title chief

of police or superintendent of police, depending on source you read is kind of responsible for this civilian apparatus that keeps order in the street in full force back to the military. they give civilians stake in the administration and provide lodging people who couldn't afford it based on loyalty and adherence to the crowd. they compensate the house of what they call traders of revolution and put them out to loyal list of people who adhere to them coming into the city. street cleaners, clerks, rent

collectors and so forth, there's this weird civilian administration but it never really has the full force of law as long as it's only backed by the military, there's this idea it could end at any time when the military comes out. especially the examples of newport and philadelphia which the british army does leave before the war and which loyalists who collaborated or helped the british and up fairy really poorly. in savannah where british bring back the well, they are able to conquer the entire area by the end of 1780 and they are able to

call the colonial assemblage into session and savannah and charleston where they attempt to do the same thing, is really is kind of their best hope to restore show that they will restore peace. it does work for about a year but the british army marches north out of the country into north carolina, a kind of goes away. you get revolutionary forces fighting in the back country through the swamp and feuds between people of different allegiances break out. even though he tries his best as government facilitate the

situation, never able to retain the power he had previously. even when the civil government is technically put in power while the war is still raging, the military is the ultimate be all and all. >> the british government or army trying to take various cities successfully holding at least some of them while sitting in the not getting towards yours which didn't end well for them, how other people who spoke of earlier in this middleground, trying to figure out how to survive, how are they ruining themselves in the process? >> a lot of them are doing really ingenious things. there's a innkeeper in new york city who runs this arbitrage scan with the currency where opens her house to prisoners of

war from the army housing them, takes their rent dollars which not a lot of landlords would do in new york and then she asks military authorities to go outside the lines, crossing the river to new jersey and use that currency to buy a bunch of food. comes back to new york and sells it three or four times the price she pays for in british currency and pocket the difference. there's a lot of people working to angle these schemes and in her case, she breaks away free of an abusive husband who she throws out of the house breaks free from because of this source of power, income.

for others, they are more fundamentally reinventing themselves, the people i follow in the book is an enslaved carpenter named boston king, he's born on a plantation outside of charleston, south carolina, please to the british lines, the british offered freedom to the revolutionaries behind the army. serves in a british regiment as an auxiliary or a crunch kind of worker then ends up escaping to new york where he marries another free slave, works as a carpenter, hairdresser, manservant eventually on the railroads. ends up reinventing himself as a free person even with the

british and living out the rest of his life nova scotia in a black community. there's tons of people like this that are totally changing circumstances through the occupation. >> that raises the question about source material, it's easier to write about clinton or folks like that because george washington of course, but these folks would often see or write about the people you track across our states in time, where did you find these individuals? >> a lot of digging. a lot was going into these societies and digging through and seeing what they had. part of the reason is going back to the beginning of our conversation, some of these

people went to hide the extent of their activity during the occupation. one story i found fascinating was mary, the morning owner of the boardinghouse. a diehard loyalist even though her husband served in the continental artillery, she wrote a series of letters to him during the battle of rhode island where he was commanding who was attacking newport. she writes these letters like i hope the continental army burns and dies a horrible death. when i see you again, your being marched through the streets and prisoner of war. she wants to revert and evacuate in october 1779. takes these letters, hands into

a friend and says hide these. until long after i am dead. after she continues to operate with her husband well into the 70s and 90s and the legendary washington connection for george washington stays when he comes to newport in the 90s and they say it block washington who slept on the. they don't find these papers of hers until 1845, 50 when her grandchildren are going to the attic and find that grandma was a loyalist. a lot of people went to great lengths to hide their activities, kind of hunting for their stories that were that much more challenging and rewarding when we find them. >> that's amazing.

it's a good example of grandma's basement. [laughter] is also an example of how the occupation on individuals and families. we may have joked about it being cold earlier and i was outside the other day chopping down trees with my mighty acts so i was thinking about that when reading your book you have a wonderful discussion about the occupation, a natural landscape and environment that people had in their homes, can you tell us about those stresses? >> it was an extraordinary strain on resources in these cities especially when you consider these places were not set up for large influxes of populations. the largest in philadelphia was

about 25000 people and that was with trade from the countryside and took an incredible amount would you will to heat and keep these people alive. the british army comes in with about 35000 troops. they come in with 8000 that almost doubles the prewar population of about 10000 living on the island. by the end of occupation of rhode island, they cut down every tree on the island and they begin to tear down fences and ships to raid the coast for

lumber. even as far away as long island. you think about prices for food and shelter. even from well-off people in new york city, prices for rent are skyhigh. a lot of it has to do with the fire at the beginning of the occupation that brings about a third of the homes in the city but this is pretty much everywhere because there are so many being housed and fed and sheltered its priority over the local population a lot of places and then there are accounts of people going hungry and freezing to death on the streets. winter 1777, eight we know

climate science, one of the fullest in the second half of the 18th century and people were freezing to death and burning animal fat and other things to try to survive. new york city, ordinary stuff goes up by about five times and this is despite british efforts to protect populations so there is dire straits for people living in these towns. >> they were able to restart congress especially when british takes new york and savannah where they have is, are they able to resupply themselves and put back into place some kind of market economy? >> in a sense, yes and no they can bring in a lot luxuries.

for example, the day after british start writing to his supplier in birmingham saying send the hardware, silverware, ceramics. send me all of this stuff because there's a desire for british manufacturing the people have not been able to get due to the outbreak of the imperial crisis. there is a great deal, a lot of these goods selling cheaply in these cities just because there is a supply bill of in england during the intervening. and there's a lot of demand to kind of sell it. if you're in the market for a set of really nice where, that

might be your place but at the same time, they are not able to connect to the local economy, these food supplies, this fuel supply that kept the city's going on a day-to-day basis. the british army goes so far as a group to ireland which boils on the way and never really works but they try dry grain, coal never really works. >> that is fascinating. for our audience, we are coming to your questions, submit those if you haven't already. feel free to continue posting questions they come to mind. the video you mentioned the experience of occupation eroded

whatever loyalty any : is felt in the government just by virtue of experiencing, tell us more about that process. was it all at once some decided enough was enough or was it a slow? he decided they would not go into exile but stay in the u.s.? >> it's much more of a slow burn. i compare it to muscle memory so even if they were, they had loyalty at the beginning, because of the hardship and the strains they put on the communities, they are forced to break the law to turn in order to survive. for example, the family of rhode

island in boston and new york, constantly smuggling food and resources to one another across enemy lines. one other in newport, one brother in occupied new york, one brother in boston constantly writing to each other and sending each other food and money and other things under the nose of the british. the same thing is happening in the south, people keep ties to revolutionary friends, neighbors, relatives not necessarily out of ideological reasons but practical reasons. that's how they survive and also vice versa. people in revolutionary areas keeping ties to british occupied areas in order to save that.

by having to constantly undermine government, these occupation regimes, it erodes their authority and the idea that it is of the population. while it doesn't necessarily turn people into the revolutionaries, at least get them alienation from royal governments elected necessarily exist before the war. >> i do want to note you did teach classes today so thank you for being with us. i want to close my portion of the conversation by asking, what you tell your students is the most important thing to know about the occupation or maybe even better, what supplies do

most about this project when researching forks. >> the project and the occupation, the most surprising thing was really kind of the amount of faith people put into making society work under reddish occupation and we think of when the military comes, this catch all for a dire situation where people are in this. a lot of people are like i feel like this category of in between patriot loyalist category of people, they get a bad rap early history and i think it is under. i think they tell political

opinions but they didn't necessarily have the luxury of acting on it. the best source i found was a book of poems from the woman in new york, a quaker and in her poetry was probe revolutionary. she wrote about revolutionary heroes and virtue mary's british soldier living and moving to british canada and that disconnect is fascinating to me. it doesn't mean she didn't hold the beliefs. she obviously did by the end, and her date today life, she didn't have the luxury of acting on that. it shows us all of what happened during these revolutionary upheavals. >> thank you for talking with

me. let's talk to the audience. a question coming in about the transition of capital cities from places like harrisburg and charleston. to what extent does the state of the occupation of these cities lead to the removal of these places in these states? >> i've never really thought of it that way, but tear versus establishment, the movement of capitals, harrisburg, charleston and columbia to atlanta and places like that but it may have something to do with it as well. again, i'm not sure if the timing of that so i will have to look into that question but that is really interesting.

>> thank you. [laughter] a question is coming in about yorktown and jamestown, she's curious about the cities and the british occupation of what you could argue yorktown at the end of the war and northern virginia occupied at the beginning of the war and basically burned by patriot leaders to prevent by governor done more but they tended to be too small to worry

about that. it's one reason, i mentioned this in the book as well, it's not a coincidence the cities and talking about, boston, new york, savannah and charleston were the biggest cities in north america and the most important economically and the most important strategically. yorktown, jamestown, kind of on that map of imperial standpoints. they did face grades at various times in a war and it was occupied by the troops but really one of only circumstantially. seeking an escape back to new york and yeah, they're just not as important economically to trade and very much. looking at whether or not there

occupied by british war is both the example. >> i think they all fail in the end because they get returns to the u.s. the british, when they negotiate for peace, there is a movement because the and, even after the battle at york, new york, savannah charleston, there is a directive by the ministry to save new york, keep it as a trading outpost to which the british can keep the economic clouds in north america and stations the navy and have a strategic pulled down but the populations of all these cities

turn against these cities by the end of the war. by the end of the war, even the people who have been the most excited about british rule in new york, they are exhausted, tired with the revolutionary government. even williams junior, the loyalist basically said enough is enough the population will follow you if you hold new york as a british post in north america. they don't really have to get up because the population turns against him so the common theme is that they just kind of collapse after british military

defeats. >> this question makes me wonder about what lessons the british learned at various various cities to the extent in which for example, lessons they may have learned in boston to new york or boston or places like that. >> they do -- it is in the course of the floor. just create in new york getting replicated in philadelphia, savannah, charleston. i believe in newport although the records of newport occupation sink to the bottom when the british evacuated the ship carried the records sink. in charleston, former attorney general creates this elaborate plan for different districts.

you can kind of ideological indoctrination of the population. it takes hold and it's not necessarily the book of these officials, these military officers willing to put conciliation in front of military victory. >> one thing at the disposal the british authorities using this tool, in what ways do they use confiscation as a means to entice people to one side or the other? >> one of the things especially apparent in the south, south carolina and georgia, the british had a large number of patients and enslaved people only initially invaded georgia

and south carolina kind of doled them out as rewards. they are able to reclaim their property were enslaved people even for some stuck with the crown even before occupation, they are just kind of given the land of former revolutionary, getting laypeople to do what they will during this period. alternately, new york charleston the powers to take property, agitate, seize land material there is a lot of people's property and wealth as a way to

entice or punish them alternatively. >> speaking of taking territory, we got a question about how far inland british minister occupied the country during the war. >> it depends on the region. in most of the laces i'm looking at, they're not that much further actual estates. in boston, they never really controlled beyond offices of the city itself philadelphia as well, they controlled the city and what we think of as the inner suburbs but the lines were pretty narrow. in the south, it's a little more all encompassing. they occupied georgia so they

got pretty far into western georgia and south carolina as far back as 96. as far back as 96 and able to kind of at certain times exercise control over those entire states so really buried place to place and then there are places where both sides, the regions around new york city about 100 miles in either direction were kind of no man's land places for malicious were loyal to the revolutionaries, they fought one another for control and neither side really had a clear advantage. >> we have a question about the citizens, i am wondering about

british armies, to what extent did this lead to, did it lead people to one side or another? >> i think there were certain amount of people willing to side with whichever side was stronger or looked more ready to win the war. i found correspondence from family members, maybe next month is the time to jump ship come to revolutionary sites are in a couple months, we win this battle we should switch to the crowd. lots of side swapping in these areas.

>> in terms of disinfection, a lot of people are kind of militantly anti- both sides and i draw a comparison to the english civil war where there are groups depend against the loyalist you see it more in the backcountry of the carolinas and georgia, people beyond the mountains. tennesseans and kentuckians, and they will attack pretty much anyone who comes through the region so i'd say yes, they have definitely disinfection for her. in terms of different occupant cities, yes and no.

i tried to do in the book is strong common threads as much as i can and usually kind of art, the beginning, british arrive. all of the population connecting the british empire, things will get more peaceful and this is kind of the beginning of the end of their travails and then there's this period of deprivation and hardship and the other thing that occurs, a lot of militaries and british army particularly was a very violent society. there's assault, rape and murders. there's all kinds violence. that is common to all. some cities set people off the don't and others. one thing bostonians look at is

the british soldiers not respecting the sabbath on sundays and not letting them go into the churches. one thing carolinians are complaining about is how the british are free with enslaved people and allow blacks to kind of have more liberties than they are used to. there are cultural differences like that but there are a lot of common expenses. >> later on in the program this evening one final question here and i want to build on this a little bit. the prominence between hundred and franklin and william, the last president from new jersey. i want to build on by asking about the long lasting effects

of occupation in the postwar period. what did it mean for people who have been occupied or divided or exiled? what kind of lasting effects did occupation have on their lives? >> i can't think of notable ones but there were definitely a lot of families divided this way. the family i mentioned earlier, about half of them in nova scotia and england, the other half remaining and rhode island. both sides prospered and continue to correspond under penalty of execution. there's a lot of this is a book with benjamin going into exile

for franklin becomes a citizen. you just hang over a lot of people a certain way, they can't sweep it under the rug and forget it. going back to the conversation, there is kind of a permissiveness in the early republic or willingness to forget a lot of the nuances of the wartime experience. one thing about that is somewhat who was a political economist in the department of the treasury of both the washington and jefferson administration and in his younger life, he was a diehard loyalist. married the daughter of a prominent loyalist family.

basically made his money profiteering off the occupation, licenses to the british west indies and import stuff from new york in the caribbean and philadelphia one of these people sides at the right time when he gets word the british were getting ready to evacuate, you wipe some outside the town speaks out of philadelphia a week before the british leave and find loyalty to the revolutionaries. he comes back and writes to new york, basically breaking contact with them and writes that he's willing to be the most perfect man if they will accept him. he's able to make a career in politics in the early republic elected to congress and confederation in the 80s. the treasury department 90s

and 18 it comes up every now and again when writing to office in public view but almost treated as his own discretion. they were like you can't blame him for that, he's only 20. it was work. it was this let bygones be bygones. part of that, everyone has something like that during the war they wouldn't want brought out. his critics are never able to kind of get traction because there is this forgive and forget mentality. >> i saw the earlier contacts, we haven't read much about his life before. he showed me your book and he's like what the heck is he doing that? a great example of the ways in which i think you talk about reinventing himself.

>> absolutely. mutilating. you look at the pennsylvania, you portion in his ribs out. on the one hand, it is interesting to see the way people reshape their lives. >> this has been fantastic. thank you so much. when we are able to travel again your back this way, let's occupy a table at a pub. i enjoy our time together. i want to thank you, i think our audience for the questions thank you for tuning in. they are working their magic behind the scenes, thank you. take care, hope to see you soon. everyone else, have a good evening, good night and good

luck. >> thank you so much. it's been a pleasure. ♪♪ >> you are watching book tv on c-span2 every weekend with the latest nonfiction books and authors. book tv on c-span2 graded by america's cable television company. today you by these television companies to provide bookkeeping to the u.s. as a public service. ♪♪ ♪♪ >> during a recent program, u.s. court of appeals judge circuit, jeffrey said, life and career of supreme court justice, antonin scalia. >> i decided to work for justice scalia, with my past and back on and family, that would not have been your first guess so why is it that in 1991, i wanted to work for justice scalia? this is the thing i think most law students can understand. reading judicial opinions, is

usually not a lot of fun. as for lawyers have the habit of drinking for coffee that is good for them. these are novels. caffeine gets you through. refreshing nude, across justice scalia's majority opinion and they stood out in the writing, honesty, the test for truth. i couldn't care less whether he is living constitutional is more originalist, all i wanted to do was get to know him, he seemed like a lot of fun but then i really wanted to learn to write like in which of course, that's unrealistic but so be it. just right as close as you

could. that's how i got to know him and why i started working with him. then of course, it was easy to fall under his influence because his passion writes dedication to make sure you're being honest about what is going on not being afraid to second-guess yourself and be involved on patient and his passion for writing, there's no way you could finish with him and not want to be a better writer and so much of becoming a better writer is wanting to be a better writer you just couldn't come up with out that. it's really interesting since 1992, almost 30 years, that your hand many times since, he did do something. i hear him say something, we would talk about the case and have this reaction, justice scalia, that can't be right. he'd say it so forcefully. perhaps saint forcefully makes me want to push back, i can't tell you the number of times

this happened and then thought about in a couple of years sometimes would go to my would say it's some really good points. so now writing the introduction to this book, it wasn't hard to embrace ritualism. i think it is right the only answer to avoid the federal court and i think he's been right all along going back, why the influence? i think it's something to do with power these ideas and it's remarkable in the capacity so well not a bad thing to know if you have good ideas and express them, she might have influenced enough to watch the rest of his booktv.org, search for jeffrey said and be a central player in the search box at the top of the page.

>> this is c-span2 online store and shop.work. c-span product and 170 congress in session, taking preorders, congressional order. catholic c-span shop that work. >> now on book tv, for television with serious readers. ♪♪ >> welcome to the national press club, a place where it happens. membership secretary of the press club and government congressional campaigns quarter. thank you for joining us today for virtual headliners. we are happy to accept questions from the audience today and i will ask as many questions as