has unfiltered coverage of the us response to russia's invasion of ukraine. we will bring you the latest from the presidentand other white house officials, the pentagon and the department as well as congress . we have international perspective from the united nations andstatements from foreign leaders on the c-span networks . online at c-span.org or on the free c-span now mobile video app. >> assistant attorney general for civil rights kristin clark testified before the senate judiciary committee about the increase in hate crimes. watch tonight at eight eastern on c-span2, online at c-span.org or coverage on our free video app, c-span now. >> c-span now is a free mobile app featuring your unfiltered view of what's happening live in washington . keep up with today's events with hearings from the u.s. congress, white house events, the courts and campaigns and more from the world of

politics all atyour fingertips . you you can also stay to with the washington journal and live tv networks and plus a variety of compelling podcasts. we are available at the apple store and google play. download it for free today. c-span now: your front row seat to washington anytime, anywhere . >> former defense secretary leon panetta and william trcohen condemned the russian invasion of ukraine. the two participated in a global security forum hosted by the center for strategic andinternational studies . thisis about an hour and 10 minutes .

>> it's almost like a real congress. it's just great. great to see everybody and have you here. wathank you so much. looking forward to what's going to be a very exciting conversation. it's been very good so far but we're going to have a real opportunity to listen to truly iconic leaders. i'm so grateful for that. let me say thankful thank you to our friends and leonardo was made as possible. we've done this for over 10 years and they've given us the opportunity to host this event. they were the ones that suggested to us this topic that we're going to explore . and you undoubtedly have the report. i'll say it in my blood terms. can america be a world leader in we're so busy fighting each other at home ? does anybody want to follow us?

with the kind of behavior we've been exhibiting overthe last years . ythe rank for, in our politic . it's disquieting. but that's why we reached out to bill: and leon pinetta. these are two leaders who've worked harderthan anybody i know to have good relations on both sides of the eye . i've seen bothof them in action . what they had to do and it always wasn't pleasant but it was invariably the core of how they approached their stewardship and office which is we have to have a bipartisan consensus for america on these crucial issues of national security . and i saw them both in action in very different difficult circumstances where there's a lot of partisan energy in the room , tearing up the issue but they kept us together as a nation. so we called on them for this

conversation. it's a very important conversation we have to have. it's a little bit artificialright now because of ukraine . there's kind of an artificial bipartisanship. i hope it's real. i hope it constitutes kind of a recovery of our shared understanding of what's important to our whole family, not just one side or the other, our whole family. there are little time marks. we've had a lot of them in recent years i'm hopeful and i'm sure suzanne will bring some of this out in the conversation today. i think the world changed rather profoundly when putin invaded ukraine. because as he's alienated everybody in europe and so many countries around the world, xi jinping threw his

arms around putin and said we are forever together, brothers here. we are on the edge of what looks like could be a great furcation of theinternational system again . it's going to be a great challenge. we're so fortunate to have leaders of this quality who guided us in the past and are going to give us good thoughts for odtoday so let me turn to you to turn this conversation alive for everybody in the room. thank you both for being here. [applause] >> thank you very much doctor for setting the stage for this important conversation and thanks to both of you for making time to be here to have a conversation with us today. we're going to get to the issues around divisiveness that are at the core of the report that brings this conference together today but of course we're going to start with what is on the forefront of everyone's mind and that is this horror in folding in ukraine. i know one of the things that

people are really thinking a lot about and the two of you are well situated to talk to this is what are some of the most likely ways that this plays out? where does this go in the near-term and long-term? >> well, it's a tragic moment in our history when we have put in and russians invade a sovereign country like the ukraine. and watching this unfold on television and seeing the chaos and carnage that involved with what's happening you know, just makes us all aware of the fact that sometimes we don't

learn the lessons of history verywell . and yet i think as john pointed out, this is very much a pivotal moment. it's going to tell us an awful lot about what happens in the 21st century. i look back at the 20th century and think about what happened in world war i as in many ways defining what the 20th century is going to look like and i think what's happening now could tell us a lot about the21st century . not only in terms of what happens with democracies but what happens with autocracies as well. so this is a very pivotal moment. and probably the best thing about it is that united states as the world leader asserted his role as world leader and was able to

develop a unified position with our nato allies. that really came together. bill knows this, having dealt with nato. this is a very diverse group of nations that are part of nato. and going to brussels and dealing with them is not an easy task. and yet, i give tremendous amount of credit to the president for his ability to pull together and really agree on a strategy that involves sanctions and weapons to the ukrainians and involves reinforcing our position in nato. and really, what it did was what they said they would do which was to make putin pay a price. to make putin pay a price for his aggression. and that wasextremely

important . and you know, as this thing unfolded i have to tell you that for all of the things we did at the defense department looking at russian capabilities , this thing has really made clear the weaknesses of the russian military. whether it's poor training, whether it's poor leadership, whether it's poor planning, i don't know all of the ingredients but the fact was they were planning within a few days to take the capital, to have the government collapse and that they would be rulers of ukraine. that was the way it was supposed to play out and it hasn't played out . due in large measure to the bravery and courage of ukraine and what they've done. but it tells us a lot.

about the weaknesses that we've seen. how does it play out? i think there's one or two scenarios. one is that we are squeezing putin economically sanctions. and these are tough sanctions because of the unity of these other countries. tough sanctions. we are squeezing him. we are seeing russia, russians who are disturbed by what's going on in ukraine and the demonstrations that are taking place in russia tell us a lot about the fact that russians are concerned about what they see happening . and thirdly, the ability to provide weapons, war weapons to the ukrainians so they can

put up a hell of a fight and continue to put up the fight and as i said, the ability to reinforce our position in nato. it could put enough pressure on putin so that at some point he decides that he's in trouble as leader of russia. and that he's got to find a way to basically resolve this , saying he's been able to achieve the goals that they were after . you know, to retain control of the donbas area and other areas that got in and have a ukraine that is neutral is its own country and the remainder. in other words, to find a way

where you can say i've achieved the goals where i was after and i've made my point that our security is important andthat he saw others a lesson .i think the world would still consider the fact that putin was defeated as a result of that but at least it's a way for him to get out with some degree of egsaying i was able to achieve my goals. the second option is that he's able, he goes in, turn a lot of these cities to ashes. we have a lot more refugees leaving. omhe's able to control some of the principal cities in ukraine and that there is a resistance that develops their that we support that will be a very prolonged resistance. the ukrainian people will continue to fight. i think what putin understands right now is he may try to conquer ukraine, but ukraine cannot be conquered.

it's that simple. so we have to prolong war of resistance and the issue then is whether at some point russia decides as it did and in afghanistan to get the hell out. i think those are probablythe two scenarios that i see . i'd be interested in your thoughts on how this plays out and what more could the us and nato, our allies be doing to try to push this towards an outcome that is you know, more desirable? >> part before looking at the camera. i'm unaccustomed to doing that i like to address everybody in the group. i agree with leon. we have failed to learn the lessons of the past. but taking the long sweep of history into account i think a historian once said you

look at the past three or 4000 years,only 212 have been free of war . it's and then to the human species that we are driven to war. and also, i've read it before but i started rereading it again. donald kagan spoke on the origins of war and he points out that there were three things basically that drive people to war. countries to war. one interest, 2, fear and 3, other work right. all three things are here as far as the russians are concerned and certainly the ukrainians. the russians have been fearful that the expansion of nato is somehow going to present a physical threat or certainly an economic threat to their existence. they have interests which they believe they should

restore the sphere of influence they have back in 1997. and as a matter of honor involved, tried . now has said the pride of russia is involved so he's going to break that down and come down as hard as he can. i don't know what the end result is going to be here. i don't think anybody can tell us. i agree with leon's presentation we will have 2 options . the one i worry about is the one described in t.s. eliot's wasteland. i'll show you fear in a handful of dust. in this particular case the possibility of radioactive dust although i don't think it will come to that but the fear he is trying to stoke in the west right now. and we're seeing day by day he has no apprehension about killing as many people as possible no matter what the hardship to young babies or

old men, he's prepared to level every city in the process until we find some solution. i don't think it's going to be us, frankly. i think the chinese notwithstanding they're trying to stay above the fray . i think they're one of the few countries that have the ability to intervene, at least have an intervention privately with putin saying this is not going well us because even if leon's second option is right, that there would be a long uncertainty which we wage against russia. putin is going to say wait a minute, you're coming in from poland . you're coming in from hungary , i don't think so. this is something i want to up the ante as far as all those countries are concerned and then start looking at ways to attackthem . and then that calls us to respond.

what do we do if there's a nato country involved? how high are we willing to go up the chain? i think he this particular point has concluded he is able to survive the sanctions more than we're willing to impose them over the mid to long-term. i think he has concluded we know whatsacrifice is , going back to the second world war. that we can bear almost anything and that the west will fold before we do. that we are going to suffer some sopain in the immediate short-term, medium-term and how long will we hold on? that's a concern that ihave . a positive thing that's come out of all this, not to say there's anything positive is that we have seen a drift towards authoritarianism in the world. certainly with china. certainly parts of turkey.

certainly we have seen it in russia. and we've even seen it in this country in which we have drifted away from the rule of law and we're seeing a turn to the rule of power. that has been the most dangerous development from my perspective in this country. when you lose the rule of law in your endorsing the law of rule and it's disappointing. we're going to talk about this. as part of the agenda which really talk about the absence of bipartisanship today as compared to the good old days. but we're finding to me at least the most worrisome thing is that the american people have been less concerned about preserving the integrity ofour institutions . they have made us the greatest force for freedom on our planet and we have taken that for granted and now we don't really respect the

rule. we don't respect it from putin's point of view and we don't respect it geopolitically. we don't respect it here at home enough. and i think what putin has done is to consolidate this and say wait a minute, this is raw , political and military power being exercised against people who have always taken freedom so as leon was talking about you seen a consolidation of all our nato countries which were doubtful until most recently.think about it. we insulted ithe germans . the german didn't get a chance to shake the hand of our formerpresident . he i think that means her publicly. we had the former president question the utility of nato who also express concerns about whether we should be in japan. whether we should be in south korea. whether we should be in

germany. and i didn't hear an outcry coming from members of congress on that say wait a minute . we have these relationships because you have to make your friends before you need them. this is a combination of all the democracies in the world we have something precious and only by staying together can we preserve that. so i think putin has, i don't mean this done us a favor. he's killed lethousands. he's displaced i think 5 million, maybe 10 million. but what he has done is reminded us, the free world what what is worth fighting for that we have to stick together in the face of authoritarianism and what that means for world security and peace . i feel a senate response coming on so i'm going to cease and desist. i feel like i'm a senator again.

quite you stopped right under fi the five minute rule. [laughter] >> i'm glad you took the time to make those really important comments about the broader impact on democracy. we know putin has spent many yearsconveying the message , trying to convince americans, the adult population and those around the world that democracy is weak, corrupt . and that's something that is irrevocably dirrevocably broken and he tested the strength of democracy when he made that decision to go into ukraine. so while there will be time to look back at important lessons to be learned as you mentioned about things we might have done differently over the years, months and days before the invasion of ukraine. that might change the course of events. we can't let we can learn some lessons right now.

secretary pinetta, you've talk about leading with our strengths as a democracy. the fact that we have allies instead of client states that come about through our support. that we can operate with transparency. as the former head of cia i'd be interestedin your thoughts on theintelligence community's performance here and the policymakers decisions to be as transparent as they have , to shine light into the dark corners where putin hides . >> i'm a believer as bill is that the united states is a world leader. it's extremely important for the united states to play that role because of the values we have as our democracy. but the way we've been able to be a world leader is w because of our military strength.

we are the strongest military re power on the face of theearth . our diplomacy, our ability to use our diplomacy effectively and our ability to build alliances. and to work with allies. we're living in adangerous world right now . and you know, no matter where you look even before what happened in ukraine, the reality is we're dealing with a second chapter of the cold war in russia. we're dealing with china. we are dealing with north korea. we're dealing withiran . we're dealing with the middle east in which there are a number of failed states that are undermining security in that region. we're dealing with cyber war which has become really the battlefield of the future and our ability to be able to

have a strong defense, have strong intelligence and have strong allies is what gives us the ability to try to confront thesedanger points in the world . and we had a great example of what it means when we are using that leadership in order to be able to confront an adversary like russia. look, russia putin read weakness on the part of the united states for a long time going back probably three or four administrations .g and that's why he went in to georgia. he went into crimea. he went into syria. he went into libya and he used a cyber war against the united states on our election capabilities and

institutions. very bold cyber war that's still going on. so he read weakness. on the part of the united states and that he could get away with that exercise of power and i think he looked at the united states, look at our polarization. he looked at the messages trump was sending out. he looked at the divisions within our own country and what bill said in terms of respect for the rule of law whether we were still, whether we could even govern, for god's sake. whether we could govern. and he then saw what happened in afghanistan. i think anthese guys are not going to draw a line. and we did. we did. we drew a line that had to be drawn. and the united states and our allies came together and when we use the intelligence

capability to basically look at what russia was doing and normally putin likes to operate in the dark, let's face it. he likes to operate not on the public stage . but when we put all of that intelligence out on the public stage and said this is what he's up to. this is what he'splanning . these are the moves he's taking. stuff that in the intelligence business that's what we're supposed to do is be able to determine that . most of the time when you determine that you put it into the pdd and its classified and nobody knows about it except a few people. this was put out for the world.le great decision. a great decision because it made the world aware of what the hell they were up to. and when putin then moved, even though he kept saying they are not going to invade, we're not going to invade.

even in the face of everything that was being put out in intelligence, it showed him for the liar that he is. and it weakened their position that much more when they then attacked and invaded ukraine. so it's a good move. to be able to point out that information. it was a good move to draw a the line on putin and say that he's going to pay a price. he is nowpaying the price . and the key i think right now is that the united states and our nato allies have to stick together in a more unified way than ever because if we are into this long-term resistance war that goes on in ukraine with all of the sanctions in place, with all the economic consequences, we're going to get some

brakes that are going to start appearing. and we cannot afford to have any breaks in the unity between the united states and our allieswe have got to remain firm .that's going to be the key as to whether or not we ultimately are going to be able to prevail one way or another in this war and we are. we haven't declared war. the reality is for all intents and purposes, the united states is in a proxy war with russia rightnow . and we have to determine who ultimately is going to prevail. >> i think we're in two kinds of work, on the one informationwarfare and economic warfare . we sent to lump all the russian people in our discussion but the russian people ordinarily would be with us . they have seen the benefit from what is happening in the west as the ukrainians have.

and putin has shut that down now. we like to site for a while but think about. this is not a war. this is a special military operation and if you call it a war you go away for 15 years. if you criticize our military you go away for 15 years so he has turned this into orwell's ministry of truth and think about it. war is peace. ignorance is strength. slavery is freedom. it's whatever they say it is and if you suppress the information in russia they're going to listen to what he's saying. we have to wait and information warfare to penetrate the iron curtain that he's put up in terms of russian people understanding what's going on and you think about the russians so far i think there's 1000s, maybe more. people who in the streets of russia saying they know what's going to happen. they're going to go away.

they're going to be a relic of the past and yet they're demonstrating against them so the more the information gets out there more people will be in the street and the more people in the streets he's going to be even more. that presents another challenge, what happens when he is threatened from within? does he lash out further? does he then get more aggressive in terms of what he is threatening to the nato countries or in ukraine or those that are not yet members of nato? we don't know which is why i think china has a big role to play here. china has signed a deal with the olympics saying we're with you hope line and sinker but the chinese don't want to see this interrupt into a much more global conflict that it is right now only in ukraine. they have a major interest in not seeing us come face-to-face with the russians and what can happen by either misjudgments,

calculation or mistakes. one of those missiles flies into poland and take out some american or polish soldiers, what's the reaction at that point? i think it would be a strong reaction that we start climbing up the ladder. i'll come back to leon's point about hangingtogether . that's one of my n'concerns right now. don't recognize the congress that i served in or that you served in. i don't recognize the house of representatives. i don't recognize the senate. there were never cases like that when we were in office and there are reasons for this change. these neither leon or i ever had to confront and deal with social media. we really never hadto deal with the effects of globalization . if you thinkabout what's going on in this country , there are not only 95 for i-95 april 4, 1995 now demonstrating against the wearing of masks or mandates for vaccinations.

even though we're taking the masks off. even though we'vevaccinated most of the people, 75 percent that are out there demonstrating . and members of congress especially in my party appealing to the worst instincts of the american people in terms of fear. racism, misogyny. all of the things that have been in our lives from the beginning of time. it's just come to the surface more in the last four or five years . but we have members of congress now saying we support putin or why don't we support putin? the short answer is you believe in freedom, don't you ? that's why we're supporting ukraine. really people are dying. so i worry that we won't be

able to sustain the consensus that exists now because we're moving into a political year and now we say well, didn't biden lose this war? isn't this biden's fault that we lost this and then they start in again trying to place themselves in front so they can win the election in november. i think putin iscounting on that. most authoritarian governments look at us , most governments look at us and say how can we be sure you will stay with us? the reason you're seeing so much discontent in the middle east is our allies and friends don't trust us. they don't trust us. you trust us on issues, why not? they saw how we pulled out of syria. you may recall general jim mattis was forced to resign after the president said pull out of syria now. no news to anybody else, get out and hefelt i can't serve

anymore . then we're out of afghanistan and the way that was certainly initiated. they're looking at us saying we want to get out of there to these countries are looking at us anywhere not too sure. maybe the saudi's have to hedge and that's why there they have been responsive. president bidenasked them to produce more energy and they said we're not going to do that . they finally came out and endorsed russia but there may have a conflict. they had a good relationship. and i think we all know why that is in terms of having some access to go into syria without being hit by at 600 they got a conflict there and there being torn by that. they came out, they had their prime minister meet with putin and that was great and then you've got india. india would be one of the largest democracies in the

world. they have remained reasonably silent, why? because they depend upon russian military.50 percent or 60 percent of their military equipment comes from russia. they had long historical ties to russia. here we are trying to establish a much better relationship with india, japan, australia, us so they're in a position now where they're trying to hedge what they do. we want to maintain our neutrality, our economy and not get caught up in russia versus the united states but the fact is they look at china and see china is posing a threat economically and militarily so it gets more complicated in terms of how we hold on toall this solidarity . it comes back to interest, fear and so i don't know how it all ends. i'm hoping for the best.

i hope leon is correct that some settlements can be arrived at but isn't it ironic that we have to find a face-saving way out for putin ? who has created this disaster on a monumental scale? how can we save face? i find it hard for us to do that but again, i'm hoping others will. i don't think that we can.i don't think we will be able to do that but i think that others who have an interest in seeing this does not spread will be helpful inthis regard . >> how much you think that effort to find an offramp, the effort ultimately perhaps could to negotiate some way out of the violence here is complicated by putin's decision to indiscriminately target civilians? the un is now talking about war crimes investigations. how much does that complicate

the way out here if we're going to be true to the rule of law? >> i'll go first. i'll be as short as i can. it does 2 things. the cruelty that he has demonstrated as i think rally the world against him so as leon was saying earlier everybody who has freedom of information can see what he has done and what that means to peace around the world so it's rally the world against him. the fact gathat he has killed so many and is prepared to displace as many as 10 million people i think that makes it more difficult for a quote offramp for him. on the other hand, to the extent that he sees more and more people, the israelis criticizing him. the uae stepping in.

others now criticizing him, not only criticizing him. we can all talk words appear. it's what we're prepared to do. are each of those countries prepared to cut offsome degree of business with them ? so that really hurts him in a way that the russian people once again take to thestreets . i think it will rally the world opinion against him. that may make it more difficult to find an offramp but i think the more he does this, the less options he's going to have. and i don't know how it ends well. i worry about waging a long term insurrection or insurgency against him because i think he can't afford to have that happen. he can't afford to have all these weapons coming in from all these different states without declaring war against them as well. so maybe in the short term if other major power step in and

give him counsel saying let's find leon's way out ofthis . all of this could have been done but leon said from the very beginning. we could have said from the beginning that too early to be talking about coming into nato. and you were just visiting the cia. bill behrens wrote about this in his book. most recent book, back channel. when she pointed out back in 2007, he said this is the red line. you don't want to crossthis breadline because putin will react in an aggressive way. it's good advice now here we are . so i think it's like the other powers other than ourselves to help persuade him. he's made a big mistake and find a way he can say okay, i made that point. you didn't listen to me, now you're listening to me and it's a message for the rest of you that want to get into

nato and the eu, i am still here. >> when the united states and our nato allies decided and said we're going to make putin pay a price, and then made him pay a price for the invasion, it is very important that we understand that this means that we have to make him pay a price. so this isn't a nice guy approach here. when you're dealing with the tyrants. and a bully like putin. this isn't one where you can kind of hope that saying her mines will take over and try to provide that kind of diplomatic solution that could happen. this is a situation where

having drawn the line on putin we have to stick to it. and we've got to make damn sure that sanctions continue to hit russia and that the russian people are made aware of just how horrible the situation is. and begin to continue to undermine his strength back home which will get his attention hell of a lot faster thananything else . and we have to continue to arm ukrainians so that they are able to do the remarkable fighting that they're involved in. these are small groups, i mean a 40 mile convoy has been held up because they're going in and blowing up fuel trucks. they're blowing up other trucks as part of it and

basically stalling that convoy. and doing a hell of a job. as a result. and russians now are facing logistic problems. particularly in the south and elsewhere in terms of their ability to supply their troops and now they're supposedly going to be calling in russian troops from syria because it's not going well. it's not going well. so putin is about power. and we've got to continue to exercise the power we are involved with. does it involve risk? you're damnright . it's not only a pivotal moment, this is a dangerous moment . >> ..

we will have to deal with the consequences. so itt is dangerous and there's no questionro that putin, you know, the russians have been working with small yield nuclear weapons. who the hell knows? but we are in this now. and this is about democracy. this is about whether or not a sovereign country is going to survive. when hitler went into czechoslovakia, in many ways europe stood back, and he continued to go, and he wasn't stopped. we made the decision to stop putin now. that's what it comes down to. i think when you put him in --

when power puts him in a difficult position, then yeah, it could go several ways. he could be cornered and strike out, or can say, you know, my power is on the line. my ability to lead russia is on the line. i'm losing my country. see these body bags going back to russia, i'm sure contributing to the same sense that what the hell are we doing there. so if it is about saving his neck, then i do think that there are ways that he'll decide that he could get away with it. china could help of course. others could help perhaps, but

this is putin that's going to make the decision. and the only way ihe can see now to make him you make that dn is to continue to squeeze him. and that's what we're doing. >> have you noticed how far away he sits fromar everybody? you know, we could land and f-35 on that desk.yb [laughing] and it may be that, you know, he is trying to show that i'm in charge, i don't have any advises around, just me. you were saying about i'm in charge. it may be that he's worried about covid, and it may be that he's worried about something else, people getting too close to him. whatever it is, i notice, and we start talking about this, yet all the airline attendant sitting next to him as he does explain why they're out of a job for theim near future. listen, we are in total agreement here. we're not having a debate at

all, leon and i are on the same page on this. i still worry about this country mostly because when i see a candidate for the united states senate say that i don't care about ukraine one way or the other, it sort of like in the past, world warne ii, where's prague? wears bucharest? and for people to say they're over there, we'll care about them, it's not just about ukraine. it's about democracy here as well. and that's why maybe were going to get to this debate about how do we educate ourselves. we don't talk civilly to each other. we have entered an era of crudeness in crudity and courses in our speech and our conduct towards each other that is uncivilized. it really is uncivilized that we see each other as enemies, that we can't sit down and have a conversation, and that members

of congress now see each other as the enemy camp. and it's all about kelly get back in power. to do what? you want to get back in power to do what? i'm a strong supporter of joe biden. he and i went to congress the same year, i hate to say this, 1972. he went to the senate. i went to the house and he's been a friend ever since that time. he has a good heart. he is somebody who is necessary at this point in our lives, because he wants to bring us back together. we have been really divided and rejoicing in that division. and you see what happens when you simplyns are divided so to e core that nothing gets done. and, you know, authoritarians love this. they love this because they can write in on theau white horse ad say look at the chaos. democracy, what have you done

for yourself lately? you can't reach an agreement. it took you a long time with infrastructure. can't reach an agreement on climate change. you can't reach agreement on any of these major issues. therefore, only i can solve this. only putin can solve this. only xi jinping can solve this. only erdogan can solve this. so again we've been seeing this drift and really is kind of on the geopolitical landscape saying what's the best principle of organization in our lives today? is a democracy, with all of its strengths but all of its weaknesses, where they can't reach decisions in a timely way? or is it with strongmen and concentrate the power in the executive branch? of all of that power is in the executive branch and that president, whoever it is. i just wrote a piece with former senator gary hart, i don't know if it's going to be published or not, and something called peads,

presidential executive emergency declarations. something that we don't know about because it's never shared with the public. you haven't seen it. it's all classified. when you start looking, some insights have been keen to it. you start looking at what can they do, the suspension of habeas corpus, control of the needy, arrest of individuals. all of these things can take place in the name of continuity of government. these are all things that are out there that we don't talk aboutn. enough but it comes back to civic education get what is a reason we have this country? what is the reason we call ourselves the united states of america, when there's so much division economically, racially, religiously. culturally? and we haven't come to grips with that. we talk about people in this country are fearful. herele again, fear, honor, interest. people are fearful of what? demographic change. what does that mean?

it means brown people are coming into power. that's what that means, that the white world as such that's here in this country saying how did all these people who are black and brown get all these positions? i thought they weren't smart enough, or theyy weren't good enough, or they were inferior. and now we see them everywhere. they have been allowed to have an education and now they're occupying positions of power and we are losing power. therefore, demographic changeths just a word for brown people of like people are coming for your jobs, and some members of congress and presidential candidates are preying upon that. now, here we go again. i'm getting into the senatorial speech so i'll stop here. >> let me give you some hope, okay? [laughing] because i mean, look, bill and i saw washington at its best and i think we seen washington at its worse. i mean, the good news is we saw washington work and that there

were republicans and democrats willing to workub together. even though they had their political differences there were willing to work together on major issues. when i got elected to congress tip o'neill was the speaker. democrats democrat from massachusetts but he had a great relationship with bob michael. >> he's an all republican. don't let him forget that. >> that's right. bob michael was from illinois and they had the political differences but they were friends and they made the decision that we came to major issues, the matter who is president there were going to work together to solve those issues. and i was there at the time and i was part of that process. there's no question that of late we are extremely polarized and it does -- our inability to govern is a national security issue and it is extremely important that we understand that the purpose of getting elected is to govern.

it isn't just to pound your shoe on the table and engage in politics. now, i'm not sure this is going to change from the top down. i tell the students at the panetta institute we govern either by leadership or by crisis. if leadershiph is there and goig to take the risks associate with leadership we can avoid crisis. if not, we will govern by crisis, and of late we have largely governed by crisis. the budget is best example of that. we're stills working on a damnr and it's likely we'll get another cr in order to get by. so rather than dealing with it, they are dealing with it through crisis. now, ultimately, i really do think that although this may not change from the top down that it will change from the bottom up because there are a lot of people who are getting elected, and i can say that because my

son is a member of congress, there are those who have gotten elected, particularly those who have been in the military who say, i'm not going to washington just to t play a political gain. i'm going to washington because i want to govern. there's things like the solutions caucus in theli house, 25 democrats, 25 republicans, willing to to work together on issues. it's a a start and they are havg an impact. and there are moderate members on the senate side who are interested in governing as well. i think this event that we're in with regards to what's happened in ukraine could very well be -- and i wish the president had stressed this -- the unity we are showing in ukraine ought to be the kind of unity we need to build back home. and we can do that. why? because i still believe very much in the spirit of the american people.

that really is the fundamental strength of our country. it doesn't live here in washington. it lies in the spirit of the american people, and they care about their family. they care about giving their kids and education. they do care about the rule of law. they do care about trying to be able to get a decent house and take care of their parents with healthcare. those are, , issues, and we can build on that. but my hope is that what's happening today, and it has produced some bipartisanship police on that issue, but that it could be, come hopefully, the turning point to begin to focus on other issues that we need to unifyfo on. and, you know, donald trump has become a hell of a lot more isolated as a result of the stupid things he saying, and that gives me some hope that perhaps we're going to be able

to see new leadership come to the republican partyo and hopefully new and younger leadership be a part of the democratic party as well. there is hope here, but we have to work at it. it's not going to happen by itself. >> i ask unanimous consent that i be allowed to associate myself with remarks made by the gentleman from california. [laughing] and his son, who we take great hope. >> well, and i am thrilled at both of your remarks just now, both in terms of sharing with us that sense n of hope but also in pushing t for civic education ad a rediscovery of our shared values. it's an issue very near and dear to my heart that we've been working on for the last several years here at csis. i will say it is also a sign of hope, frank luntz, who is a republican pollster, did a survey, a poll, and it was one

of the all the pulse i've seen in the last several years where their way and equal number of democrats and republicans who agree on one thing. and that is that the best way to restore a sense of national identity is to teach civics education. i and nearly 60%, identical percentage of republicans and democrats. so despite efforts by some to pull the reinvigoration of civics into the culture war, my sense is that the is bipartisan support for this and do something we can move forward on. so on that optimistic note, i'm going to turn over for questions. i'm sure the folks in the audience have some questions. i hope you do. >> if you don't, we'll keep talking. [laughing] >> thank you, guys for having such a great discussion. i'd like tosu ask about how we n maintain the integrity of institutions without a crisis?ow

we've seen that nato is really strong because were in a crisis but that's not really a sustainable solution. >> go ahead. >> -- >> we will break away from the speeding to take you live to the u.s. senate, part of her more than 40 your commitment to bringing you live coverage of congress. the senate is about to gavel back in following a a recess r weekly party caucus lunches. this is live coverage on c-span2. the presiding officer: the senior senator from arkansas. mr. boozman: thank you very much. i have the privilege of