>> we are talking about little things but we need a lot of fuel. is it a simple matter once you have proven the concept to scale up? >> unfortunately, none of this is simple. the hardest goals will be fuled that can compete with the cost. anytime new biofuel approaches came in the past, all of a sudden the cost of carbon out of the ground gets to again. that is what makes it impossible to pete. the only way for it to compete is for the government to create a carbon tax so we start to realize it does not matter how cheap it is to burn coal or oil or natural gas in the long ron. we cannot afford to keep doing that. at that stage, yes it and be scaled up very dramatically. it's not cost effective to do so

now. with food steps since his, with the cost effective specialty chemicals, for vaccines etc.. >> let me ask you a lifecycle question. if you are running out of food and you can create a bug or you're running out of fresh water and you create a bug that can create more fresh water or you're out of energy and can make more energy there is a theme. more, more. the alternate approach it seems to me would be to do less. have fewer babies eat less, buy less, more gently on the earth. it strikes me like you are a more guy. >> i can only control how many people have babies in my own environment. [laughter] i don't know how to do that globally. we have a tremendous challenge with all the people we keep

adding to the planet. not too long, we could be 10 billion people. it's not sustainable with the approaches we are using in the consumption of everything. moore is the problem. we could have less babies, but unless we are going to roll back populations, which i don't think anybody is advocating, at least not in the political arena, we have to find solutions to more food, more medicine, not at the expense of the environment but a recyclable sustainable fashion. we can support the number of people that we do have, but only if we change how we do it. >> my last question because we're almost out of time im curious about the ebola story right now. when you watch that story, since

you have been involved in virology and dealing with the bird flu as well, what are we doing right at the moment and what do you think we are doing wrong? >> ebola is primarily a public health management problem. there has been numerous outbreaks in the past and they've been managed by good containment. because of the location and on the borders in a war area, those containment issues fell apart and it started spreading around. ebola isn't a lethal disease most of the time. i understand a group at harvard has been working on treatment in africa and they are down to around 12% mortality by using good medical practices. yes it would be great to have a

vaccine to treat it, but containment is the most important thing initially. obviously in the future, as we've done with the flu vaccine we could synthetically make a vaccine very quickly, we can e-mail it around the world. you can do one of our devices to print it and it can be given locally to stop future flu pandemics from ever spreading. that has to be done disease by disease. >> i would love to tell the audience -- this guy is working on a digital biological converter which if somebody is sick and vomiting and stuff you can scoop up the poop, figure out what the virus is contracted for the genome to the lab anywhere in the world and they can come up with a vaccine and ascended to you digitally and you can make it where you live

one day soon, never, maybe? >> one day sue. we can actually do that right now with newly emerging flu vaccines. the u.s. has a stockpile of a vaccine. it is the first synthetic dna vaccine that my team at the institute did. it proves the paradigm can happen, so we have a stockpile of the new vaccine before a single case has occurred in the u.s. for the first time we are ahead of the game, instead of trying to play catch-up. it's a matter of working out the right to basis of the basis of the disease. one size does not fit all, but the future will be rapidly emailing these around, downloading them, and blocking the transmission, and we should

be able to eliminate future pandemics. >> santa claus has very little on this guy. his presents are huge and fascinating. we are out of time, santa. everybody say goodbye to him applause-wise so he can hear you. [applause] >> good afternoon. it is a pleasure to get to know you, refund, but i hope a longer process. the announcement that you would be the 13th secretary was made back in march. you will not assume the position until next summer. but has rethinking clarified at all since that announcement was made about the broad objectives that you would like to realize while you are there question mark >> not really. i am hugely enthusiastic about it and excited about being able to work at the intersection of culture and science. i made doctor.

i spent my life in science and medicine. i think the humanistic disciplines are unbelievably important, and we are living in a stem-oriented age. it is a fabulous opportunity to work at this institution. that is a way of sidestepping your question, but i do not have any ideas, and i'm going to the learning curve. >> one of the things he said which gave us in washington a bit of a pause was you were asked by one of my colleagues about admission fees to this is sony and send -- to the smithsonian. you said you were not aware of any aspect of the nonprofit world that does not have to take another look at business models. is the door open to the idea of charging admissions question mark >> not as far as i am concerned. one of the famous aspects of the smithsonian is everybody can get

in there and the fact that these days you do not have to come to washington to do it secretary to the work on digitizing part of this collections. in washington now one of the beauties is you can come come it is a populist id populist ideal. what i did say, and it is possibly myself -- my thought is business models of everything that depends on government funding are have to be more creative, and we are all dealing with that. in universities, we were in private-public partnerships that are springing up everywhere. i have no intention of making those institutions less accessible. >> fundraising for the smithsonian a.b. more difficult. the bbc had a piece that said cornell is never six when it had -- smithsonian does not have billionaire alumni. under the tenure of the other

director, there's debate about where the line should be drawn when it comes to entry into the private commercial relationships , and in one case was an arrangement with showtime that would have given them apparently exclusive first rights of refuser over the first rights of refusal. people complained about that, seeming that it would be taking a public resource and privatizing it. any since dust any sense of where the red line would be like that for the smithsonian? >> a great question. the way fundraising works in most organizations, everyone that i have ever worked with. a parameter will structure where many people give amounts that they are comfortable with our modest amounts and fewer get more and more. as you mentioned sometimes you are able to get these and orders

breathtaking if it's from people with the capacity to do it. i think that kind of gift pyramid is true for every nonprofit that raises money. i am hugely impressed that the smithsonian has raised one dollar billion for -- a billion dollars. i think the brand of the smithsonian, if i could use that is fabulous. . i think the fundraising will be different, but it will be doable, and i think a lot of people are supportive of it. but despite the fundraising and despite the very generous money that comes from the u.s. government, there will be a push to find other what i will call enterprise-type of funding. every nonprofit that i know about thinks about this broad range of revenue streams.

i can't comment on the showtime contracted. i never looked at it. i will become familiar with it of course when i'm in the saddle, but i will say that defining where that line is legally and ethically in terms of what fits the feeling the ethos is completely important that will be part of my job. that will be part of my job. i will try to be open about it and hope that people will comment on what they think that line should be drawn. i can't say much about the showtime. i do think it's important to think about enterprise functions and public-private partnerships but it's got to be done in a way that everyone feels good about. >> the other sort of controversy the smithsonian seems to be wandering into course are cultural issues. not so long ago there was an exhibition at the national portrait gallery called hide and seek that got the current secretary and a good deal of hot water. this was an exhibition of gay and lesbian themes in portraiture. one item in the exhibition was

deemed offensive by a small number of people, but fairly loud protester and the decided to pull it from the exhibition. i'm sure you don't want to necessarily second-guess your predecessor, but coming out of university context, where you have been quite strong about is dressing that free speech aspect over the civility question, does that, to those issues come come will transfer? can you essentially run the smithsonian with the same emphasis on free speech as you tried to do at cornell? >> well, yes, i think it's very important to do so. in general the smithsonian does that, does that. as you suggested i not going to second-guess what i'm sure was a hard decision. i will not second-guess my process on any decision to i

will say that as we talked about a few years ago as we're getting ready, creative activity of any strife tends to foster controversy. recently the smithsonian came out with what i view as a bold statement on climate change saying that based on a lot of data and other kinds of data that it looks as if the warming that's going on that you can not really argue about is due in great part to human activity. it wasn't too long ago is to >> it was not too long ago that a statement like that would not be wildly controversial and may still be controversial in some quarters. i think whether it's size and certainly arts and in my 20's the humanities, very frequently foster controversy. so i think that we need to be able to embrace that controversy and be part of the culture world and the science world in a way that makes sense, in a way that is done carefully, thoughtfully, but not necessarily back away from controversy. but honestly i cannot comment. >> at cornell you've been willing to attract a bit of controversy with your position on immigration reform and other issues like that.

when it comes to kind of cultural controversies, let's take the humanities. as the secretary of the smithsonian do you think you can say we need robust funding for the nadh? can you be a public advocate for the humanities in that since? >> well, i've been pushing very hard as you were alluding to for any age funding, for years and years and years. neh funding, but i been successful, i've worked on this the funding has gone down a look at each new. what i advocate for will be less important than calling attention to this fact that the humanities and the arts as well are very, very, very important. and again the stem-oriented age which is very understandable in

a recession, even though some parts of the economy has bounced back a lot, which all know the economy is not totally bounced back. i think it's very important we don't lose track of these disciplines. so yes, i think it's important and hope to be able to work with and learn from the other leaders of the cultural institutions in washington who know many, many times more than i know about the washington scene and about what flies and what works. but i think that the bully pulpit, if you will, platform of the secretary should be used to point out the broad needs of the country in a way that's reasonable. and since i've garnered a chance to comment on it, whatever public positions i've taken in higher education have been linked to higher education and linked to something that had some familiarity with. and as i have said again and again, you won't hear me talk about things in washington that i am not directly involved in and don't know anything about. but i think arguing that the country should not turn its back on the social sciences humanities, and arts is very

important. i'm proud to been one of the authors of the report from the american academy of arts and sciences called heart of the matter that was released a couple of years ago. and that argues that the broad range of disciplines need to be pursued, no matter what we talk about, whether we're talking economic competitiveness talking about placement for students at whatever level. we have to think broadly and not just about the stem disciplines. this is a stem guy talking to you. >> in several interviews since you announced you becoming to the smithsonian usage of greatest regret at cornell has been about the causes of affordability of tuition there. you've also been a remarkable fundraiser. fiscal year 2014, $732 million

came in, of which only $39 million has been earmarked specifically for student aid. is that the right balance, if it's a real problem facing cornell? >> a terrific question. don't you like what i grade your questions? >> i will try to ask some bad ones. >> you are have asked some bad ones. at in any case in any case, i will tell you the broad -- let's you to put is exactly the to me the last one phrase you were asking. >> let me think about it from two different aspects. first of all it is true and i have said it in public and apply to say it again in public know that my biggest single regret from to university presses is the universe of iowa and the cornell university is that i was unable to change the balance more effectively between access and affordability. and at cornell which is an unusual place because a place

with a big endowment, very few american institutions, about 100 of the 4000 colleges and just has substantial endowment. so a little tiny piece of american education, of course an important piece. we are able to, for half the families in america, half of that are in america can go to cornell and have no parental contribution and not borrow any money from a student loan. then at the other end of the spectrum there are people whose salaries or assets permit them to pay cash, even for very expensive education as an ivy league education is. but between those aspects of the socioeconomic spectrum, between those that have had the films in america who we can help, people who make too much to be considered needy in that sense but don't make enough to pay for this, especially if they have two or three kids in college, i didn't do good enough job of organizing that. it takes two parts to organize it. it takes some series of change in the cost matrix of the

university so it costs less to run. during the recession, the beginning of the recession i eliminated two vice presidencies presidencies, took my salary cap, and other things to reduce costs but that wasn't enough. the other end was to increase revenue. a lot of it was tuition and somewhat financial aid. let's talk about the other half of which are asking and that is the path between the rhetoric and how much was raised. it cost will be $50,000 in tuition and fees to go to an institution like cornell, a little bit more than that but let's call it $50,000, if a person wants to donate a scholarship in an endowment that would last for ever and in perpetuity about the student what kind of a free ride through cornell, that's $1 million contribution that will yield a nominal earnings of about $50,000 a year and that's about the cost of going there. $1 billion, huge amount of money.

but if another contributor wishes to contribute to a capital project, construction project, and we're fortunate enough to get $59 million or $100 million or $200 million gift that greatly outweighs the balance -- but the bottom line is that i'm guilty as charged -- we so much without a better way and still need to comment about shrinking the cost matrix, and some of bringing more revenue in and not basing the revenue increase so heavily on tuition which is been the most obvious lever to pull for revenue. so, yeah, we need to keep pushing. when i run into people who want to contribute and don't have a specific idea what they want to do, my top priority is always student aid because of my own background. i didn't do enough, either on the cost matrix side or the revenue enhancement side. >> this is a man who plays the flute and has done on stage with billy joel. and you said you have stage fright. >> i'll tell you the problem with the whole billy joel and since were bragging about me in which i like, i've

also sat in twice with winston marsalis. both apparently have lost my cell phone number. [laughter] and when i saw mr. marsalis recently, i said, as people my age, you don't call, you don't write, i don't hear from you. and i was going to be a studio musician growing up in l.a. and it turned out much to my disappointment and chagrined editor but in l.a. was a better musician than i was. i still do it as an application. >> as an avocation. i do it a lot, so i enjoyed it a lot. i took a video course which is very instructive. and playing a little tiny bit as your talk about of classical music slowly to i will make it very hard for you ever did what that sounds like. >> it's on youtube. [applause] >> earlier this week the u.s. supreme court heard oral argument in the case king v.

burwell. you can join us at 8:00 tonight when we will broadcast those oral arguments. we will follow that with comments and reaction from attorneys involved. you can listen to that at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. join us tomorrow when american indians discussed the stereotyping of their culture in sports mascots. here's a brief look at some of the discussion. >> since the washington football team once a great and powerful franchise, has not been to a super bowl since we filed suit in 1992 -- [laughter] people in my bank and on capitol hill say you still have that

curse. we say, no, it is not a curse. it is just karma. it is their own fault. they are doing it to themselves. if they would just throw off the shackles of this name, get rid of it, have a name change contest, everything would be wonderful for them, and they would start winning again. i just do not think they are going to win until they do that because this is the 23rd year. that is an amazing coincidence 23 years and they have never been back to a super bowl. in the meantime, there has been the case that has my name for 17 years. now i'm landa -- now amanda blackhorse has that privilege and burden dragging along that lawsuit. we will just keep prevailing and prevailing and more and people across the country are seeing the error of their parents or

grandparents' ways, and they are saying, we do not want that. that is not who we are. and more and more native nations are saying we do not want these false identities, these false personas laid on us anymore. we are not going to take it, because that is the root of a lot of our problems. people do not take us seriously, because we're not taking ourselves seriously. >> just a short portion of the event looking at american indians, mascots and stereotyping. you can watch the event at 8:00 p.m. tomorrow on c-span. >> here are some of our programs for this weekend. on c-span2 saturday night at 10:00 p.m., david morris on the

history of post-traumatic stress disorder that affects over 27 million americans, including himself. and sunday night at 8:00, scott taylor argues the obama administration is hurting our national security. and on c-span3 the commemoration of bloody sunday when 50 years ago voters rights advocates began a march from selma to montgomery, alabama, and were met with violence. on saturday beginning at noon eastern, we're live from selma with phone calls, followed by the ceremony with the president and congressman john lewis. on sunday, live coverage continues with a service from the historic brown chapel ame church. find our schedule at www.c-span.org and let us know what you think of the programs you are watching. call us, e-mail us or send us a tweet. join c-span conversation.

like us on facebook. follow us on twitter. >> next a look at unique photographs of space shuttle launches and rocket launches in russia and japan as well as astronaut neil armstrong's funeral with nasa photographer bill ingalls. this is about 50 minutes. >> good afternoon. bill ingalls has been a professional photographer for over 27 years and has served as the senior contract photographer for as a headquarters since 1989. his assignments have taking him from familiar locations such as the kennedy space center to the inside of an active volcano in alaska the oval office, the inside of a d.c. eight flying to a hurricane hearing rooms of

capitol hill to, to the brutally cold kazakh steppes. bill is recognized amongst his peers for capturing some of our most historic moments including the first launch of a u.s. citizen on a russian rocket and the burial at sea of neil armstrong. he is the second photographer ever to receive the prestigious national space club press award. the award was first given in to the legendary broadcaster edward r. murrow. it is my pleasure to introduce him to you this afternoon. ladies and gentlemen, mr. bill ingalls. [applause]

>> thank you. this is a real honor for me to be invited here today. i just do not feel i am worthy of it, but happy to show slides. i am not comfortable eating on camera, so i apologize to those at c-span, those streaming. rest of you here can see what is going on. i was not sure about how to put this together, who the audience would be, and what to really focus on, pardon the pun. it is a portfolio of sorts and way too many pictures. feel free to get up and leave and tweet and check your e-mail or whatever. go ahead and -- i'm in charge. all right, here we go. i do not do this often, as you

can tell. this is my predecessor, the first senior photographer for nasa. you will note the pell-mell cigarette in the right hand, the camera hanging off of him whiskey drinking, cussing hell of a photographer, and i am doing everything i can to live up to his standards. he was with the crew from the very beginning with the apollo 11 crew. with your other training together, did all their around the world victory march, and i was fortunate to get to know him and spend a few years with him before he passed on. this is some of his work. he set the bar pretty high, and this is the apollo 11 crew. i came on as an intern in television. i was a writer and producer and set the summer at nasa headquarters and did freelance photography.

i went to teach television at the university of pittsburgh. i think i called ness everyday and begged for a job, and they got so sick of me calling they figured my boss gave me the option. he said that this position that bill had had had gone away and there were other agency photographers who had started to pick up at the various centers. i could either revitalize that or work and be a photo researcher in their office. both are great jobs. but i definitely wanted to try to revitalize this position as best i could. i still have bill taub's original cameras in my office. they all have stories. but we don't have all day. i will keep marching on. so this is at the kennedy space center, which is also a wildlife refuge. there are quite a bit of wildlife there. i also spent a lot of time in

washington, where there is wildlife as well. we'll march through these. this is kennedy space center and some of my shuttle-related work that i've done there. this is on the transporter with the space shuttle scs135 in its final roll to the launch pad. these are workers and their families invited to the go along the entire route to say goodbye to the shuttle program. again, i take my job -- i am silly. i have a lot of fun. i work hard. i take it very seriously. i know i have been given a privileged position to be on this, to be the eyes and ears for others that cannot be there. i take it very seriously. this is on that crawler transporter. the silhouette on the left is our administrator charlie bolten, shaking hands with workers as we were riding the

transporter out to the pad. of course, the shuttle lifts up -- lit up at night on the pad. i had to get a lightning shot in there, too. you will see a common theme throughout my images. if there is a puddle, i would use it. here is the first one. i'm going to zip through. i have a lot of pictures. i will zip through a lot of these. i am happy to answer questions about them at the end. this is riding out on the helicopter with a sniper for the final launch. the security is very serious. as katie mentioned, here and in russia. this is in the lobby of the launch control center before going up to the firing room for one of the launches. the mural that they have there. this is inside the firing room. i used to joke that i never saw a single launch. i always watched people watching launches. that's a lot of my photographs.

this is nasa administrator charlie bolten. this is one shot with myself in the frame. i used a remote. michael weimbach's office. his office juts into the firing room. these are remote cameras set up around the launchpad. you don't want to be this close during the launch. the closest that you can get is three miles during a shuttle launch. for a soyuz launch, three divrts quarters of a mile. this is smoke plume after the shuttle launch as workers are exiting the firing room. and landing of sts 135. charlie bolden on the left and the center director for kennedy space center, bob kaban, on the

right. that is the main landing gear on the tarmac of the shuttle landing facility for sts 135. chris ferguson, feeling if there is heat coming off the front of the shuttle after we landed. a unique view underneath the shuttle looking towards the front nose. this is the final roll from the landing facility to the opf. then i had a responsibility to work with others and help document all the shuttles going to their final homes. this is discovery at dulles airport in virginia. puddle number two.

puddle number three. this is during the event where the enterprise on the left was being pulled out and discovery was being rolled in, as they passed each other. then enterprise being loaded up to come to new york. this is that dulles airport as well. look for it. this is coming into jfk. and then some days or weeks later, out on a boat in the hudson. the enterprise is being brought up to the intrepid.

that is something you see every day. then back down to florida. this is for endeavour departure kennedy off to los angeles. i enjoy doing all of these tremendously. it is bittersweet, obviously seeing the end of the shuttle program. but as a photographer, this is one of the really rewarding experiences that i have had, where we are able to see the public and the orbiters and what we do so close together in one place. going through the streets of l.a. with endeavour was credibility. it's too bad we cannot do it every day. this is from the goodyear blimp. as endeavour went by the randy's donuts. i just like saying that i was in the goodyear blimp. that was fun. this is what i'm talking about.

throughout the entire route, just this outpouring of love and excitement. and people holding their breath. they had to zigzag through the streets and avoid buildings. they had to take out a few trees along the way. they tried their best not to do that. time warner let people get up in their boxes and photograph it as it went by. i was told that in inglewood when we went through there, they had zero crime that day. zero. that is los angeles.

and, a lot of people ask me if when i first came to nasa, if i was a big fan of space, nasa and so forth. i have be honest and say i was a fan of nasa. i was not obsessed with it. it wasn't necessarily a goal that i end up at nasa. photographer was definitely my first love. i was extremely lucky to have such great subject matter. the two go together so well. maybe i've had the kool-aid now for 25 years, but if there's anything about what i have learned over the years from being at nasa and making pictures for nasa is summed up in this picture and many other pictures like it. regardless of what we discover in space, regardless of where we end up, the act of getting there, the discovery, the whole process of that, to see kids get excited about it and to start seeing them light up and think about math and science, i think is worth every single penny.

sometimes i get bored. this is the administrator checking out an atlas five rocket. this is juno spacecraft on its way to jupiter. still. again, remotes. these are a bunch of unmanned missions here. this is out of vandenberg air force base with the beautiful pacific behind it. jeff bezos and blue origin his little craft he's working on. the lawyer on the right followed me everywhere and watched everything i shot. [laughter] robert bigelow, another entrepreneur with inflatable habitats. i think of this is the jiffy pop that we are going to fly into space. these are his inflatable space stations.

this is an orbital down at nasa. we had a rollout that happened yesterday. these are not those. these are various other rollouts taking place. this is the newest launchpad for me to be working on. it is a lot of fun when you go set up remotes, to be there to discover new images. and to make new scenes. it starts to get repetitive after a while. i have done how many soyuz launches and landings. i enjoy them all the time. but as a photographer, you want to try to tell the story in a unique and challenging way and that can be difficult when it's repetitive like that.

it is very exciting to have different opportunities. this is out on a boat in the ocean getting some shots around sunrise. a remote setup. near the pad. i was so happy they put that sign there. i started dipping my toe into infrared. this is false color infrared remote camera shot. i'm still working on that a little bit and will make it better next time. this is the maven launch. maven on its way to -- now in orbit around mars. boy, was i happy when i looked at the back of the camera here. went to retrieve this remote. i was fortunate enough to go over to japan to tanagashama for the launch of the g.p.m.

spacecraft. i had never been to japan before. it's a placed i always wanted to go. i had an incredible experience there. i really enjoyed it. not unlike our visitor center. it's always fun to see what's similar, what's different. just driving around you see space related themes everywhere. also known for the tanagashama gun, that's why their little guy has guns on the helmet there. h2a rocket. it is a beautiful rocket. probably the most beautiful launch pad ever. it was gorgeous. there were surfers out there earlier. i was upset that i missed that shot. there's always the shop that gets away. the darma doll. you circle in one eye and set a goal, and once the goal is reached, you circle in the other eye. that's how that was explained to me. this was used for the building of the rocket and the goal was the successful launch and putting it into orbit. i guess these are getting cropped a little bit.

but it is what it is, i guess. it's fine. i was surprised. i didn't realize -- certainly in russia, we talked about it, they have a lot of traditions. i did not realize that in japan they have traditions as well leading up to launch. they visited three different shrines the day before before lunch. this shrine is just outside of the space center. they leave two bottles of sake. they do some prayers. we moved on to the next one. my interpreter who was with me -- very straight -- hi, olga. my friend, olga, from moscow is here. she's going to kill me for calling her out. my interpreter, who is very dry and straight about everything said, bill, do you know much about shin toism? i said, i really don't. i'm afraid to admit.

she said, there's over 8 million deities. we are visiting three shrines in leading prayers. she said, you know what's interesting is that they all like sake. [laughter] one of the challenges i have is itar-related issues. i'm not allowed to photograph a lot of things that will show our systems and design. that is a challenge i am always overcoming. you will show people in the workplace doing a lot of work. i shoot minimal depth of field crowding people together so you don't see the monitors. i don't set them up, but i'm always looking for this when i'm shooting to make sure i'm not overstepping those bounds. in the rocket launch in japan. we had to wear hardhats. we were like three miles away. [laughter] i have a love affair with a moon. this is the super moon we had a few years ago behind the lincoln memorial, pentagon. can you-all see that ok?

>> guys, the photo before that is one of the photographs we will auction off. >> ok. this is the last super moon as well. i do a lot of hearings in washington. as a photographer, i actually enjoy doing those. i have a front row seat between whoever is testifying in congress and typically every emotion is covered in 30 minutes. they start with smiles and they go downhill from there. it is great. i notice i've left the smiles out of this one. this is our current administrator, charlie bolden. he is a wonderful man. four-time astronaut. this guy, john glenn, by far one of the best people i have ever met in my career, just amazing.

>> [indiscernible] >> what i always tell people is that he will walk in a room, could be me, custodial staff president united states. as for as he is concerned, we are all human beings, we're all the same. he's just a sweet heart real nice guy. and of course, neil armstrong. an amazing human being. sorry, i am dragging on here. i will try to speed up. this is at j.p.l., for the landing out there. this is the day we are about to land on mars. this is the moment in the control room where we got the signal back that we have landed successfully. i did one of these pictures during the mars pathfinder landing. there was a gentleman that had

been at nasa for a decade and he was part of the mars viking program. this kind of rejoicing was taking place. i saw him with a very stern look on his face. i said, what's the matter? aren't you happy? is there a problem? did we not get a good signal? he said, no, no, no. back in my day men were not hugging like this when we landed. [laughter] times have changed. there's this woman. she made a visit to nasa a few years ago. dr. holdren, the president's science adviser being interviewed by a student reporter for "times for kids." we do quiet a bit. this is the president making a call to the international space station with the science adviser. with elon musk, puddle number four. down at kennedy space center.

and trying to keep secret service out of your frame is not always easy. and in the oval office as well. this is the last time i photographed these three gentlemen with the president in the oval office before neil passed away. i had the incredible honor, the family permitted me to be the only photographer at the funeral for neil. that was a personal family funeral. then i went on to cover the washington, d.c. funeral as well. then i went on a navy ship out into the atlantic for his aerial -- burial at sea. this is his granddaughter preparing her remarks. his wife and granddaughter. and i had no idea this was happening. these things are planned, but

this doesn't just happen. i had no idea this was happening. this was the second full moon, the night of his funeral in cincinnati. then back in washington at the national cathedral. and this is in jacksonville, florida, waiting for the remains to come off the plane. and, out at sea. the navy put down their cameras and let me be the only photographer to shoot this. i'm not sure why, but -- my first trip to moscow was in 1991, when we first started

making discussions together to partner up. i think i have made about 70 trips to moscow, maybe 56 or so to kazakhstan. my first launch is in 1995 out of kazahkstan. the rocket is in three pieces when we arrive. the emergency cone in front. the capsule area. they just start to slap that thing together. it is pretty amazing to watch, actually. it takes about 12 hours for this to go on. there was one time when it was almost all the way together, they hadn't quite finished and may oscourt was getting impatience, is it time to go? i said i wanted to see it all together. i was making pictures. he said, bill, bill, please, time to go. i said, no no, the light's not right. he said, have you seen this movie, "kill bill." [laughter]

we're done. we're moving on. this is the business end. 32 nozzles, i think, on the back. rollout like clockwork, 7:00 a.m. that thing goes out to the launch pad. that is the same launchpad that eureka launched off of. they still launch. every one of the launches i've covered except for one has been off of this pad. some of my friends. this is rocket adorned in sochi colors.

it's not that fast. that is a 30-second exposure. it doesn't slap up on the rockets right there. the nice thing for the photogs doing an exposure like this, that's full of people and they've been wiped out by the exposure. if you were to ask me what is missing and what i need to do more of in the future, this is it right here. it's -- after you have done is forever, the hardware is cool, but it's the people. that's definitely what i'm looking forward to doing more and more of, is the people behind all this. the priest comes out and blesses the rocket. i often get accused of him being my brother. he comes over and blesses the media as well. and i think he has a special target on me typically. there is the crew in the

background in quarantine, during the state commission, with a go or no-go for launch. they put on the flight suits behind the glass. this is one of the things that i have been wanting to get for a long time, was the crew getting their haircuts, just to show -- they are normal human beings and they need to do things that we all need to do. i don't need to do it as much as i used to. finally, after years of trying to get into do this, they got me in to do it. i was asking my colleagues and said, what should i expect? will there be a large crowd there? is it just the person getting their haircut or whatever? they said, it depends. i said, what does it depend upon? it depends on how short the skirt is that day. [laughter] i said ok. so they called me up and said you're good to come over. i said, will there be a lot of

people? they said, not so much. the crew is in the back room saying goodbye and they'll come out as katie showed you signing the door. formal door-signing here. lots of traditions. lots of traditions. and the priest ready to bless the crew as they come out. and pressure suit checkup and saying goodbye to the family. steve swanson. this is at the base of the pad. this is a 14 millimeter lens which exaggerates things. but it's not big. compared to the shuttle, this is a small, small rocket. one of the things i have yet to capture his when the crew gets up to the stairs, they pat them on the back and then there's a

guy takes his knee and jams it into their butt, as well, "get out of here." this is the torch for the olympics. and a remote. this is the other launchpad. the one time i photographed the other launch pad in soyuz kazakhstan. this is from pad one. this is a two-minute exposure in the middle of daylight. and then it's on to the landing and we'll wrap up after that. so staged in kazakhstan. we head off in helos. i'm part of the group in first three helos that take off. that's a media helo. we typically get into a pattern and circle the pad where the soy

use is supposed to land. once we see that we are at a point, we open up the door of the helicopter. i'll lay down with this much of me hanging out. another guy lays down next to me. two guys lay down on top of his who are shooting. two guys sit on the four of us. then there's two guys leaning on the shoulders. there are eight of us doing this thing. we've downsized that a little bit. there are only six of us these days. so we open the door. the first time this happened max, a good friend of mine was on top of me. of course you can't hear anything. it's loud as can be. the wind is blowing. it is cold. we're looking, just craning your neck to look around to see if you can find it while you're shooting. you're waiting to see if we could see it. max leans down, he says, bill! i'm like, max! he says, i love you! i said, dude, not the time. not the time. [laughter] so this is staging.

this is the flotilla heading out. i think we've got 12 helicopters that head out the day before. this is the runway, which is no longer in use, but we use it for our soyuz landings. some of the locals come and pick us up and take us into town for a few hours of rest before the next morning. we eat at the restaurant. you stay at the hotel. and i found some breakfast which is always good. when the doctor eats it, i know it's ok. he is the flight surgeon. here we are hanging out at the helicopter and seeing it come down with three people who have been in space for six months and they're pretty incredible. these pilots are good.

this is shot with a 300 millimeter lens. we are right on it. you can see the ground crew chasing after it, as well, in atv's and jeeps. and a lot of farmers fields out in that neck of woods. this is a shot that i had been trying to get for ages, to see the retro jets firing. this is shot at 11 frames per second. that's one second right in a row there. that's how quick it happens. and katie, i've had a lot of folks come to me afterwards, after they get out of the capsule, they're like, bill, did you see them fire? did they really fire? are you sure they fired? this is during early morning landing, with all the support vehicles coming around the soyuz with their headlights on.

crew of three inside. this ran top of the fold, "new york times." a different landing. this is nice to see the scenery out there. one thing that is a good question to ask katie and others and richard, that i haven't heard talked about yet. i remember ken bowersox talking about this quite a bit. he landed ballistic. when they open the hatch, there was no one there. it took a while for the support crew to get there. he talks about the first thing was the smell of dirt and earth and inhaling that and loving that smell after being in space. there is katie. this is a print i made, as well, for today.

all of these images are in the public domain. all of these images can be downloaded from the nasa website for you to use. so the crew is being brought out of the capsule.and carried over to a chair. giving a thumbs-up. from our russian friends. this jan -- this just ran on the cover of aviation week a couple of weeks ago. a lot of work takes place on the capsule, getting it ready. steve swanson from the landing site. he threw his hat up in the air. he was like how cool is this? it's a hat, mike.

i'm sure everyone will tell you some of them want to do it. others don't. a system on help in anyway just to be safe. the welcoming party in kazakhstan at the airport. and these are give -- they are given these metrics go dolls these days. thank you for your patience. [applause] we ran long, didn't we go, we have lots of time. >> i want to ask a couple -- have you ever had a picture that

nasa said you can't use that one? >> i have to admit i'm pretty fortunate. i know what nasa is not going to like? -- not going to like. i've had my share of mistakes over the years. i made it picture in the firing room of everyone on the headset. we ended up scrubbing for the day. we launched a day or two later. we came back into the firing room for every attempt of the launch. a gentleman said we just got a strange call in the firing room. he set a radio station in los angeles just called live on the air and said to we have the firing room? i said yes, how do you do. how did you get this room -- get this number? we zoomed in on this picture. it had the phone number on it. everybody thought it was

hilarious. i was panicked and concerned about it. >> obviously being around all of these guys and these rockets taking off, do you want to go into space? you must make a lot of money as a photographer, right? >> that punchline was pretty good. i absolutely would love to go up. i'm always thinking about what i would do that might be different. he did a lot of the time lapse and high iso imagery that i would've had on my shot list. i think the only thing left is a series of news. >> not news of you. them absolutely. >> i once interviewed bill

anders, who took the very famous earthrise photo. i always like to ask people what they were thinking when they did their great thing. for bill it was earthrise. he said, do you want to know what i am thinking? i'm thinking i'm off mission. i'm supposed to be taking photos of the dark side of the moon as we go around. and i'm supposed to be taking photos of the potential lunar landing sites for apollo 11. but here i am taking pictures of the earth and i am wasting film. what i really thought was i am going to get in trouble for taking these pictures. the earth was so beautiful. i think they were also taking photos but bill got the right one. is it you are in the right place at the right time? >> absolutely. that is half the game. just trying to plan ahead and think about where i need to be and hope it happens.

>> give us an example of where you are at the right place at the right time. >> you caught me off guard. it's not so much nasa related. when jfk's last visit to the white house tom hanks was having his premier from earth to the moon. it was being premiered in the east room. president clinton and jfk junior was there with his wife. i saw him approach the famous portrait of his father with the arms folded. i made a couple of frames of that and i couldn't pass on it. hanging out at the right place at the right time. the white house photographer came and joined me and i backed off. i knew it didn't have a lot to do with what i was doing there. when he passed away, the white house but together a photo album that they presented to the

kennedy family. they use my photo in that series. it is one of those happenstance moments. >> i'm going to open it up now for questions. i sure there are a lot. let's start in the front row. >> it is very clear that there is a strong connection between you and your work and there is a lot of love there. it is clear that there is a lot of love you put into your work. the images speak for themselves. being a young person, i am curious to know, there is obviously some tenacity that is tied with that love with your work. is that something you have always had? if you could just talk about one or two key moments in your 20's when you began to move toward

nasa and become more of an asset to that organization. >> sure. i can answer your question directly. like i said, photography has always been my passion. more than nasa was originally. of course, now, nasa is in my blood, too. i feel very fortunate that that hasn't gone away. anytime i go out on a photo assignments, especially places i have been over and over, i love that challenge to try to find something new, try to find a new picture. and yet, tell the story in an the understandable way. you could just get crazy and take pictures that don't make sense. you have to tell the story as he well. for me, that passion has never gone away. that is not entirely true. i have had my moments where i have gone home from work and i have not wanted to pick up a camera. the first time that happened to me, it really scared me.

i thought, now what? am i losing it for this? then it comes back. i think that is the one thing for my experience now, i don't freak out when that happens. i just stick with it. the passion always comes back. i love looking at the work of others. i should mention that my colleagues, joel is down a nasa right now, it helps to inspire me to see fresh eyes. being around others that love what i do as well is part of it. did that answer your question? >> this fellow here. >> what kind of camera, lens, do you hand holds, use tripods? do you still shoot film? >> yes to all of the above. i shoot nikon stuff day and out but i have remote cameras or

cannons -- canons. we put nikon lenses on canons. i sometimes still use film just for personal satisfaction. i didn't go digital until i had to. now i am in full hog. my original tricks -- on my original tricks, i used to have a giant storage bin that had all of my chemicals, scanner hairdryer, fish tank heater, clips, the whole thing. smocks, and i remember the hotel in moscow once, the house keeper didn't knock and cayman -- and came in.

>> if they saw you in your smocking new york they would freak out. >> the only window in the hotel that i went to originally that faced the satellite was down at the other end of the hallway. these are back in the day, these huge satellite dishes. i set my alarm for 2:00 in the morning, we got, go assemble the satellite dish, put it in the window behind the curtain, ran the wire into my room, scanner frame, then would use a modem to skip for moscow -- to skip from moscow to my office. one image took 2.5 hours. when it comes to digital now, i am a huge fan.

during my entire dark room in a bag -- carrying my entire dark room in a bag. this is much better. i >> i was fascinated by the photos of the neil armstrong photos -- the neil armstrong funeral on the ship. that was a pretty select group of people. there must have been a vibe. >> it was an incredible honor. the family was very kind, very polite. they were subdued. the navy bent over backwards for them. this was an american hero. it was interesting, when i

will photographed the ceremony in ohio, there was a family publicist of sorts there. we had to get to know each other to make sure he was comfortable with me and what i was doing. the only picture that ever got questioned was, at one point someone said that they were going to do a flyover at the end of the ceremony. this was at a small country club that neil belonged to. it was very modest. they were concerned how it might look, being on the lawn of a country club as a flyover takes place. if it would look elitist. my take on that was, if there is anyone in this country that americans would like to have seen, had a good life as a result of his hard work, it was neil armstrong. they didn't argue it all. they said let's do it. >> i will take one more question and then we are going to break. back there, yeah.

if the guy can get you the microphone. >> in the first decade of man's ram, families were very much front and center in the official story of the astronauts and the missions. there is a tv show being made about the book "the astronaut's wife's club." nowadays, families have been much less in the picture. to what extent do you look at at conveying the story have you paid attention to the families. to what extent does nasa think that should be part of the story? what are the family's attitudes and how the astronauts feel? >> a very good question.

i would encourage you to ask some of the astronauts directly as well. there are a lot of things as katie was saying when she shared her medical situation. nasa takes privacy very seriously. that extends to the family members as well. as a photographer, i would love to incorporate that. i also respect that boundary. it is a balancing act, absolutely. i'm not sure i can give you a really good answer for that one. it will be good to talk to katie and other folks and ask them how they feel about that. >> let's have a big hand for bill. [applause]

the earlier this week the supreme court heard a case on -- the president's signature legislative, schmidt read you can join us at 8 p.m. eastern tonight when we broadcast the oral argument we will follow that with some of the comments and reactions from attorneys involved. you can listen to that at 8 p.m. eastern right here on c-span. join us tomorrow when american indians discussed the stereotyping of their culture and sports mascot. because include a former nfl football player. the lead plaintiff in a lawsuit against the washington redskins and a native right advocate. here's a brief look at some of the discussion. >> this is a well -- there is a well-intentioned teacher somewhere who was teaching her students about thanksgiving. things giving is required

content in almost every state in the union teachers are expected to teach about thanksgiving in some way. this is innocent play, isn't it? these are kids and they are pretending, which is what kids do. it seems innocent enough. first of all, it is rather unlikely they would pretend to be people of any other race than what they are. that would be understood almost immediately as inappropriate. but not when it comes to indians. the other thing is that innocent play turns into this, a group of sorority girls dressing up as indians, or frat boys dressing up as indians, or a little later , hipsters dressing up as indians. i don't know what that is all about.

what is this thing with dressing up as indians? it turns into this and becomes commercialized. victoria's secret, every year. and then of course this. what starts out as innocent play eventually becomes ignorant and racist. >> just a short portion of the event looking at american indians, mascots, and stereotyping. mi you would see a stickball set. washington was a large man. six-foot, very robust, terrific natural athlete. madison is this skinny little guy. >> this sunday historian david

o stewart on founding father james madison and partnerships he made that aided in the success of our fledging laois -- fledgling nation. >> the gift is his ability to form partnerships with the great people of his era. it also alludes to his gift of his talents and what he was able to do to help create the first self-sustaining constitutional republican -- republic. >> on c-span's q&a. >> next, a discussion about hillary clinton's use of private e-mail accounts when she was secretary of state. this is from today's "washington journal." is about 40 minutes. , and c-span radio. host: david drucker. you have been covering this town for about 10 years or so. how significant is the hillary

clinton e-mail situation? guest: at this stage in the campaign it is significant. i am surprised at the lives it has because you see so many of these stories and they come and go in the news cycle is so fast. it has really captured the imagination of political players and journalists in washington and new york and around the country. it will be interesting to see where it goes next. host: a lot of ink. a lot of editorials. he was today's "washington post." sunlight foundation. even the "new york times." guest: well they broke the story. you have to give them a lot of credit for the work they did. i think the key point about the clinton e-mail situation is not that she is a politician who

didn't necessarily want everybody to have access to her e-mails, even though some people try to make this a story about politicians and whether or not they are willing to expose all of their e-mails to public scrutiny. the issue is that she was a secretary of state. not only were their roles on how you handle me know but she was presumably trafficking in classified information and other information that probably a lot of american enemies want to get a hold of. or they tried very hard to get hold of. we do not yet know whether or not the information that she was dealing with was secure if it was outside of the state department e-mail. i think that for somebody who wants to become and her that is the real issue here. host: a lot of reports about kernel powell doing the same thing. guest: he shouldn't have. it would be nice to know is that private e-mail was secure. i talked to a lot of members of congress and sometimes converse with members of congress on

private you know. here is the thing, first of all there is no rules for them. a lot of times when you discuss politics, you cannot use government resources to do with her politics, so they have to go outside of any government e-mail chains. when i have having conversations with members of congress it is not about classified material. i am not talking about national security. i'm usually talking about whether some member of congress is going to get a bill through in the policy or a leadership plan to run the house at -- house or senate. hillary clinton most likely talking about much of the time and had to do with u.s. diplomatic strategy, national security strategy, and may have included information that was actually classified. whether it was her or any other secretary of state in the situation, i think the question is, how did you deal with that? if she can assure the public

that she never put american secrets at risk in explaining exactly how she did that even though she was using her own e-mail server, but that could diffuse a potential problem that doesn't necessarily go away as quickly as i would have thought. having said all of that, we are so far away from actual campaigning and an actual election that voters are now do not even know who their nominees are. you have an actual person running against another actual person and you start to make choices based on what is before you and whatnot -- and not what you imagine, that can clarify your decision-making as a voter. all of a sudden, it puts potential scandals and real scandals and perspective. as in, i really do not like with this person did, but there was no way i am voting for the other guy. the new cycle moves so fast and there are things we have not got into. it is possible that we said, hey, remember what we thought

that was a big deal? host: how frequent is it is that you think government officials accuse private e-mails? guest: i don't know that we really know the answer to this question. if you are talking about politics, imagine any member of congress or the administration might be involved in the political matter. something where you are not permitted to use government resources or it is questionable. as you can imagine, they use their gmail account or private e-mail. you can imagine of having text conversations via cell phone. anything so that you are not using -- and on their personal cell phone. i do not think the question here -- i don't think it is helpful maybe politically helpful to clinton's allies to ship this from an argument on how you dealt with classified and importing government information

to one of just transparency. and there is an issue of transparency. the secretary of state, i do not think necessarily owes the american people access to everything she said and anytime she happened to say it. it might not be helpful for our relationships with allies and our plans to make it tough for our enemies to expose all of clinton's e-mails to the world. what i think is important to know, did she secure information? was the state department aware? if so, who signed off and how did they make sure it was secure? if she was ever involved in political matters including helping president obama possibly election, why shouldn't she? then i would assume it would probably be done not on state department e-mail because you probably do not what use government resources and you probably are not supposed to for a political matter. there is no reason -- that would be the correct choice to make. i think we should clarify here.

there is an issue of transparency and jeb bush has released a bunch of e-mails and trying to show he has nothing to hide. that is all well and good and makes voters happy and it will get you more votes, then people should consider doing that. the issue here is her function as secretary of state and a very high-ranking cabinet position. and happening to be in line for the presidency. host: why we just learning about this in 2015 if this is a major issue? guest: that is a great question. i have had a lot of conversation with other politicians journalists about how this came to light now and why. there are options there. one of those options is that the clinton team you this was a potential problem and they wanted to get it out there and get it out there now. in my spirits with campaigns let's just say for the sake of argument that is what they did. it was a great decision because it was probably going to get out

there anyway. a smart candidate will always sent themselves and find their own skeletons before anybody else does and then you try to decide when to release it. i have seen numerous times in the campaign where you are in the off year, not election year, early in the off year and there are revelations that come out and it sounds like the biggest deal in the like the biggest deal in the world. a year later no one cares. for scandal to be potent, it is timing as well as what the scandal is. i am not saying that this will not last, because it does go to work competency. i would add something, whatever people say about the clintons the thing about the clintons is people look back at president bill clinton as someone who knew what he was doing. love him or hate him, he was competent and and effective commander in chief, negotiator.

he was really sharp. if you go to the 2012 convention where he gave a great speech or president obama's reelection, there was key line that no one could fix the economy in four years, quote "not even me." that was the key selling point. even if i was the president, the guy you know and love and think knows what he is doing, even i could not fix of this -- that was one of clinton's selling points, the sides being one of the first female nominees of a big party. the clintons know what they are doing. they can handle crises and problems. this kind of problem has the potential to chip away at their selling point, her selling point, as being extremely competent and ready for the job. host: at the same time, the

columnist in the new york times wrote that the " clintons permanent address is on the fault line where defiance needs destruction." guest: they have always been on that line. all the way back to the 1992 campaign -- it is all going to come crashing around them for one problem or another. -- they land on their feet in 1996 after the horrible defeat in 1994. the president is impeached. ends up more popular than ever. people are kind of tired of clinton and the party takes a serious turn and goes with barack obama in 2008. bill clinton, after obama is on the ropes, ends up as the number one most effective surrogate for president obama on the campaign trail in 2012.

i never count them out until they are out. host: vivian tweets in "there is a big difference between if she should have an was illegal for her to have her own server." guest: there are issues of legality and state department rules and why she appears to have been living by different rules than other people. there was a state department official that lost his job for >> we take you live to new work, where new jersey senator bob menendez is addressing reports the justice department is preparing to bring criminal justice charges against him. >> making sure victims of superstorm sandy have the tools they need to rebuild their lives, or making certain that iran never, ever achieves the ability to produce nuclear weapons. i have always worked to keep new

jersey families safe, keep= ports secure, and keep first responders fully equipped and staffed. there may be no member of congress who fought harder than i did to get the 9/11 commission's recommendations into public law. so i fight for these issues, and for the people of our country every single day. that's who i am. and i am not going anywhere. anyone who knows us knows that she and his family and me and my family have been real friends for more than two decades. we celebrated holidays together. we have been there for family weddings and sad times, like funerals. and we have given each other birthday, holiday, and wedding presence just as friends do.

lastly, because there is an ongoing inquiry as much as i would like to, i cannot make any additional comments or answer any questions. a time may come to do that, and i hope you will understand. [speaking in spanish] >> trying to take a press conference, preparing to bring criminal corruption charges

against him. the doj investigation reportedly centered on a man he mentioned a florida ophthalmologist. earlier today, the center's office said they were many false claims named about his ties to a man who was a friend and donor to his campaign. he is a democrat, who was elected to his third term in 2012. hillary calls it hdr 18, 19, 20, 21. i think 19 covers gender separation. to divide woman from men -- host: i apologize, i am not familiar with what you're talking about. where are you getting this information? caller: and -- all of this comes at a rio. a treason jail. -- host: can you give us a source of we can checklists? caller: you can go in your video

thing and look under -- let me say, let me find you something. let's see. in rio, you will find where they had -- what is that group called the -- host: we will have to let you go. i do not think either of us are familiar with what you're talking about. let's moved to santa clara california democrats. hello. caller: i am kind of ignorant because i do not have a computer, so i do not know -- host: you really do not have a computer? do you feel not part of in certain ways without a computer? caller: sort of.

it is something i have been putting off and have not gotten involved in yet. but her -- let's see. i do not know what a server is, but if you are in government talking about government, to a person -- if you're on the computer and talking to a colleague who is also in government and you are talking about government topics, but they are also a friend of yours and you are combining into the conversation personal things, then based on what you said a view minutes ago, personal is personal and government is government. if it is combined in the same conversation, what do you do? back to an earlier caller, if she is -- has been doing this for four years, why would

someone not have said anything if it is a big deal? i do not know if you can tell me -- host: any response for her? guest: those other things we are trying to figure out. why did not anyone say anything when she was secretary of state. she was head of the department of than. when you are the boss, the only person left to question you is the president of the united states or chief of staff. these are a lot of the things we are trying to figure out. when you talk about servers, we are trying to figure out where it was then and where it is now, who ran it. there are a lot of things we do not now. you raised questions people are trying to find answers to. host: oklahoma, independent line. we are talking about hillary clinton's e-mails. caller: thank you for taking my call. i wondered if mr. drucker might inc. that hillary should be --

might think that hillary should be congratulated for securing her e-mail much more effectively than the government that edward snowden was able to access and provide to the guardian. guest: that is an interesting angle. no one says that the government is necessarily the most competent, effective organization in the world. i do not think it explains until we have an explanation why the secretary of state would decide her personal server was more secure than a state department server. one thing to be aware of notwithstanding the fact that spies, from time to time get u.s. information and are able to use it against us the way mr. snowden did. the fact is, the president of

the u.s., his team, the cia, the fbi, and so on down the line, they all rely on secure government e-mail and other means of communication that have been deemed better than someone's computer in a basement. i think we have to assume that you tried to err on using something secure versus something that is not, unless people can supply why i am better off with gmail then government and cryptic communications. host: in an editorial this morning on usa today, laney davis responds to the anti- editorial that usa today wrote. he rose -- he wrote "fact: to those who argue that mrs. clinton's server at home was less secure than the one used i the state, i answer: really?"

guest: that is a great argument, but even hillary clinton has not sat down with anybody and laid out why laney davis's claim is the case. maybe if she says i did not trust the state department e-mail to be secure, here is why. of course it will open up another pandora's box of why did you not do anything to fix it for four years, no one is arguing the government cannot be penetrated. that does not mean you do not try. unless someone can tell us that actually the president has a gmail account, he figures -- with a server in the white house basement -- because that is more secure than an encrypted government communications, i do not know the argument will wash.

host: this e-mail, your friends earlier, does the public have the right to every word to family and friends or private discussions? guest: no. as a reporter, i always want information. that is how i make my living. anytime i can get information and review it, i enjoy that. but any public official does not go me or the public every last piece of their lives. they do not always communications about personal matters. i do not think it is good for the country, particularly as secretary of state to air your personal laundry that adversaries can use against us. to my mind, the issue is not whether hillary clinton releases all of her communication's. it would be interesting and prove she is transparent, but i do not think that is the issue.

the issue is that when she was dealing with government agent -- government issues pertaining to an important job, was it security if we wanted it secure? host: wednesday night, she sent a tweet "i want the public to see my e-mails." when will the public get a chance? guest: who knows? everybody claims they are for releasing e-mails. it does not answer the question. where these e-mail secure? if you release the e-mails -- the question is not why will hillary clinton not release her e-mails? the question was she was using a private e-mails account when a) she was not supposed to according to state department roles and b) was it secure?

as a reporter and analyst, i like to stick to the issues i think matter and are relevance -- relevant. jeb bush, in some ways created -- at this busy stage of the presidential can -- campaign -- here is my e-mails. who cares? you are governor of florida are -- florida. unless you are negotiating sensitive deals with the middle east or china or anyone else, it is not relevant to this particular question. it may tell us about your business and political dealings voters may look at that information and it may influence the vote and may be demanded new level of transparency in that regard for presidential candidates, but that is not the real question. the question is was the information secure and why did she break the rules? host: we hear 65,000 e-mails.

is that a lot, all? guest: i have 40,000 e-mails i have not deleted between my two gmail accounts. that is not including those i have not deleted out of my yahoo! account. this is over. -- this is over a period of how long? the question is, what is in the e-mails. and is there classified information. we know the benghazi select committee in the house wants e-mails because they want information pertaining to the september 11, 2012 terrorist attacks on our consulate in benghazi. if you have, out of 55,000 e-mails, 50,000 of those our requests from someone to help me move money from one account to the other, i will give you a nice stipend, and those sorts of funny things -- you have a bunch of spam, and other words, who

cares. the key is what is in there and what is involved. volume does not mean anything. host: republican line carrier caller: thank you for taking my call. during the watergate investigation, hillary clinton was 27. she was a lawyer on the house judiciary committee. her appointee for writing a specific brief was due to the council's point of view and that is not relevant. but her boss says that you cannot use that because of a previous preceding regarding douglas and his potential impeachment. hillary took the douglas file, went to an office, wrote of -- a brief that was fraudulent and she was fired for writing that by her boss, who had only fired

three people in 17 years. my concern with hillary is her current and past behavior will be the concentration of a presidency. should she be elected? i think the american people deserve a president who's behavior is not the focus of the news media -- host: can make all back to hillary clinton being fired? i do not think i have ever heard that story. guest: i am not some way with that story. host: wears this information coming from? i try to keep up on the news. caller: you can look that up. it may be in the national archives. her boss was seisman. host: you're saying she was fired for writing a fraudulent

briefed during the watergate hearing? caller: that is correct. you can look that up. host: i am sure people are doing that right now. any response for her? guest: i am not familiar with the story. i will say that in the 2008 campaign, or some point in the last decade, there is a tape saying that the bush white house had it bunch of secret e-mails and this is the kind of thing that is not acceptable. host: what is it about hillary clinton that gets people revved up? guest: in the 1990's, i thought it was clinton derangement syndrome. then we had george w. bush and low and below -- behold i saw pushed arrangement syndrome. now there is obama derangement syndrome. i thought there was something unique about them. what drove conservatives nuts

was bill clinton was elected as a centrist democrat or in a government way, after the 1994 shellacking. it drove conservatives crazy. they could not dislodge him. i think our politics, at a certain period of history where it is polarized, so whoever the leading candidate is, the other side will go crazy. i think that is true for democrats and republicans. if republicans are in the white house in 2016, i think i can tell you about whoever-it-is derangement syndrome. maybe walker derangement syndrome and so forth. host: mishkin, democrat. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i am calling about the e-mail

account. i have a computer. i'm not to lay literate, but is there not a way that she could not turn her computer over to the fbi and have them go through her computer and find anything and everything she has on their? -- on there? also why is this such a big story with isil, genocide in africa, people here starving to death, people who do not have jobs? we are making a big deal out of someone's e-mail? and why don't she have a secured government computer in her home. she was on the job 24/7. i do not understand this. thank you and have a good morning. guest: she has a lot of great

questions. we do not have the answers. it is a big deal because she could be president. host: david drucker, are the democrats standing behind her, defending her? guest: they are doing both. at the same time there is a lot of anxiety and frustration. i do not think this is what they want to deal with. assuming that hillary clinton will announce or take more overt steps to run, at that point, if she has a team that is better positioned to deal with this, it will make it easier. i think democrats are of two minds. many of them like hillary clinton and wants her to be president. it looks like she will be the nominee so they will support her in any event, but it does not mean they are enjoying this particular situation. host: richard calling from here

in washington, d.c. hello. caller: good morning. i want to commend journalist drucker for noting that clinton took credit for the welfare reform. that was after congress jammed it down his throat. he also took credit for the economy, which was through wall street. let's look at what his rear claim to fame is. he is the only elected hesitant ever to be impeached and office, convicted of contempt of court and fired while in office. i like him as a person, but who are we kidding. as for hillary, her work in the state department led to the so-called protecting libya, even though she, samantha power and

rolando, in the past administration, susan rice, did not find the duty to protect and are for syria -- in darfur, syria, and in the case of susan rice rwanda. now today, because of the duty to protect, secretary gates says there is no security threat from gaddafi, now we have isis. these are just examples of this serial shambles that this couple has brought. doesn't this indicate, that hillary, when this unravels like watergate, that she will probably withdraw her bid? guest: i do not see her deciding not to run for president. i think her record as secretary of state is not as stellar or pristine or protected from

political attack as democrats might have hoped. i think there is a lot for republicans to pick through. whether it sticks, we do not know. even though democrats take issue with the benghazi investigation, there is a chance there is a lot more for republicans to uncover, depending on whether the house committee can accomplish it. it is not an easy race for her by any stretch if she runs. it does not appear to be a democrat with real have to or political basis to support who is interested in running. maybe if elizabeth warren changes her mind. you should not discount clinton's permit ability. both clintons. hillary in particular. they are very deft and how they have navigated problems, putting together a very sharp campaign team.

like i have said, it is a long way to the election. we are very far out. hostile -- host: the representative talking about the e-mail situation. you do not need a law agreed to understand how troubling this is , he said in a statement. there are a chain of custody issues, the preservation of material and document issues. and there is spoiler nation -- s poliation of evidence issues. one should also the concerned about the national security implications of former secretary clinton using exclusively personal e-mail accounts for the conducting of official u.s. foreign-policy. a couple of tweets. there are still a couple haters on the left because they want liz or bernie to run.

and, if hillary clinton decides not to run, who would the democrats back? guest: that is a question. the thing about 2008 that were taken for granted, hillary was the nominee. she was going to be the next president. obama runs and his polling was not great. what we can now look back and say, here was a politician with real talent. with a really good following. who is able to harness support that went beyond his following. right now, there is nobody in the democratic party that appears in a position to do that. bernie sanders could go after hillary clinton from the left, but he is not the same kind of post-partisan centrist figure that event senator barack obama

was at this point in 2008 campaign. jim webb could run a hillary clinton as it populist, but i do not see him harnessing the desire for a much more committed progressive that some democrats are looking for. who was really there? the only name that keeps coming up is elizabeth warren. she has made no indication she wants to run at a time when these campaigns get started earlier and earlier. it is still out there. if hillary did not run, someone will have to do it. but there is no one who can take our out now that has indicated they are interested in giving it a shot. host: orlando independent. good morning. caller: i am calling, what is the big deal? we have more important things than hillary.

hillary and bill have been conniving since they have been in public office. so what is different? guest: this gets to why i am skeptical about whether the donations the clinton foundation , the story with legs, a year from now, because that is what people think. what is the big? deal -- what is the big deal? but the e-mail issue goes to the core competency of the president. one of hillary's selling point is that she knows what she is doing. there are a lot of democrats who want the next nominee to be better at running the government and getting things done. if this kind of story goes to one of the last parts of hillary clinton. host: did the white house know? guest: we do not know.

he will be interesting to find out if she ever got senior white house approval for her private e-mail account. host: baltimore, democrat. hello. caller: a little. i wanted to know, if: powell did the same thing -- colin powell did the same thing, why do you not bring him to shore. i also want to know, everything this president said did, didn't scrutinized -- been sc rutinized, can you ask those questions? guest: i have no doubt that if powell ran for president, those e-mails would be scrutinized. the he is not running so that will not get a lot of play. as far as clinton and the president getting scrutiny, that is what happens if you run or our president. if you next president is a

republican i expect they will get as much scrutiny as the current one. host: north carolina, the last caller on this segment. republican. caller: thank you. mr. drucker, you do not have to carry the water for hillary. she broke a federal law. there is classified government information on her server. if she can break the law everybody can. that includes top-secret. if anybody follows the rules, it should be the leader. if she wants to aspire for the presidency of the united states, she needs to follow the rules and not just employ her own. thank you. guest: i think he makes a good point. i think the argument is going to

be a very attractive argument to a lot of voters, especially republicans and conservatives but also democrats who are fed up with people in washington seeming to play by one set of rules why everyone else has to play by another. that is why i think this issue is bigger than the fenton foundation issue, because of the information on the server and how it was handled. my argument is, even if something is a big deal that should matter, it does not mean it always matters to voters in the country who are not in washington, new york bubble. i think this story deserves the high level of scrutiny it is getting safely for the argument the gentleman made. host: a snowy friday in washington. no one is in town. cap's most of the government will not be operating at full speed today. what will you work on? guest: client continuing to

focus on the presidential campaign, especially the republican primary, because there is one. [laughter] i think the interesting thing about republicans is they are trying to redefine themselves for the 21st century without losing the conservative principles that they think are important to turning the country around and think built the party into what it is or could be. i should have a story today on marco rubio's tax plan. people debate about whether it is a good plan or whether it will help people, but if you look at what they intended to do on the political side and the language they use, they are trying to take the republican argument for lower taxes and make it relevant for people today and people's problems today, instead of recycling reagan's plan from the 1980's.

>> then it, a discussion about the affordable care act and the impact of the court's decision. after that, president obama holding a townhall meeting with college students in south carolina. the future of the federal health care law arrest once again with the supreme court. justices heard oral arguments wednesday, challenging whether tax subsidies can be given to people who buy insurance or only ones established by state. the challenge breasts on six words -- the challenge rests on six words.