over my friends, i have endorsed a couple others in their races before they decided to run for president. i was to left and right, you were going to get clobbered in the press. beta, chewed up, spit out. -- and i aming, and ?hinking, and you've been thinking that since i was on the stage nominated for vice president. i thought, you budget. i will serve. like you all, i am still standing. have both goneho through the ring there as mr. trump has, makes me respect to even more. but you are here and you are putting your efforts, you are putting your relationships on the line to do the right thing for this country because it you are ready to make america great again.

[applause] palin: i am here because like you, i know it is now or never. i am in it to win it. because i love america. i love my freedom. if you love your freedom, inc. of that. that and know that the united states military deserves a commander-in-chief who loves our nation compassionately and will never apologize for this country. new commander-in-chief who will never leave our men behind. a new commander-in-chief, one who will never lie to the families of the fallen. [cheers and applause] i am in it because just last week, we were watching our sailors suffer and be humiliated on a world stage at in hands of iranian captors

violation of international law. a pictureweek-need later-in-chief has decided -- because a weak-kneed capitulator-in-chief with the skills of a neighborhood organizer organizing 18, decided that america would -- organizing americaecided that would apologize. they captured, we apologize. we bend over and say, thank you enemy. we are ready for a change. and our troops deserve the best. a new commander-in-chief with a track record of success that has proven he is the master at the art of the deal. he is the one who would know how to negotiate.

record ofandidate's success proves he is the master of the art of the deal. he is beholden to no one except we the people. how refreshing. he is perfectly positioned to let you make america great again. are you ready for that, iowa? ] heers and applause gov. palin: no more pussyfooting around. our troops deserve the best. you deserve the best. he is from the private sector. he deserves a hallelujah. can i get a hallelujah? hallelujah! : president is to keep us safe economically and militarily. the charge. to lead some trips, hang in there. help is on the way.

better than anyone, is he not known to be able to command fire. are you ready for a commander-in-chief? [cheers and applause] are you ready for a commander-in-chief who will do asks?b and go kick isis's isis's ass?and kick are you ready to stump for trump? i am here to support the next president of the united states, donald trump. eight years ago i warned that to obama process promise of the fundamental transformation of america, it would take more from you and leave of america weaker on the world stage and that we would soon be unrecognizable. promiseat is the one

obama cap. but he did not do it alone. and this is important to remember. especially those of you, like me, a member of the gop. this is what we have to remember in this very contested, great primary race. trumps candidacy has exposed not ramifications of the betrayal of a transformation of our country, but he has exposed the complicity on both sides of the aisle that has enabled this. ok? trump, but he is been able to do, which is really taking people off, which i am glad about. he can go on doing at left and right, that is why he is doing so well. he has been able to tear the the off this idea of system. the way that the system really works. please hear me on this. i want you to understand more and more how the system, the

establishment, works. and has gotten us into the trouble we're in an america. loss hasnent political been doing the bidding of their campaign donor class and that is why you see that the borders are cap open. -- eric kept open. for them, for the cheap labor. it is crony capitalism so they can suck off them. industry forng special interests elsewhere. we need someone in power in position to bust up that establishment to make things great again. it is part of the problem. his candidacy as a movement, a force, a strategy. it proves as long as the politicos get to keep their titles, their prayers, their

media ratings. they really don't care who wins elections, the proof? look what is happening today through the gop machine, the establishment. they would assemble the political landscape. a are attacking their own front runners. what the left ever come out of -- what the left ever come out against their own? no. they do not eat their own. but to becoming after donald trump's supporters even? with accusations that are so false? they are so busted with the way these things work. please, you, a diverse support group. some are even whispering they are ready to throw in for hillary over trump because they cannot afford to see the status will go, otherwise they will not be able to be slipping off of the gravy train that has been

feeding them all of these years. they do not want that to end. funny,nny, ha ha, not now what they are doing is waili trump and his trumpeters are not conservative enough. oh my goodness gracious, what the heck with the establishment know about conservativism? tell me, is this conservative? gop majorities handing obama a blank check to find a obamacare and planned parenthood and illegal immigration that competes for your job and .urning safety nets into and all of these new democratic voters who are going to be coming over the border as we keep the borders open. bequeathing our children millions in new debt and refusing to fight back for our sovereign see even though that and sent elected them

them to washington, d.c. no! if they can't do that, who are they to tell us we are not conservative enough in order to be able to make these changes in america that we know need to be made. now they are concerned about this ideological purity? give me a break. they to say that? oh, and tell somebody like phyllis shuffling, she was the republican conservative movement and hero and a trumps up border. tell her -- and a trumps importer. tell her. right wingers. proud cleaners. of our weapons and our constitution. enough?we are not red well, he being the only one who has the guts to go where the issues that have to be spoken about.

-- while the rest of these establishment candidates want to hide in the dust. they would not talk about these issues to be brought them up. they have been talking about this political correctness. like a suicide vest. talkedues that had to be about had to be debated and he brought them to the forefront and that is where we are today with good discussion. a good, heated, competitive primary. be lectured that, well, you guys are all sounding kind of angry is what we're hearing from the establishment. oug on right we are angry -- doggone angry? yes. they stomp on our next and then they tell us just chill. relax. we are mad.

we have been had. they need to get used to it. this election is more than just , anybody bybc's clinton. when we are talking about a nation without borders, when we are talking about a great season and our federal government. will never be able to pay off the debt, our children and grandchildren. power through strength. well, we are talking about our very existence. so no. drill.not going to we're going to drill, baby drill down. we are not going to self-sabotage and to represents that. we need a candidate to represents america first. solution.se

yes, the status quo has got to go otherwise we're going to get more of the same. and with their failed agenda, a cannot be salvaged. it must be savaged. and, donald trump is the first one to do that. ?re you ready for new are you ready for the leader who will let you make america great again? [cheers and applause] gov. palin: it is going to take a whole team. fighters in the house and the private sector and the senate. so our friends who are fighters in the house and the senate today, they need to stay there and help out. they can help our new leader in the positions they are in. let me say something very positive about one of those individuals. rand paul. i will tell you about that libertarian streak in him that is healthy. he knows you only go to war if

you are determined to win the war. and you quit putting the bill for these nations who are oral-rich. oil-rich.which -- we have been fighting their scrimmages where they are yelling all bar and cutting each other's heads off. -akbar and allah cutting each other's heads off. ownave not prioritized our best at budget well enough to be able to afford what we are doing overseas. things are going to change under president trump. applause] gov. palin: so we can be a team with fighters in the house and senate. yes, our candidate is different.

he is a multi-billionaire. not that there's anything wrong with that. it is amazing. he is not elitist at all. i'll, i just hope you get to know him more and more as a person and family man and what is he been able to accomplish. his quiet generosity. maybe his large as gets in the way of that quiet generosity and his compassion, but if you know him as a person, and you will get to know him more and more. not just for his record for success and his good intentions for america, but who use as a person. he is not an elitist. as a multi-billionaire, we still want them on because he roots us on. he tells says, joe six-pack, he says, you know, i have worked very very hard and i have succeeded. heally i have succeeded, says. and he says, i want you to

succeed, too. and, that is refreshing because he, as he holds things, he builds big things. things that touch the sky. they get infrastructure that puts other people to work. he spends his life looking up and respecting the hard hats and the still-toed boots and the work ethic you all have with in you. he is an optimist. passionate about equal opportunity to work. the self-made success of his, you know that he does not get his power, his high, off opium. money.eople's like a lot of dips in washington do. they are addicted to opium where they take other peoples money and then there are high is getting to redistribute it, right? and then they get to be really popular pick up and they give out your heart-earned money. he does not do that. his power, his passion, is the

fabric of america. dreamsy work ethic and and faith in the almighty. but a combination. are you ready to share that again, i read? because that is what is going to allow you to make america great again. he is going to be able to empower you to look out for one another again instead of relying toa bankrupt government supposedly being looking out for you? no. i think you are ready for that. iowa, i believe you are ready to see that our veterans are treated better than illegal immigrants are treated in this country. ] pplause gov. palin: and you are ready to talk about the tax reforms to open up main street again. and you are ready to stop the race-building based on color and zip code to unify around the right issues. the issues important to me i

would not be endorsing him. amendment.ro-second those are the things unifying values. these are unifying values from big cities and tiny towns. from big mountain states and the big apple to the big, beautiful heartland in between. i want you tods, try to picture this. it is a nice thing to picture. exactly one year from tomorrow, former president barack obama -- [cheers and applause] his hopen: he packs up the change he staff and his teleprompters and his selfies and heads back to chicago. i'm sure he can find some community they are to organize again. there, he cannot finally look up

, president obama will be able to look up, and there, over his head, he will be able to see that shining, towering trump tower. thatbarack obama, he built and that says a lot. i look, you say a lot will stop being here tonight, supporting the right man who will allow you to make america great again. brush you, god bless the united states of america and our next president of the united state's, donald j. trump. >> unbelievable. mr. trump: i love you, darling. take you. we're going to give them hell. i just want to thank sarah and todd. just really amazing people. day is a woman that, from one, i said if i ever do this i have to get her support.

she feels it. she understands that better than anybody. sarah, on behalf of myself and my family and the country i want to thank you. thank you. come on, we will sign a couple of things. ♪ with iowa governor's announcement that he wants to see donald trump lose election, a busy day two days before the iowa caucuses. joining us is catherine lucey, the ap reporter for government and politics. thank you for being here. walk us through the events of the day and how both of these developments unfolded. catherine: a busy day, obviously.

the governor of iowa did a press conference with some reporters about renewable fuel. ethanol. it was a conference dealing with that industry. should rejectowa ted cruz because ted cruz was phasing out a federal standard for the fuel. when he was directly asks if you'd like to see ted cruz defeated in iowa, he said it yes. so he is not making an endorsement, but sending a pretty strong signal about who he does not want to see elected here and iowa. fuels oris this about is this about ted cruz and the republican party? catherine: officially when he is talking about is that he is concerned about renewable fuel. he certainly

identifies more with the establishment. has not coalesced around a candidate and there is quite a bit of hand-wringing about the fact that trump and crews are battling it out here to win the caucuses at the moment. >> will governor branstad endorse anyone before the caucuses? know, he: as far as i has repeatedly said he would not make an endorsement. he did not say any different today. but we're in a very weird year, so it is not impossible. he has not traditionally and doors. >> catherine, after days, it is sarah palin with supporting donald trump in iowa. does this in any way affect the caucuses? catherine: that is a big question. i guess we will have to see how it plays out. i think endorsements only mean

so much. obviously, she is someone who has support and interest here. trump is hoping this will kind of push him over the edge. i think it will continue to be a between ted cruz and donald trump as we go into the final days. >> you are following the candidates on the ground across iowa. what are you sensing in this republican field? there really is a lot of frustration and anger and people really want to see a change. busink in different ways, trump and crews are tapping into that. the thing that is different about them and the thing that will be interesting to see on caucus night as approach this in different ways and air drying some different audiences. and crews has a more traditional -- and ted cruz has a more traditional camping. reaching out to pastors to build a traditional and trusted ground operation, whereas trump is

holding giant rallies, huge events and is really pulling lots of people who do not traditionally participate. successs having predicated on getting new people out to caucuses. political experts are saying there are essentially three, maybe four tickets out of iowa. right now, who is that third candidate? the race for third, the so-called the establishment of race. right now, senator marco rubio appears to be in that position. he is probably third in the polls. certainly, chris christie, jeb bush, and ben carson are all, you know, pushing. see if they can perform better than expected. >> as we are seen in the past, the last two weeks before the caucuses can see some

significant changes in the polls. catherine: iowa tends to decide lake, break late. in addition to the three or four tickets out, there is the of who would come and six, but if they were previously 10th, so there is a little bit of that going on. you want to do better than people think you will. >> catherine lucey who is covering this presidential campaign and the iowa caucuses specifically. she writes for the associated press. joining us from des moines, iowa. thank you for being here. announcer: here's a look at the calendar for the republican caucus and primary. we are just two weeks away from the iowa caucus. the benoit nine, the new hampshire primary. south carolina holds its primary february 20. februarya caucuses on 23. follow our road to the white house coverage on c-span.org and

the c-span networks. announcer: c-span takes you on the road to the white house and into the classroom. campr, our student documentary contest asks students to tell us what issues they want to hear from the presidential candidates. road to then's white house coverage and get all of the details about our student camp contest at c-span.org. next, deputy national advisor ben rhodes. this is one hour and 40 minutes.

>> good afternoon and thank you all for braving the second coldest day of the season. i am the director for the study of the institute of diplomacy. georgetown institute for the study of diplomacy. the mission is to bring together diplomats, practitioners, scholars, and students from across and beyond georgetown university to explore a wide range of global challenges and the evolving demands of diplomatic state craft. the purpose is to better understand the nexus between theory and practice. between the scholar and the practitioner. and to enhance and expand an appreciation of the critical role of diplomacy as a national security tool as both formulation and implementation. we host a number of events

throughout the year, including the very prestigious lecture in policy andreign diplomacy. it began in 1976, predating the institute. they commemorate those who provided the endowment. -- it was by a graduate in 1924, practically one of the first. makers include george w. bush, dr. anthony lake, the honorable lee hamilton, ambassador theoponte, george tenet, late sandy berger, and a ,resident of the wilson center among many others. this year it is the institute's pleasure to partner with the institute of politics and book service at the mccourt scroll up policy to present a moderated conversation with mr. ben rhodes.

the assistant to the president and national security advisor for strategic communications and speechwriting. topic this afternoon's national security, communications, and politics in a complex world. mr. rhodes oversees all of president obama's national security communications, speechwriting, and global engagement. he just completed his eighth state of the union address. and he is also responsible for many of the president's more memorable domestic and global speeches. rigorously, he served as deputy director of white house's speech writing and as senior speechwriter for the obama him pain. joining obama for america, he worked for several years as special assistant to lee hamilton, a previous lecture. presenter.

he helped draft the iraq study group and and and recommendations of the commission. he is co-author with lee hamilton and tom kane of precedent: the inside story of the 9/11 commission." i was told to mention he was a mets fan. he is perhaps best known for channeling president obama's voice for the public, but he also serves as one of the president's closest and longest-serving advisors. given his role in the many national security decisions of this administration, we decided this year to present the lecture in an of format to allow for greater insight into how national security decision-making works at the white house. a moderated conversation is always far more interesting when

the participants have a report. so, two of georgetown's own who have worked with mr. rhodes in different capacities will moderate today's discussion. bernadette is a dean and fellow on assignment to georgetown from the foreign service. she most recently served as special assistant to the president for national security affairs and spokesperson for the national security council, where she worked for mr. rhodes for three years. the nfc, she served at the state department as special assistant to secretary hillary clinton. baghdad, insy in dubai, and in the u.s. embassy and bogota. in 2000 seven she was selected as a colin powell fellow which recognizes one of 12 most-promising future leaders in the department of state. prior to the foreign service,

she was vice president of private thinking at j.p. morgan and assets of management at lehman brothers. she is a graduate of boston college. but unless he is the founding executive director to of politics and public service. nearly two years as one of the top communications strategists in the democratic party. most recently, he was communication director of the democratic national committee. he is a veteran of four presidential campaigns. he is a political strategist for four current senators and two former governors. he is advised on independent expenditure campaigns -- i can't quite do this 1 -- independent expenditure campaign arms of the ccc and the ds cc, which he will translate later upon request he has worked upon

numerous other state and local races. he is a founding partner in two of washington's leading consulting firms and is a frequent commentator on tv. has an ma ino political management from the george washington university. we have a great program today. i am glad you were able to join us. with that, i am turning this over to bernadette. bernadette: take you barbara. thank you for being with us today. i had the privilege of working for been for three years at the white house and really felt that you were one of the bus buses i have ever worked for, in fact when i was thinking about going to the white house and was not really sure if it was going to be the weight it, j sullivan who at the time was the deputy chief of staff of the state department said, if you have an opportunity to work for ben rhodes, does not matter what the position is, you have to seize that opportunity.

he was one of the best people you love ravages to work for. as usual, jake sullivan was correct and it was a fantastic expense. i am excited to be able to share with my georgetown colleagues and students what that was like. we thought we would start off with a mix of news of the day, see how it is to channel the president, what your experience has been like. if you could walk us through what your typical van slyke of the white house when you come in. what happens between the time you sit down at your desk and leave late at night? then: i mean, you must have forgotten in the several months since you left there is no such thing as a typical day at the white house. do is, the best i could you know, i will get in in the morning and received the president's daily briefing. so, as you all know, the president receives a daily intelligent reefing.

those of us who participate in that session get our own version of the briefing as it is we get into work. so, you start the day with generally usually not a lot of good news. it is a sobering start to the day. then, usually, we reserve that 9:00 a slot to coordinate what messaging andtant congressional national security issues are. for instance, this morning, we had a session on iran to review the status of all of the different pieces of the events that rolled out over the weekend. tend to have the president's daily briefing and that would be susan rice and avril haynes, lisa monaco, myself, the vice president when he is in town.

that is always fairly normal. but then the rest of the day tends to be driven by several different things. participate role, i in the devotees and principles committees, which are essentially the policy-making bodies of the government. the various deputies from across and intelligent community, they will meet or if the issue is ripe for decision, there cabinet members will meet. i do not go to those mean is, if you did that is all you would do. but that is the routine of policy making. that is one thing that could take up my time. the other elements are mainly if there is a major presidential engagement coming up. that will occupy my time. so, if the president is going on a foreign trip, what is his schedule, what are we trying to

get done? what policy are we trying to get tocrossed the goal line announce? what speeches might have to give? digging through, essentially, big residential items. a trip, and announcement, a speech. that is something that will consume a fair amount of my time. if there is a very hot button pressing issue, there are no doubt going to be decisions made over the course of the day. situation like we had over the last couple days, i will essentially cancel my schedule and do nothing but you with iran. so, you are either planning for the next big thing you know is coming or you are planning and drinking from the higher hose of world events. of worldre hose events. there are a couple other things, the public diplomacy function i have is less prominent but no less important.

overseeing the exchange programs, the global outreach, that takes up a segment of time. and lastly, a series of issues i essentially have taken some degree of ownership of. policy.rma occasionally checking in on things like that. but, you always start the day the same way and it always ends -- wouldit is a good day, time are you at home? heari am always amused to the biographer of jp morgan. the hours are not as bad in terms of sitting in the office as the people i know who are lawyers and investment anchors. wait in therell at 8:00 but i will be out of there by 8:00 most days. that is a short

day. hopefully you can get out sooner. the problem is, does not stop when you get home. the challenge is not so much the total kind of ours land at the office, it is that if something happens and 10:00 at night you are expected to be able to do about it 10:00 at night. if something happens had 2:00 in the morning, you are expected to deal with it at 2:00 in the morning. i had long planned to go to new york last weekend for the long weekend, that obviously did not happen. so, the more difficult challenge i find in terms of time managing and husbanding your own energy is your never off. it is like being a doctor or something. the phone could bring in the middle of the night and that is all. nobody is going to care that you had to pick your kid up from daycare. that is where i think the time pressure comes from. >> how do you consume information? you have these initial meetings in the morning, but presumably

you are aware of what is going on in iran. physical newspaper reader? to have an ipad? to search twitter to see with the beltway is saying? how do you maintain that throughout the day? question. i consume information in a very distorting and unhealthy way. and i have 410 years. -- and i have four 10 years. attest to this. i was a think tank person. athought it would be thoughtful, inspiring expanse. and the first and got my e-mail account, i had 500 e-mails in my inbox. 470 of them were what we would call press clips. media monitors who are constantly sending the latest iteration of the new york times story, the washington post

story, whatever it is. .o you consume information i used to be a physical newspaper reader, as the reader. when you are in these jobs, information is fed to you from media monitors who are just sending volumes of information to you. that has evolved in the course of my time in government. it used to be you would wake up and there was a routine. washington post stories, new york time story, washington journal stories, wire stories. now it is like, here are tweets. it is a very distorting ring. because, you know, a newspaper actually is help all as a filter because you can see what is on the front page of the new york times. that frontou get page article from the new york times e-mail to you and the next rocket man 72e

says there are a bunch of idiots able to you have to be assign relative value to what you are consuming. twitter has accelerated what was already a news cycle where i felt there was a trap where -- if were to focused on there was a cable news flareup, people responding to that because they're concerned and it is driving the conversation washington for a few hours, if that was already a problem, twitter has accelerated that. like, oh my god what are going to do about this. have diedeal would 1000 deaths if we let every negative story or statement shape how we felt about it. you have to of the ability to consume enough information to know what is going on out there both in terms of real events and

washington conversation. but you also have to know how to shut out enough of that so you will not overreact and get knocked off course. one of the things i like about working for this president is he does not get not off course. it took seven years to get the iran deal done and if he had allowed himself to be buffeted by politics or even certain international events or criticism, you would not have the iranian nuclear program rolled out. is one of the topics we felt we had to address. we anticipate the audience will have questions about news of the day. having worked on the iran deal closely with you for several thes, i, with the rest of world, watched and thought it was fantastic. congratulations. my question is, we sought to announcements in tandem. the implementation day of what you said has been a very long

process to get to this point in tandem with the news that there was the release of these four americans plus a fifth american who left under different circumstances. you have said in the past that in a world in which there is a deal with iran means it is more likely to produce an evolution in iranian behavior than a world which there is no deal. whatever the british -- the president say this does not herald a broader warming of relations with iran. now that we have the implementation of the heralded iran deal, that is implementation day plus one thek, one month, one year # changes would you anticipate out of tehran? will they started to push the boundaries? this, as a tangent, minas hope for more cooperation for resolving issues in syria? if so, what does that look like? nuclearst of all, the

side of this is almost hard to overstate. a lot has happened. way, there is a sea change in what their nuclear like.m looks when overhung the entire nonproliferation regime is resolve for the foreseeable future. there is continued monitoring. the important point is, a have clearly compartmented the nuclear issue and allowed the head of their nuclear program to

manage that account. had no problem -- like, when there were issues, there were technical issues we could raise and say, hey, we have this concern. the concern was addressed. there is this kind of -- it is hard to overstate the importance of, you know, they have really decided to deal with the nuclear issue, for the time being at least, in a constructive manner. will have to rent it -- monitor if there is any change in that. diplomacy ined channels between the two twotries that did not exist years ago. that does not mean there is a change in behavior yet, which i will get to. it does mean we can communicate with us government. ago, whenfour years something would happen, like the sailor incident or anything for that matter, it was, you know, we would have our u.n.

ambassador find their u.n. ambassador, pass a message that their u.n. ambassador would then have to send back to tehran, process it there in their system , they then would tell the swiss in our interest section what the answer is to that message. i mean, this is not picking up the phone and talking to family, right? >> conkey and time-consuming. cannot learnd you about how decisions are made in iran. what has already been beneficial for the iran nuclear deal is communication. on the american citizens, you know, we were able to essentially roll the nuclear negotiations into a channel to resolve that issue and that was difficult. everything with the iranians is negotiation. we were able to grind that issue town and get it done on the terms we were happy with.

actuallylors is better. i don't know where that incident would've led four years ago. you have u.s. navy personnel in iranian waters, here at the sea, and you could easily see how in could have1 that escalated. you know, they are holding them. it becomes a crisis because it is kind of a public issue in both countries. theyve to respond before are out in ways that escalate. whereas here, john kerry called and they were released in a few hours. which is kind of a much healthier, more functional way of resolving issues and avoiding escalation. so, the second point i make is

we have the ability to resolve issues. anyway, they are going to be other issues. irritants, there are just going to be things that come up that will benefit from the dramatic communications between the united states and iran. the third point is, the next major test is syria. and, i do not know. there have already been, you know, this syria talks already looked different than they did two years ago because iran is at the table. they were not two years ago. you have a situation where he have the right countries in the process. in that you have iran and russia along with the united states, turkey, qatar, and others. you have the right mix of players. template andright timeline for resolving the issue and you have the major sticking point of a sod. it, we will have to see whether iran's position on that evolves

in a more constructive fashion or, friendly, you will have to see if iran's decision-making involves because our senses than that the foreign ministry is not the lead actor in the policy. so, that bears watching. that is not the only test, there will be other issues. the last thing is how well iran evolved? we don't know. will learn a lot with their module selections coming up next month. they have an important set of elections. and will be choosing new that will be a test. off in aelection go way that is reasonably fair? and, who wins? so you will see what that's has. no question they will continue to be pushed back by hard-liners

-- do not want them to be you do not want there to be with the west and the united states. you also see within iran, an well of support for moving in a different direction and how those two things sort themselves out. our judgment with the nuclear deal is ultimately there was so much public support for making the deal that even though the hard-liners were against it, they could support there was. >> [indiscernible] does this have the potential to backslide? are we on such tenuous footing that there is no way to tell if this is an shined in a way that we made progress? both directions.

on the iranian side, we did not make this progress when oxman augmented john was president. the previous president was there. we do not know who the next president of the united states is going to be, either. we do know we have demonstrated to skeptical audiences and both bentries that there can mutually successful outcomes. the nuclear deal was a very good deal for us because it resolves our biggest proliferation concern. it is a good deal for them in the sense that they are going to get relief from sanctions that were crippling their economy. it demonstrates that, you know, through very difficult diplomacy common ground acceptable on both sides. the question as to whether or not both systems can sustain that momentum and find other

-- to directect, that type of effort towards. respond toan increasing engagement with the rest of the world? the greater connectivity that is going to bring to the iranian people, does that serve as a kind of moderating impulse in iranian society in the sense that students and middle-class iranians who are more inclined to be less radical and hostile to the united states and israel and other countries, are they of powered in a way that has an evolutionary effect on iran and society? have to wait and see. another recent event that makes for a non-typical day at the white house is the state of the union. as barbara mentioned and dan five first trading out, you are one of the few people in the history that has had a part and eight state of the unions.

as the writer of the cairo speech, the president's nobel-prize-winning speech and some of the most favorite and memorable speeches of his presidency, can you walk us through what it is like to write a speech and channel the boys have the president? doo wop income as it down, have a better, discuss an outline question what does he give you knows on a legal and? he is quite an eloquent writer himself. what is a process like? to you, like students here, get it back with loss of crafts out -- with lots of cross-else? how does a presence were? all, there is a thing where a character sets a record for the most home runs by a minor-league player in history. and he does not really want that of the. like, eight state of the unions

suggest, why has he been in same job for eight years? [laughter] ben: one of the reasons i am in the same job, it is actually a very interesting process to work on the prison with his speeches. them, charismatic and he sank he is saying, and always wants to make an argument. the very short hand when which a speech goes is, i will sit down with him at the beginning and he will essentially just kind of talk for, you know, up to now about what he wants to achieve. sometimes you will be very specific and say, here's the outline of the argument i want to make. sometimes you just throw ideas out. even rhetoric out that he wants to be and therefore is to you get this kind of verse of input you then take and go alone, in your quiet space, invite. >> where insurance quotes this?

starbucks with your ipod? in a library? a library is actually buried in the fifth floor of the executive office building that no one ever goes to that i think is one of the nicest, most quiet places where nobody can find you. [laughter] ben: you try to get distance. just spent four days in isolation, but i am running back-and-forth to my other job now. and, you write something and then you enter this process where you send it around to everybody who needs to see. policy advisors, but has stuff. then you are in this kind of interesting, you know, moment where you are kind of a girl-keeper. goal keeper.g -- the main thing is, you have to make changes but you don't want to make so many that it starts sounding less likely spent and more like a summation of legal and the output of a product paper inside of a speech.

then it goes back to the snow and nt will sometimes just completely rewrite it himself and come back and say, you know, it it is a bad try when he says, i think we need to make some a structural changes. that is the code word for like, when he did not do a very good job at this draft. that could be you have to kind of go back and read to the outline and rewrite these page where he will just start lining it with edits until he gets at the right he wants. he does not for the tuesday statement on at announcement. but he will growth 10-15 rounds of line editing until it is exactly what he wants it. a most high-wire version was the nobel address which was right after the afghan announcement. we wrote this nobel prize speech, thought it was great,

the morning we're going to leave for oslo, he calls me and john and gives us a totally different speech that he has written by hand overnight. get on theeft to plane to oslo, we had not even gotten him the draft of this page and we set up the whole night on the plaintiff in this crazy exercise. we finally made him go to sleep for an hour because he had to deliver the speech. so that is the most extreme version. that is extreme speech-writing. but deal with it i was a to the state of the union is, on the one hand it is hard to say things new after eight years. but the other reason is you have a years to draw from. nicewe came in, and it was was everything we were saying the first time. because was listening there was a huge seismic change in america. and so, that was one kind of a speech ready. now, on the one hand it is hard because people have heard barack obama for 10 years and you do

not want to sound like a greatest hits album. but, you have a record. what i liked about this was it is not a hypothetical thing. here is how we dealt with the ebola. here's how we dealt with cuba. here is my we think we're going to do this. and so, it was a very different kind of speech writing the in a years ago. when you are trying to say, here's what i want to do. now you can say, here is what i want to do and that is why it is a better approach. people.re is a lot of here is what i have done and here's why i think it is the right weight to do things.

-- the right way to do things. the nobel speech was the most interesting to me because it was a weirdly personal -- you know, foreign policy is often hard to personalize. you usually don't have to do that, obama was leading us as speechwriters to let us into his brain. we were reading that policy, he came back with martin luther king and mahatma gandhi. he was trying to work through something so. you were about to send 30,000 people to war, you know. he took it seriously. what came out was interesting.

>> i have been an admirer of your work, even begrudgingly so, for two years there. as we talked about and you are so well-known for, nationalthe come a security and foreign policy adviser to the president on everything from egypt, libya, opening ofe relations with myanmar and cuba. step back and wonder how the hell you got there, because you do not come from the , neitherrajectory diplomat nor professional politico. so, let's walk through your path a little bit. you grew up in manhattan. what is your first political memory?

ben: interesting question. you you know, what was interesting was my political personality and it h with theke -- ed koc wiffleball bat and they used to walk around and i thought it was cool and he was a bigger and larger-than-life personality.

,n terms of national politics the surprising thing is my e andte as a reagan i remember him being fired up and it was the first time i was old enough to process and the they were big occupied mythey psychic space because they were larger-than-life and my by personalitys and not party affiliation.

>> you are going to go a .ifferent path >> don't be like the right-wing trolls. >> you were going a different path. you worked for giuliani. >> that was before i wanted to eat a writer. that i loved new york politics and thought it was interesting. ands a freshman in college iteeded a summer job and impossible. rudy giuliani was conservative in the new york sense, which is pretty liberal.

and it was a fascinating job stop >> what did you do for the campaign? >> i worked in the press office and i sound old. with to cut out and glue newsday and the post. it is very different. that is where i started. spokesperson is a real care everything to going the videotape of union endorsements and rudy giuliani at staten island.

kid this young communication director liked. thatended up happening was i finished the college degree and the state interested in another for larger-than-life machine boss he was running and in politics, you work for the local person. and i was watching a polling and i had an unmolested

view of the whole thing, seeing the second plane hit and the first tower go down. fiction know, my theers were irrelevant moment i was in as a new yorker. interestalways had an in politics and writing, i was less interested in fiction as that happened and everything after that was about getting whatved and i did not know form it would take. to be there.ut

things,ad done all the it is a different cover up. >> how do you go from being a aspiring fiction writer and watching at 11 in real time in new york to washington and putting the motivation into practice? >> it is a degree where you go to school and i want to figure the fiction-writing department. encompasses publishing that that weld do and i said

need to get into journalism and i know how to write with the decent education background and i will do him whenever i need to do to get in the door. policy said to write i wantant to to be connected to national you may get to write a nice little piece about something. ever think about being a speechwriter? do something known things about. yesterday he was looking for a speechwriter and

to let him know. me withonnected hamilton, who is running for wilson center. he was a former congressman there is a pragmatic view of up.iy setand i did not know anybody. job, which was a good job, was caught up in this

and some of it, i was lucky to work for a democrat and i got experience on the issues of the time with terrorism and the iraq war. working for hamilton. >> how did you meet obama? i -- 2004 -- like everyone else -- not like everyone else -- like some of us. you know, i was an early believer -- you know, i was kind of following the senate campaign and this guy looks at different. what ied different from used to see in washington and i

was a people who was hoping he had bigger ambitions and the thing that was frustrating was that it was great to see them come together and find common ground and chart a new way. you get a sense that the 9/11 commission and recommendations and will not change the fundamental direction. sameraq study group the only sorealize there is far that you can get without being political and the politicians make the decisions that direct course of our foreign policy. so, i felt strongly that i wanted to work on a political

things arecause learned that the government and the for policy, the only thing that would redirect that would be the election. so, i started offering myself to a speechwriter and i wrote and hes for mark warner decided to not run for president get to his toema in the water. and i knew it up people around ever writing that was not bad for the irish times.

and the difference clinton was the iraq war and to that nature. they get deployed to iraq and with campaigns, interesting things happen. somebody needs to prep the andtor for the interview you are in different spaces and that was a role that worked for me. >> one more question about that campaign.

that it was all about iraq and it was a symbol of a change being called for until before election day, when the it was dropped and suddenly all about the economy and all about the economy. you are a foreign policy guy and a national security got. what do you do? >> it is interesting. the week we went to work for obama full-time, it was a week of the youtube debate when he said, in response to a question, that he would engage the leaders of iran and the bad guys of the

world. he was asked, would you engage without preconditions. he said, yes. >> i was one of the guys who attacked. a first met him, i was like, i think that is wrong and i thought i got us into iraq and we constructed an argument that took iraq and made it. the same mentality that says that you have to go along with a war in iraq says that you cannot willtalk to iraq and that get us into another war with iraq and instruction cord -- it strikes a chord. build a bigger argument about doing things differently and it has been gratifying to stick around so long to see a nuclear deal with iran and it shows the

arguments that develop political campaign, there is a threat that runs all the way through to implementation and on the economy, there are a couple of things that are interesting. when you are a speechwriter on a campaign, if you write the first speech on the topic, you are the guy on the topic. i used to write speeches about domestic policy and i wrote about wall street regulation approaches and became the regulation guy. our member when lehman brothers collapsed and he would have to give a speech the next day and there like, you need to rewrite the speech overnight. by that time, i was interested in the foreign policy and they

take that to do at and our this in theng about moment with the campaign of saying thend i'm her chance is that the global economy collapses tonight. >> the entire global economy could collapse tonight. this is not a hope and change exercise anymore. and there is a vacuum of political leadership in the than not having

a win yet. hadand that is the specific point of it. this is not just like some notion. what we say matters to markets and the last thing i will say about this is that it was because noor my job one wanted to hear about for policy for two years of the administration and we would do i'll beent union and told to cut for policy and half because nobody wanted that. they wanted economy, economy, economy. a source of tension that developed in the inter-agency was the people felt like the white house was not letting

centralizing the discussion of issue on for policy and was saying no one was allowed to talk about for policy. 7000 jobs ared being lost a month and what you going to do to stop this? >> what you going to do to stop this. . there must be questions in this. >> make this a question. we welcome short comments.

just let us know where it is from. >> i am rebecca. i'm may federal government employee. do think that you will ever run for office? >> no. know -- it is interesting. i've never thought about it. >> this is how it starts. i am moresay that likely to go in a direction of having my own views and being heard on issues and not a surly wanting to run for office. necessarily wanted to run for office. i know a lot of people worked on the obama campaign and were wrestling with this. it is not appetizing to think

about. i cannot imagine fundraising him half the time -- fundraising half of the time. -- i see a lot of people from the obama campaign and administration who are running for congress and working -- who would be working for congress and are in silicon valley because the demand of running for office and being in office is different and you just try to be the best congressman you could to explain things to whether youuents race things for a month for the campaign and i do not feel like the personal itch to do this peoplebroader point that

wrestle with issues of campaign-finance reform and other things with a thought about the type of people we distance a device and the people of my generation. we should who get into this work. they look at the political climate. at for policytor magazine. at foreign policy magazine. >> i know. >> we talk about obama and i want to know if you can talk about the extent that the president channels you.

do you feel like you have had a lot of impact? do you think this will work for another administration? >> on the second question, i do not plan to. and i think i will get more intense after the i would neverd to comment on who the next president would be. wouldnot something that i -- it is not something that i'm seeking to do. , i thinkrst question ,hat, in terms of if you point

him himhas been doing what it and i'm very us to do and comfortable at this space, finding myself with a profound difference. and it is getting attention on the issue. and i became very interested in the policy for the potential opening to do something affirmative. part of this is that you manage the crisis and respond to

difficult circumstances. in 2011 describing where they were in the policy review and what they were and sayingh burma that the president could get involved in this and that we could really blow through the opening and have the opportunity the fundamental change in the country. that was appealing because it was affirmative. not everything you do is. ever since then, my role has -- would the president come to the work and have irma on the brain? not necessarily. goes to cambodia, there

is a perfect opportunity. see for himself what is happening and the visit could generate momentum. over the years, i think that is an example of an issue that a little bit of presidential attention makes a difference and , what i can do is make sure that he does not lose it on this and that he is checking in regularly before the election and i went out with the letters this is an example of having a different view or changing minds and he supports what were doing and keeping the attention. -- somebody has to do something with cuba and a lot of

people have things going on. of -- cuba was something he wanted to do and it helped him do that and it is how you can make sure something gets a sufficient amount of attention and engagement. absence of that, it is not clear that there would be a normal focus on something like that. >> hello. i'm a sophomore year. i am very interested in climate change and i think a lot about the intersection with national security and international affairs. talk about the legacy of climate change and how important it is, in terms of legacy andout him

how much it carries into the next years, depending on who is president. you think i'm a policy will stay similar right now? you have any thoughts -- do you think that climate policy will stay similar right now? do you have any thoughts? >> i think it is evident. things i would say, in terms hi thecy, we get into climate conference collapsing and there was no advice for coaching the climate change framework is up with kyoto framework had the rich countries doing a lot and writing the rules for everyone else to negate the rules or the damage of climate change.

things,o do a number of build a new framework. paris and we being do more as a developed country. there is a mix of financing for adaptation and mitigation and it is important that people are committed to the transparency in the reporting and the ability with people living up to the obligations and there are other important things that happened that the president really did. partde this bilateral and climateunlocks this is change became a leading bilateral issue and it is in the

top issues. if that was not the case, you never would've had the announcement where they set out will created the space for paris to happen and anything that has to keep happening is climate change is a bilateral foreign-policy issue with emerging countries. this is what we talked about talk not just about terrorism. the last thing is about the mobilization of the private sector and this is a thing that unlocked the associated press. years, we renew those extra push we made

at the beginning of the administration, we created activity that we are not going to do in the private sector allows us to hit the targets much faster. theory that this drivinge market forces a venture with get moreund, it could motion and it is in some say this is inevitable. i think that you terribly deal and it would be a strange way to start your time in office most and is is 197 countries

guess that you could do it. theother thing is that movement is happening and india gets into solar energy. it will happen. it entirely depends on the president. these are easy. these are hard for some countries to do. if we take our foot off of the gas, five years from now, i laggingu will see a ambition and the goal is to get more ambitious. whoever is the next president, they will have a huge amount to set up. whether paris was a well-meaning

it elevatesether the degree of ambition. >> thank you. this is been insightful. studente fox and i am a in a fellow at the institute for study and diplomacy. i'm interested about what you thought was internationally confluence with what was to mystically and politically popular and what far process was with decision-making involved in your background. >> interesting question. is not asexample that

iran withwhite is is the momentum to the politics thereanuary of 20 -- would have been another we reachedill and and the sanctions bill passes and there was another we, youking its way and

groupsent to the outside and the deal was good. will pass the sanctions with a trigger for after the time and they thought we would say yes. said, whatever you do, i will veto it. there was a week where this was -- more than a week. there was a time when no one knew what to do with that and we did not know how that would play. that was not politically popular on the hill and you had the prime minister dealing with this publicly and it was influential

around washington and what was interesting was that it began with the argument in miniature that we had in a bigger way after. draws theresident line and says, i think this is right and i will use every less power to get this done and was how weuff that you would have to have a public argument about whether this is the right thing motivating toas and a little daunting. it does something that flies in the face of how things are done

surface the underlying we always are in conflict with iran. confrontation and it was interesting the public opinion was split. certainly the opinion in the city was not. people were skeptical and in favor of sanctions. interesting when the president calls the bluff and no one was confident. >> on the flip, how does this impact negotiations in the equation when you have political leaders on the upside being loud

and vocal that they are coming at you on the domestic. before you finalize the negotiations or whatever the issue is, the politics impacts how you are doing on the international. >> i think that it goes both argumentsome make the andwe have some hardliners to put some pressure on them. because the other way with these people try to negotiate. is some of the king to sometimes similar

to -- my goal is sometimes similar to -- journalists, my role in the job is to give diplomats a space to do jobs and not worry about it. discussions with all of us and saying, you guys, don't, don't be negotiating with congress at the same time you are negotiating with the p5 the risk is that they do not feel the freedom to get the deal done and the have 500 voices in their heads so that part of this is absorbed

and that is what the white house has to do. >> i'm a graduate of the school of foreign service and a lot of -- i want to express my appreciation with the foreign-policy issue the to talk him up in the speech. and i was wondering what the foreign-policy. there are many things that converge their and one of them is actually a most clear

instance of a humanitarian intervention we have done with the impulse behind intervention being one of the humanitarian concerns for the civilian populations with a risk of credibility in the international community that had been a security council resolution to call my behavior to stop and there is a huge humanitarian consequence for people who are in danger in places like benghazi and others with the international communities seeing this proving to be a hollow. situated in the context of the humanitariany, the

intervention center achieved an objective of adverting a catastrophe because of slaughtering of citizens on the him, the context of to libyamoil, it led being more of a vacuum than before because it was hollowed out and it was a government in waiting and a history of institutions that were prepared to take the place when he was gone and the intervention resulted in the demise. benefitsou managing and enormous political vacuums because there was not the governing structure to take

place. i think, when we look back on that, you know, what is difficult to wrestle with is what we could have done differently to prevent this situation today with the vacuum of warring factions and a breakdown of security. we presumet the -- that governing structures we was more connected can they were to the people on the ground and you had democrats who are saying and doing the right things with the government and budgeting to be inclusive to interact with foreign countries and they were not able to control the militias that were holding territory in parts of libya and you never connected

the political structure to the security challenges. in that circumstance, what do we do? we haven't program with europeans the focuses on training forces and mobilizing. never tookthat, it off. in washington, it is framed that we should have gone in heavier. libya did not want us. he was and they agreed on is not wanting any farmers and they want an office there. i think that it points to the demonstratingma they cannot bring together the world and accomplish something in a very quick time that saved a lot of lives and it the international community can do

these things. on the land, it has been part of a broader trend across the region where you see the erosion of the authority invested in the establishment and there's nothing ready to take the place of the establishment in a different iterations and, as you look at syria, it causes you to question. into syria, with that improve the situation? about a little less than 10 minutes. >> my question is brief. and my question is less technical. then the relationship with president, what do you admire

about barack obama? admire that he is willing and it is as version of things that i have said a couple of times. him after talking to the first meeting she had and the whole thing went well because the president said the whole hemisphere was welcoming and we had broken through the have put the license in a place in the hemisphere and we are now having a different conversation. he is always very generous to his staff and thanks us. anybody could.

anybody could talk to these guys. it takes a president to say, i am opening relations with cuba. he is willing to challenge and do things. the only person -- no person will look at the policy to cubans say it was worth continuing. it is a third rail. you don't touch cuba policy because it has always been that way and for people -- there will be people who will be mad if you do that. time and again, he has been willing. the things we have done that i'm proud of our the things where he is one to take the risk in the face of conventional political approach. you don't do a nuclear deal with iran. you ratchet up the sanctions until -- what?

you don't open up cuba. s die and the castro's diet a -- you certainly do not have all these transactions with the iranians. he takes criticism. people price that in and that is rare. when you look back at the totality of all the things that happened, foreign and the mastech, a lot of them are things that would only happen if you had a president who is willing to be criticized or take risks or do things that are different. that is what i'm focused on. student. graduate i want to ask you about your work with the president as a speechwriter. we know the president can write well and his speeches have a narrative and his story behind

them that do not limit to a single sentence within the speech. balanceou strike the with the story and the policy message? how do you personalize the policy? so, it is interesting because it is more interested in this van anything else because he knows we are giving a speech africa and it is not -- there is a whole story behind that, in terms of the history of the country we are in, the place of the country, the intersection with the united states. he is more interested in trying to surface the underlying

tensions or issues that inform the policy issue, then just saying here is a nine point plan. this is kind of how his mind works. so, the first challenge is how thread to keepe things. most speeches have the ark and here is what the situation is. here is what we should do about it. so, the time they get to the plan, they described the circumstances and create a logic that makes policy same inevitable because of a certain view of how we got to where we are. if you had done that persuasive, the policy prescriptions would make a lot of sense. that's the quick answer i would

give. the issue i would highlight is terrorism and he is resistant. he could go out and beat his chest. he has enough of a record to do it. i think that he is also of the view that presidential rhetoric and momentumic him as policy with controversial space and it is a and a threat to they do not risk

a destruction of america like that. that is a controversial statement stop if we declare this, the logic is that we should have tens of thousands in you have to think describing something in this term and what the practical that would follow. balance and it can be arelenging to make sure you effectively describing the biggest threat to the united states of america in a way that does not create a logic beyond what we think the right responses and the rhetoric of

world war iii, he believes enough in the power of language and he thinks that we would be doing something differently in the response. >> thank you. i'm a graduate student and a fellow at the institute. the administration has been praised for having a diverse administration and a staff. ofave seen complete benefits having racial, ethnic, and gender diversity and having different backgrounds to different perspectives. wonder if you could give a timetable and what the product was for the diversity on the table?

a couple of things. obama and his diversity, you get the different example and it is too easy. literally, it comes to the window to africa and places he knows well. this is, in africa, always coming again and again in the issue of corruption and the visceral loading of corruption in africa and you should see the audience response when he is in kenya or raising issues because it is like he is tapping into something that people have. is an example of the

president leading me to understand summit i would not have. administration, you -- i i think that -- there have a number of muslim american thingsues and one of the -- you know -- we hear from muslim american friends and context wethat the are talking to people in is security and you are diminishing the community to being a security concern and we raise the security issues, always being clear that part of this is not making any sense and you are doing the work for the and part

of this is also that we have a successful and diverse muslim therican community and language in the state of the union is informed by our colleagues who are muslim and tell us how the committee feels stigmatized. so, this is an example. by the way, i encourage this originally and you are going to take messaging and be much and,r with the audience when i came into office, the u.s. government does a lot of analysis of what you think about terrorists and nuclear weapons. you have the ability to do your own. where do you want to work? where do these people want to be

? you go to iowa, you do not talk about all stop you want to know what they talk about. they care of the farm bill and ethanol. we do not do the same thing with the foreign audiences and when we ask a question about whether they care about science and technology, we developed programs that are rooted in entrepreneurship and it gives us a place to have a conversation to build networks that go beyond talking about nuclear proliferation and terrorism. we have to talk about it. we are the united states of america. some of this is diversity in some of this is thinking through the messaging perspective on who we are talking to them what they are interested in doing.

these are things that i think that we can do more of. >> i think we're just about out of time. >> one last. >> we have people in line are now. the first in line is larger stop alumni.an many countrymen were hoping obama would talk about the because especially obama administration did a deal with cuba and things were changing. policy is tied to puerto rican policy. year,ly, beginning this they close the state of the

you see thes and thoughts about this issue. >> maybe we can take the other two questions. where theondering greatest experience was in the white house. i wondered about north korea. i wanted to bring it up and what the next step for the united .tates and the region should be i think a policy of strategic patients should be applied. >> quickly. and again, i do not work directly on this -- the

president said out for the state of union to be different and, in previous years, he would have dealt with it. he did not want to give a that get at the direction of the country generally. pullmakes it harder to very important issues -- and they are important issues. one the president talked about all the time, my brother's keeper initiative, was not in the state of the union. this was thematic treatment of things you need to get right. puerto rico is an important policy issue, but it was more a symptom of it being a different state of the union. you did not find a lot of policy in it. korea, north