tv QA CSPAN March 13, 2016 8:00pm-9:01pm EDT
8:00 pm
8:01 pm
susan: i remove her being 10 years old and handing out copies of newspapers that my parents founded, the legal times, at the aba convention in washington. brian: how long did they own legal times? susan: we started in 1977 and their company owned it until 1986. brian: who taught you about journalism? lyons was the supervisor of the newspaper at andover. he was also george w. bush's favorite teacher in high school. many years later was still and not only was he a
8:02 pm
great leader in journalism but also in the role of a free press. taught constitutional law as well. my junior year in high school. it was incredible experience. brian: your husband is with us today. peter baker. when the circumstances when you met him? used toou have people say i got my job through the washington post? i met my husband there. monica lewinsky was the thing that brought us together. i was an editor at the i would oversee investigative reporting for the national staff. i started in january 1998 one week before the monica story broke. peter was a white house reporter covering president clinton. that is how we met.
8:03 pm
brian: we have some video from 1998. your husband peter baker. clinton discussed jones testimony with secretary. peter: the president gets home from his deposition on january 17. they've gone through all his reported sexual encounters with women over the years. the one that stuck in his mind was monica lewinsky. he gets home at night and because of betty currie and asks her to come into the office the next day. so they can talk about it. that sunday in the privacy of the white house and they went through his testimony and he tried to see if his memory matched her memory. prosecutors are very interested in that because her version was somewhat different in that he
8:04 pm
says i was never out of earshot. he and lewinsky were never essentially alone, he claims. betty kerry said yes but later told investigators had been the outer office on a number of occasions. brian: what are you thinking? peter: my taste in ties hasn't gotten any better. that was a long time ago. the issues were so extraordinary. never repeated sense, thank goodness. since, thank goodness. we're young journalists trying to figure out what the story was.
8:05 pm
politics?ut was it about accountability? it was a stew of all these things. what do you think is the residual of that time. on our politics right now? it was part of a continuing than washington that became increasingly corrosive over time. we had a hard time figuring out what are the right boundaries. the ways even hold the president accountable. when does become partisan? all sortsace back to of events in the previous 10 or 20 years. and then extended through today. you see an evolution of how politics has grown harsher and harsher in washington. brian: you were able to find your spouse at the washington post. peter: she was my boss at the time.
8:06 pm
we were spending a lot of hours together. late at night. the story13 months was all-consuming. one day we discovered completely by accident that we lived on the same block on the same street. we didn't even know it. we never saw each other they are because we spent our time at the office. that told us there was something real here. monica linsky brought us together. i grew up here in washington outside fairfax virginia. i went to public schools all the way through. my high school journalism teacher was a man named stewart held was very influential in encouraging me. susan: technically president clinton might say that was not the controlling legal authority.
8:07 pm
there are many bosses in a big newsroom. lucky.been really professional have and personal partnerships over more than 15 years is a very unusual thing. he was terrible on deadlines. and he is terrible now. what is the last possible moment you can turn in a story? there are a lot of procrastinators who gravitate toward journalism because only the force of a gun to the head will get things done. of like those old newspaper deadlines, what is happened in those 15 years is the absolute weliferation and explosion,
8:08 pm
are all wire service 24-hour deadline people. he was one of the very first people to write a web story for the washington post. we wanted to have a midday update on impeachment. just 15 years you go from the print paper and waking up in the morning to a fresh set of news and headlines. now this rolling world in which the new york times and the washington post and politico are all filing all the time and we expect sophisticated not just ammodity news versions but complicated breaking stories almost instantaneously of them occurring. in our living memory of covering the scandal he was the very first guy to even write a web story for the washington post.
8:09 pm
you are going to jerusalem together. peter: tuesday his departure. son will go with me later. out the going to finish election with politico. she will join us a couple of months after that. what is your thinking about being the bureau chief of the new york times in jerusalem? peter: susan and i were bureau chiefs together in moscow. we have never spent any time in israel. we are looking forward to learning a lot. it could be a real adventure. part of the world that has so much history and so much of a vital part of today's issues and we spent a lot of time writing about in washington but we've never lived there. you are stepping down as the editor of politico.
8:10 pm
i will be changing roles and continuing at politico in a roll around helping to lead our editorial growth and innovation. continuing to expand internationally. we just launched politico europe. we are looking at creating and launching new things. i started the political magazine . it has been a really exciting new platform for us. longform reporting. the war of ideas. you can't own the washington conversation unless you are part of the debate over ideas and policies. how it connects. that approach is something that can work in europe and other big markets of the world.
8:11 pm
have spent our careers focusing on that intersection between washington and the world. one of the things that we learned from our tour in russia which coincided with president putin's first term in office. it was after 9/11 so we ended up in afghanistan and iraq. theame back here to washington of george w. bush's second term in office. washington isn't just the capital of the united states, it is the capital of the world, that nexus through which .hings flow we are very insular here. kind of a small village at times. you have to renew your intellectual capital. the storiesderstand and issues. i will be writing a weekly column on foreign affairs. it will appear in politico and
8:12 pm
politico europe. longer form magazine pieces. probably for the new york times. brian: many folks take what you do. hit what you do. they don't like the media. peter: you get a lot of e-mails or communications from readers that are unhappy. that even if they are hostile, if you write them back and say i understand why you are saying that. here's my thinking about why i
8:13 pm
wrote the article that way. if you give a thoughtful response that doesn't seem defensive but actually accepts that there is some legitimacy to people's points of view and we are open to criticism, they say they shouldn't have been so mean. they look at us as an institution. when they see us as individuals who can have a conversation, it is a healthier thing. go back to 1992. when you are at roll call. original was the newspaper of capitol hill. before there was politico or the hill. it was founded in the 1950's. in 1986 it was purchased by arthur levitt and he had this
8:14 pm
great insight along with jim glassman that rather than just being a real community newspaper you could be serving one of the most important audiences in the world. the members of congress and the universe of capitol hill. that goesnal news deep on those subjects, the process and the politics that really mattered. a really smart business proposition. the washington post had a monopoly market. huge premiumsying to reach all those readers of the washington post. in the suburbs and all over. newspaper could just reach this specific targeted influential audience. that business insight has given rise to this whole industry of ideas and issue advocacy advertising. i was unwittingly stumbling into that.
8:15 pm
i became an intern at roll call in the summer of 1987. i was 18 years old. i was at harvard. in theread an article washington post about this very interesting media experiment area and. know these folks at all. i sent them a letter in those days. i ended up with this really incredible experience. i came back to work there after i graduated in 1990. in 1992i was probably the managing editor of roll call. i had this incredible window into washington. as it was transforming. the first post-cold war election. the election of bill clinton. the beginning of the transformation of the media. what we did at roll call back
8:16 pm
then was very much a kind of pre-internet kind of publication. brian: everything you to do can be seen on the internet. a roll call editorial meeting. jim glassman and morton contract he are there. susan: everyone has done their generic story on women candidates. what we should do is a story more specifically about which women. where are they coming from. ? the flipside is the results of redistricting and how many new blacks and hispanics are going to be in the democratic caucus as a result. the people that we know are coming as freshmen are almost
8:17 pm
y minorities. susan: these new districts are ones that it is all most inconceivable that they could elect republicans. brian: 20 years earlier you would probably see no women in that room. what was the change like? susan: rollcall was a great place to go after college for any journalist male or female. it was a great window into covering national politics. at a very young age. not going that older route of a distant far out suburb newspaper and then a slightly closer in newspaper.
8:18 pm
maybe someday getting downtown. we were very privileged to be able to jump right in under jim glassman. to cover national politics and learned a lot of awful lot. it was kind of insulated from the society at large. it was a startup. very young. not very conscious of gender breakdowns. in 1992 there was the need to anita hill hearings. looking back on my very young just out of college self and where women are in journalism today, i think i would've been disappointed and surprised at how much we are still having many of the same conversations. that is not to say that there hasn't been a certain amount of progress and many first woman
8:19 pm
barriers have been broken. the first woman editor of the new york times, jill abramson, or the year of the woman we were talking about their in congress. many many more women in congress today. still only 20%. thoug. the percentage of women ceos is still in the single digits. i think i would've been surprised. much more uniform marched on progress. maybe that is what you always have a sense of. it is interesting to see the debate this year over hillary and what seems to be a generational divide between older women who have a sense of the barriers still existing for women in professions whether it is politics or journalism and a new group of voters these , who seem toters
8:20 pm
bridling at the idea that you should vote for a woman just because of her gender. it is surprising. it is a small number. manyl say that having editor of for policy magazines before i moved over to politico there are even fewer women in foreign policy circles and international affairs circles than there are in political journalism. peter: susan has been very blessed by having a lot of opportunities and she has made the most of them. watching her up close has been inspirational for me.
8:21 pm
the editorp being overall call. she was the editor of foreign policy. she is the editor of politico. for women over the years. at the very top levels there is still a glass ceiling. there are different expectations. conscious or unconscious of what is allowed in the course of being an editor. i have worked for some male editors who are pretty tough guys and that was celebrated. women i still think have a that.r time with brian: what year did you leave the washington post? peter: i went to the new york times in 2008 and susan works for donald graham and ultimately helped him by foreign policy magazine.
8:22 pm
brian: you weren't very happy with the way susan was treated? peter: there had been a conflict in the newsroom. i felt that the leadership of the time didn't handle it well. were not supportive or loyal to someone who had worked as hard as susan did. brian: you said you would still be at the post if it hadn't been for that? ." and i grew up with the post. when the washington star died, i got the paper. i rub her writing seven miles on a bike to get the first edition of the washington times. washington journalism mattered to me. my dream was a waste to work for the washington post.
8:23 pm
susan: there are lots of different answers to what was the conflict. i learned a lot. i was the national editor of the post at the time. papers were not where they are today in terms of figuring out the very uncomfortable digital transitions. our friends and colleagues had just left to found a little go. politico. we were trying to reinvent political coverage. it was a special challenge for me to manage such a large staff of many very accomplished .eterans very anxious about what this new era of transformation was going to be like. the longtime editor of the post was replaced right after that. leonard downie.
8:24 pm
bigpaper went through a series of changes that needed to happen. it has been great to see its recovery over the last couple of years. the new owner and an infusion of new blood and new ideas. brian: the two of you were selling a book in 2007. susan: very early on in vladimir putin's 10's tenure we met with one of his top political the goalts and he said was to and the revolution. what he meant was the revolution that toppled the soviet union back in 1991. peter: the west has to be open eyes and clear i'd about what russia is. bromance was fooling ourselves weo thinking ourselves that
8:25 pm
would be a democratic figure. he doesn't want to be that. back at theyou look four years you spent in russia what comes to mind? peter: that was a. of great transition and tumbled. everybody thought we were coming in when people were getting boring. yeltsin had stood up to the kremlin. who was supposed to represent stability. it was a. of enormous change where the vladimir putin began to turn things back. n: we found out how invaluable it is to go out there and do reporting on the ground, be open-minded, trust your
8:26 pm
instinct. we didn't come to it after decades of entrenched ideological positions one way the other about the soviet union and what the new russia should be. what we found was a resurgent nationalism. this fascinating figure of the vladimir putin. she came out of the kgb and was determined to use some of the but had beenwest misread in some ways by people here in washington. and elsewhere in the west. they wanted to believe in this onward trajectory of democracy. it didn't prove to be russia's trajectory. it was a revelatory experience and the face of the idea of going out there and judging for yourself and being open-minded and reporting on the ground. people talk in a very cliched being at the value of
8:27 pm
foreign correspondent. going out there and engaging with the world. for us that really was the case. and deepened our understanding of the world. trajectory as journalists. brian: when you two were working together, where you both bureau chiefs? how did you do it? how did you stay not at each other's throats? peter: we wrote this book that we were promoting in that video. we did that while she was pregnant with our first and only child. wehad this great story where were back in washington and
8:28 pm
finishing up the book and we were coming home from dinner and she said i think the time is coming. i think the baby is coming. but we still have two chapters to go. she finally went upstairs and i sent sleep and i said off those last two chapters to the publisher. she said it that's good because i am having contractions. on c-span and we were just the day before. we were at an event at the wilson center. we were presenting about russia. we agreed to do this and now i was nine months pregnant. we forgot to tell you but c-span is there. with their cameras. is there in your archive day that our son was born. brian: how does vladimir putin look here now.
8:29 pm
susan: we left at the end of 2004. the trajectory of putin is surprising in the way that we most russiat watchers were shocked when he invaded crimea. of buddhismmarch which is a real phenomenon. he may be the longest-serving read leader of russia's and stalin. to have been there at the foundation of the. of that. we can see the germs of all these things. vladimir putin's love of bare chested horseback riding that has turned him into a global
8:30 pm
icon. all of those things were the foundation that we happened to be into. there was such a break fromin ma break from the 1990's story of russia, that there is more continuity with the story that we first stumbled into in 2000 through today. brian: were you able to interview him? susan: we were just talking about that. was actually lucky enough, if that is the right word, to have been at the very first interview that vladimir putin gave to --rican's correspondence american correspondents in late spring. he was a very unknown figure. he was a former kgb guy, he was little-known, he had no what experience with western journalists.
8:31 pm
we were invited to a roundtable at the kremlin library. they kept us waiting for hours, so this interview did not end up taking place until 11:00 p.m. at night. >>" she asked. -- ask what question she asked. remember i was three words of the way around this table, and he gives very long answers. especially when he was new and insecure in the job, he was very eager to show us that he had mastered this briefing books. spouting walks of facts and figures, and figures can at every question gave a very long detailed answer with statistics almost right out of how the bureau's report on the farm crops kind of thing. we got three quarters of the way around the table to me, and no one had asked about the ongoing war in chechnya.
8:32 pm
there were many serious allegations of human rights violations, of terrible situations for the civilian population as russia targeted this breakaway province of its country. this was the war that has brought food and power -- vladimir putin to power. comer, thenew youngest person the, and i was the one who got to ask him about chechnya and human rights. he did remember me after that. [laughter] grian: is he speakin english? susan: he understands english, but he does translation in his formal setting. brian: i want to give you a chance to answer, but i want to show you vladimir putin at the end of last year, at an anniversary celebration of the startup of russia today, the
8:33 pm
television networks. let's watch this, and then i want you to talk about the impact of this on the country. >> our courageous advantage is that we allowed to to show yourselves. we are not making you do anything, you are free in your work. fun, tortunity to have enjoy your work. we can see the result of it. the result is awesome, great. i want to say happy anniversary, this is a great today, 10 years. you have managed to achieve a lot of things. that, i want to repeat myself. six information channels have been created, and also global video agency.
8:34 pm
russia is great. one unit ismber channel on youtube. [applause] brian: so when you watch that, as an american public television station that carries a here in the station, what is your action to him talking about the fun they will have? a state-funded television operation that is meant to translate to the west basically the kremlin's point of view. because cnn, c-span, and washington post are not giving them a fair shake, they have to counter. it is an information war. what i remember is the first story recovered when we got to russia. it was time putin's takeover at mtv, the only independent network in russia. power wasrise to
8:35 pm
orchestrated through television. he understood that television mattered in russia as a way to maintain power, and to control the airwaves. it was a formative event of his early presidency. it showed a lot of what would come. extension of that. tv matters in controlling politics. brian: how much information is blocked in russia, if any? only: you can is internet in russia, is not like china, there's no great firewall, at least yet. successful inmely the manipulation of the information environment. the one and only independent television network that russia ever had was the very first thing that vladimir putin and his team, took over, understanding the importance of
8:36 pm
that. this is almost the only thing that finds this vast country couple of different time zones. it is hard to remember, here in the united states, back to the era when people sat at home and watched network news every night on one of three stations. but in russia, that has persisted as a habit. network of websites that aggressively cover news in russia, or even the outside by various exiles and dissident types. can get access to information, but the information environment has been thoroughly manipulated. it has been fascinating to watch some of the coverage of the war in ukraine began, especially over the last year. people have written fascinating and disturbing accounts of the just listened to the news in russia, what do you hear.
8:37 pm
alternate actual reality. whether it is remembering the downing of the malaysian airplane, that is all a western conspiracy, russia had nothing to do with this, of course there are no russian troops in ukraine , despite all the documentation. the war in syria, their intervention, there is a starkly alternate reality that is presented. but of course this is a very powerful and sophisticated tool in many ways. it is not new. if you look at the historical accounts of how the soviet union kept power, or maintained new influence in eastern europe book world war ii, a great that just came out a few years ago, that could be read as a guide to the kind of approach and sophisticated information operations, as they would call
8:38 pm
it in russia. have changed and become so much more sophisticated. people should not think that just because there's the surface appearance of a robust network of websites, that people are not operating in a very propaganda atmosphere. 2015, in march from you play a role in a story that caused a bit of a kerfuffle. let's watch this, and you can explain more of it. columnists,,s and not any of the reporters who cover him, he said he was going to announce the isis campaign. he invited some foreign policy people from various ministrations.
8:39 pm
i called all the people to try to guess what he was saying, and what was on his mind. the off the record restrictions i cannot be me, so held to a rule i do not agree to. it is our job to find out what he is thinking. mexico of congress had gone in and talked to about this, i would call them and maybe they would tell me what he said as well. brian: give us the context. peter: the president of the state has off the record meetings sometimes. , or so with the reporters with people who are opinion shapers. people who are influential writers. sometimes he does it in a lot of people. he brought in about 17 people and not.
8:40 pm
to yours a reporter is what he is thinking and what he is doing, and saying. i called all the people in the room, and got enough information about what he is such reported out. there was a little kerfuffle, good word. coulde people in the room not write about it under the ground rules that they had agreed to move but i was not part of that, and i did not have an agreement with anybody to not write about it. it is my job to report out as best i can. editor of the new york times as saying i do not think that anything the president has to say should be off-limits to the readers of the new york times i would not have a news reporter in that room. please explain what that is all about? peter: a lot of people do not make the distinction that a newspaper like the new york times has multiple pieces. there is the opinion page, and those were people say your liberal or conservative, because the judge your opinion page. call this are free to do what
8:41 pm
they want. the newsroom is reporters who are taking a neutral, no sides approach to things. i am not taking sides. they feel pretty hot strongly that you have enough the record meeting with the president arises a reporter. the president of the united states, how could you hold us back from the readers? is better for us not to participate in those kinds of meetings, because then we are not compromised. brian: you were called in, and the president said unelected tutee, off the record, what would you do. ? ? susan: i did attended off the record meeting once. it was in my capacity as a writer for political magazine. i reported international affairs
8:42 pm
, a precursor to what i hoped to do when we are in jerusalem. that attend a session like i were to agree with peter and with others that that is not an appropriate role for a reporter. i think that it is a part of a very conservative party president's strategy of getting the message out without being publicly accountable for every word and every phrasing of what he is saying. of course there is a long tradition of that, and we all know that president kenny was hanging out that kennedy was hanging out in georgetown radley, going only that, teddy roosevelt dazzled reporters with his extensive access to them. that stuff did not all my gives way into the press.
8:43 pm
i think we have seen the yearsion and this last 15 of the media. one of the very regrettable itngs in washington is that becomes a more partisan atmosphere. we used to have our three networks as our national newspapers. now we have millions of different platforms, a co-mingling of opinion and ideas , and certainly much more iran andbetween america and the you that it likes, and a blue america and the media that it likes. one of the great things about the new york times, one of the things that track to politico was the there are -- there is a dwindling island of open space in which both sides have to contend. e of independenc
8:44 pm
journalistic inquiry is really valuable at a time when it is 85 -- when other platforms it is dwindling fast for many other platforms. quarter can't talk to the president on air force one after he comes back from a trip off the record. i have been there, and i cannot get off the plane, so i've been part of off the record sessions in that sense because you cannot control it. to make us up to be holier than though, but i sure there is concern about how you do that. i am concerned it becomes a substitute for on the record encounters. if the president get interviews to the white house press with any kind of frequency, he took our questions that his predecessors did, that would
8:45 pm
be one thing. the problem is it has become a substitute for the in which he does not interact with the white house press who cover day in and day out on a regular basis. brian: political magazine needed a magazine paste on the obama administration. wendy think history will say about the obama administration 50 years from now? susan: that is the famous question. president obama sent to david remnick, i just want to get my paragraph right. we want historians to write overall this paragraph that we all know the first part of that paragraph. he broke. , he made history by becoming the first african-american president of the united states. only was thehe not first black president, he was a two-term president.
8:46 pm
this is an administration that has not been marred by ethical our -- oror because cloud over his judgment or decisions probably speaking. now, how will some of his policy decisions go? we were seriously debate everything from strategic things tos, two other how his record will in the world is up in the air. what will the iran deal looked 10 years from? now? we are just getting the beginning of the answer on if that is a start right through, or a new unraveling.
8:47 pm
thee not talking about famous line during the opening. hopefully we'll get it third before that. brian: how many years have you covered the obama white house? peter: since the beginning. i came in with him. the second term of president clinton, the second term of president bush, and everything from the beginning of president obama to now. seven years, i guess. we are writing a biography of the former secretary of state james baker. givenonly never done given when external reading interesting life he has had -- it is oddly never been done given the extraordinary life he has had. he had his hand in every major thing that happened and what it for a generation.
8:48 pm
he represents an archetype in washington that does not exist anymore. someone who's fiercely partisan, and then sat down and rewrote the tax code and settle other wars. he is an interesting figure. brian: how much access is he giving you? peter: he has sat down with us a number of times. we've done a lot of good for -- a lot of interviews with people with him. todo not have enough time work on the book, but it is a fascinating subject. brian: is there different role in your husband is playing for you on this book? >> we're dealing with another once in a generation historic presidential election. say that we are really lucky to be able to collaborate together, and i will pick it up
8:49 pm
after the election the how far we have got in with it, and keep running. brian: what is the difference in the way you approach journalism? ways, we are the james carville and mary matalin of german -- of journalism. ira porter, she is an editor. think of her because of her editing of compliments, but they forget she was covering tora bora in afghanistan. she went into iraq daily american troops within but without an embedded unit. she covered the theater siege in moscow and so forth. part, what most susan's temperament and great vision in terms of editing is doething i do not have an not spend time on. i agree closely to the ground
8:50 pm
side of the equation. brian: how about you? agree i do not entirely with his characterization. peter is a great journalist, an extremely modest. he taught me an awful lot about journalism, and does have the stings of a great editor. he just chooses not to go in that direction. if you getting an editor, in is so rare, you have to marry them. incredibly lucky to be able to work together and complement each other. when we wrote kremlin rising, it was interesting to see the different ways in which we approached the writing. for example, he was very fast, thehe -- we divided up chapters that he wrote very quickly, much more quickly than i did. it was his first draft of these chapters where i was taking more time and somewhat more finished
8:51 pm
product, which, given that i also was pregnant with our son, and was on the back end of this project, not able to do as much, it made me feel good that my chapters were further along, because then he has a process of going through and stitching the book together and rewriting more intensively. we did have a different style and how we approached the writing side of this, but i think what we had in common that is really exciting is that we both love the story. almost any story. i think we have obviously had a shared passion for trying to in thisnd washington post-cold war world. this has been the are of our careers, and i think the thing that stitches some of these disparate greases together, it is definitely true that peter,
8:52 pm
although he often is the person who deals with your stuff in our house is less interested in the kind of broad questions surrounding the digital reinvention of journalism, which is an energizing and exciting subject for me over the last decade, as i have seen a new set of possibilities for journalism open up. in some ways, he is the last newspaper guy. [laughter] peter: i do what they tell me to do, but i just want to write story. if they want me to do it in 140 characters to i will do it 140 characters at a time. brian: if you look at your trip, how long will you stay in jerusalem? peter: a three-year to her. brian: what do you want to do? peter: i am looking to get beyond the simple stories about the conflict and help washington readers understand israel on the ground. we on the stand here in
8:53 pm
washington, jews, arabs, agent hatreds, the wall, the occupied territories, this, that. many veryso passionate people about this. they feel strongly about one side or the other, and it's hard to find anything that satisfies both. i want to broaden the story, deep in the store, see what we can do about helping people understand what it looks like on the ground, how it actually plays out the on the very basic construct we have. i hope we continue. brian: what is one thing you want to do? tells people that we decided to go to israel because we were tile -- tired of all the partisan fighting here in washington. peter:" a place where everybody gets along so well. [laughter] susan: for me, is a great story. it is always a great story, as
8:54 pm
an important story. there has been no part of the world has been more consequential for american foreign policy than middle east over the last 40, 50 years. and not to have that experience on the ground in a more deployed than we did in the iraq war would be missing out on something, especially right now. israelflagration around is really extraordinary. it was always a sense of this is an island, it is its own story, but now look what is happening in egypt. the quote is happening in syria. all the countries surrounding israel, jordan, which obviously is basically physically geographically connected most closely. -- sorry, territory 25% of the population is refugees overwhelmed from the syrian civil war unfolding on its orders.
8:55 pm
this is an extraordinary moment both in terms of the middle east and in terms of the politics of israel. talk to people here in washington as we have been doing. you have a mounting frustration. on the one hand this is a super relationships and partnerships with the united states and israel have had, and do have. on the other hand the people who deal with the most closely are extremely frustrated. not just because of the bad personal relationship between president obama and promise your netanyahu, there is a real sense that we might be independent point, a juncture, where the things we know about chiller are not working anymore. there is a growing sense of there is no real peace process, so what will come next? brian: how old is your boy, and what is his name? >>'s name is seo, and he is 11 years old. brian: what is he thinking about
8:56 pm
moving to jerusalem? >> he is excited about it. he is an energetic explorer command curious about the world. brian: where will he go to school? susan: there is an international school there, we visited a couple of weeks ago. that will be part of the huge learning experience for him. this is a place with kids from all over. people,over as to your and go -- come and go. i understand it right, you're not jewish? >> no. brian: in light of the years. any fallout from that, good or bad? figurea lot of times the would not send a jewish reporter. back in the 1970's
8:57 pm
and we have to send somebody. i will send a jewish reporter. he said he would send david schindler. i think it can become cases, because people make assumptions thousand that. we go in without that kind of background. at the bureau chief, i do not have a stake in this one way or -- hopefully we can report in old-fashioned good journalism rules. brian: peter baker, it has been a long time. susan glass, the editor politico
8:58 pm
8:59 pm
glasser and peter baker, here are a loose you ma others you m. you can watch these any, or search our entire media library at c-span.org. >> c-span's washington journal, live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. monday morning, the senior fellow for the ethics and public policy center, a former senior adviser for the romney campaign will join us. chances of a brokered convention , and who among the candidates he will support for the nomination. jury thedocument
9:00 pm
liquor can burns will be talking about his latest pbs documentary project he robinson. was first to break baseball's color very are and who went on to become a leader in the civil rights movement. plus, the supreme court correspondent for wall street journal will be with us by phone to discuss the latest in the search for supreme court nominee. sure to what washington journal at 7:00 p.m. eastern on monday morning. during the discussion. -- join the discussion. >> during the squeaks question time prime minister jim mcdermott told members he would not resign if u.k. decided to leave the european union. are also discussed jobs, the british economy, and reports of abuse of syrian refugees staying in resettlement housing. this is 35 minutes. tice over a year and because it was working well that's why we've extended it across the government. >> order. questions to the prime minister.
74 Views
IN COLLECTIONS
CSPAN Television Archive Television Archive News Search ServiceUploaded by TV Archive on