republican controlled u.s. house and senate. follow the transition of government on c-span. we will take you to key events as they happen without interruption. mrs. clinton: watch live on onpan, watch live on demand on theorg, or watch c-span radio app. >> every weekend, but tv brings you 48 hours of non-tv -- nonfiction authors. economistiversity examines the historical impact of immigration on the u.s. economy in his book, "we wanted workers." he is interviewed by edward alden. >> when immigrants come in, they do all kinds of things. they affect wages. reducing the wage of people. and that wage reduction itself creates gains.

,f someone is lower wage someone else's higher profit. so people who use immigrants benefit dramatically. tyson -- neil degrasse tyson answers questions about the universe in their book welcome to the universe, and tour.physical to her -- >> we calculate how you might go about finding exit when it's oplanets.d be -- ex you are after whether he can harbor life. >> go to book tv.org for the complete schedule. >> this weekend in american history tv on c-span3, tonight, a little after 7:00 eastern, kings college london visiting professor andrew roberts discusses the role of u.s. army

chief of staff general george c marshall in america's world war ii victories. arguing the general skills as a strategist transformed the u.s. army. withis pennsylvanian impeccable manners was astonishingly calm considering the pressures on him. america,00 on reel the 1921 film honoring the unknown soldier of world war i. >> it was tremendous. the streets of washington were lined with thousands of folks who waited for the casket to be removed and brought by the honor guard down pennsylvania avenue and then across the bridge. into virginia. i have read it was one of the largest turnouts of any parade in the city. >> sunday evening at 6:00 p.m. eastern on american artifacts. >> a beautiful building, from the moment it opened it was already too small for what was about to face.

about .5ed to handle million people year, it ended up handling in 1907 alone, 1,200,000 people. we learn about- the immigrant experience and just before 9:00, in 1916, resident woodrow wilson nominated boston lawyer louis brandeis to the united states supreme court did becoming the nation's to sit on the high court. income commemoration of the 100th anniversary of his aboutration, they talk the justices life, career, and legacy. >> brandeis is trying to do here is limit the court to a very specific role. one that is defined by the constitutional network in which all government operates. and which limits or should limit any one branch from exercising powers beyond its prescribed movements.

>> for the complete schedule, go to c-span.org. discussion of school segregation through history and today. this event features award-winning investigator ,ournalist nikole hannah-jones who writes about racial segregation in the united states and how it is maintained through official action and policies. from the columbia journalism school, this is about one hour 15 minutes. ms. hannah-jones: good evening, everyone. welcome students, faculty, and guess. to those of you who don't know >> good evening, everyone. welcome, students, faculty, and guests. for those of you don't know me yet, i am the dean. one reason this is special theght is because this is first public performance of our

new delacorte professor. the delacorte lectures are tradition here, aimed to let students into what's happening in the magazine industry and in magazine journalism. they are run by the delacorte center for magazines established here the journalism school in 1984 by the magazine publisher george delacorte and was supported by his wife valerie. and with her, the new york community trust. thege delacorte founded publishing empire and was a beloved and rather eccentric character. he contributed to some of the architectural wonders you see on campus and has also famously donated the statue in central park. we are grateful to the delacortes for their support of journalism education in our robust magazine program.

and now, i would like to dessen, before joining us here, keith was the founding editor of m plus one, an influential magazine of culture and politics. if you have not read this, you should. go to the web right now and check it out. keith is also a contributor to the new yorker. he is editor of three nonfiction books and the translator or co-translator from russian for a collection of short stories, a book of poems, and the words of oral history. he is an author of a novel and he is also writing anyone. i had over this evening to keith and i will have him introduce our guest for tonight, nikole hannah-jones. [applause] prof. dessen: thank you, sheila,

for that wonderful introduction. thank you all for coming. i'm really excited and honored to have nikole hannah-jones of the new york times magazine here is our first delacorte speaker of the year. nikole began her career newspapers and works at the news and observer in raleigh-durham. working on the education beat. she moved to portland all the way across the country to work at the oregonian. there she focused on housing discrimination. ms. hannah-jones: for part of the time. prof. dessen: then she moved to new york to start at pro-public seriese she published a of incredibly important and moving and highly recommended pieces about the resegregation

of america's cities and schools. , thatst segregation anyone who is not blind is aware of, but the actual active, continuing process of resegregation of our cities and educational system. was hired away by the new york times magazine, where she is continuing her work. there are two reasons i'm happy we are having this conversation. think because this is supposed to be a magazine , the workcture series that nicole has been doing is incredibly complex and incredible difficult to get one's arms around it. i do think the fact that she has been working at a place like and working with

places like new york times magazine, those have given her the space to do this kind of work. it was hard to do in newspapers. ms. hannah-jones: very hard. prof. dessen: the other reason is unfortunately, this is an incredibly relevant story right difficult, the most interesting, and significant has done wasikole about ferguson in the wake of michael brown shooting. at thehe went and looked school of michael brown attended and the history of that school in segregated st. louis. it seems to me like resegregation is a story that is kind of underneath an undergirding a lot of the news stories we're seeing all the time in the united states right now. please welcome nikole hannah-jones. [applause] prof. dessen: the outline of the

evening is i'm going to ask westerns and then about 6:50, we will have questions from the audience and then about 7:15, we will be done. just byould start telling us a little about how you got started and why you decided to become a journalist. whether you found journalism school you attended useful, and how did you get your first job? ms. hannah-jones: thank you for coming out tonight, i'm happy to forere and i come to campus various events. i appreciate you coming out to listen to me talk. journalist -- i grew up in iowa, let's get that out there. there are black people in iowa. we are mostly related, we know almost everyone. there were enough of us that we still had it great of segregation. we'll all lived on one side of town and i started my education in segregated schools.

from an early age, i was very curious about why the black neighborhood i lived in was one way and across the river, white people seems to be living a very different life. i was always a skeptical person, even as a child, which also got in trouble as a child, but has proven to be a good life skill. i was on his very curious, started reading a lot and i was always very enchanted with history, because history helps whenin the world to me and i was and probably fit for sixth-grade, i service of striving to time magazine and wrote my first letter to the editor when i was in middle school. i was a bit of a nerd, i'm ok with that now. school, i to high took this black studies class. i was bust as part of a voluntary desegregation program, and i went to a has will that

was about 20% black. our high school offered a one semester black studies course and i took that class was complaining to the teacher, my only black male teacher that i think i ever had, that our high school paper never wrote about kids like us. he told me that if i didn't like it, i should join the paper or be quiet. i took it as a challenge and joined the paper. i have a column called from the african perspective. kids and myt black classmates and what our experiences were like. awardmy first journalism from the iowa high school press association and was kind of looked after that. hooked after that. my only applied to win college, university of notre dame, which did not offer journalism. they offered history, which i loved. i wasn't sure if i was going to be an historian or a journalist. ultimately decided that journalists write history as it's happening and journalists

write for the masses. historians write for other historians. i really want to write about people like me, the write about it in real time. ,o i went to journalism school the royal carolina blue, not like this columbia blue. i was at the university of north carolina in chapel hill and it went to grad school. it was a two-year program and i loved it. it was great great it had a program for people who wanted to be academics and people like myself who wanted to be professionals but didn't have a journalism background. got morend of where i and. -- where i am. prof. dessen: how did you get your first job? ms. hannah-jones: my first job was in raleigh, about 30 minutes from chapel hill. in my very job fair first job fair, i had to know internships and i came there was some class papers to wilson, who

was managing editor at the observer at the time and he very kindly told me don't ever come to a job fair with class papers again. we need to go get some clips. i took his advice and came back the next year with clips and he hired me as an intern. me as graduated, he hired a reporter. i first job was as a public schools reporter in the city of durham, which was half black, half white, pretty liberal college town, that's where duke is and since i went to carolina, i hate duke. [laughter] prof. dessen: --ms. hannah-jones: i started covering public schools at the height of no child left behind and the rise of high-stakes testing. the belief that if we test and hold segregated high poverty schools to a high level of accountability that suddenly we would get results like white schools. this is where i started my

journalism career. very early on i was looking at the results, the verge of getting results of school reform that was leaving kids in segregated high poverty schools, which is what really got me interested in the subject. prof. dessen: were the stories you are writing about segregation and testing? were you able to get that into the newspaper? what were the kind of folks you ks you had to hoo use? ms. hannah-jones: i had a great editor. durham was a town where every story was about race. the city council is half black, half white, the school board was half white, half black and had a black mayor. race was kind of at the forefront of all the politics in that town. the whole premise of no child left behind was we're going to

count every student and look at the race of every student and weird not going to leave black and brown kids behind. no child left behind was based on race. it was very easy to pitch stories looking at what were the ramifications of this high-stakes testing and for those of you -- there's a lot of young folks, i don't know how much you know about a child left behind, but these high poverty segregated schools would not be able to meet the same standards as white schools and then schools would be taken over and they would implement all of these reforms that would never work. it was very easy for me to pitch stories about race because the entire federal educational bureaucracy was looking at race at that time. were the stories like this is not working? it's june in test scores are bad? what were the daily stories you could write? i was spendings: a lot of times in those schools that were failing and talking to and really spending

time in heavily white schools, even though was a majority black district, it had very little poverty. and just fundamentally spending time in those classrooms and understanding there was no way you were going to get the same result out of those two schools. it wasn't a matter of parents not wanting education for their children or kids not trying, or teachers and principals not trying, but when you have a school where 20% of kids are poor and you're the school where 99% of kids are poor, to expect those kids are going to do the same, with the same resources -- it's not even as a poor schools were getting inordinately more resources. allarted really looking at of the things that reformers were saying would work, and then asking why are they working -- why aren't they working? this is the era of cost and experience with black schools. we're going to replace all the staff, replace the principles, divide them into small schools. we're going to turn them in the special ed schools, we will try to do a magnet. every few years, these kids were

being experimented on, but the test results were always the same. that's when we begin to question -- can you accomplish educational equity within segregated schools. you just cannot find a school that was able to do it. you can find elementary schools that might turn around for your two and then the scores would slide down. never found a middle school was able to turn around and you never found a high school. every educator, when they were on the record, when they were being honest, would say what we're being asked to do was impossible. when nine of 10 kids are coming in here hungry, they are already behind when they are coming into the classroom. a teacher, if you can imagine, as a teacher when you have four kids who are behind in a class of 25, that's one thing. have 21 kids who are behind in a class of 25, and you are being asked to do the same thing with those same resources, you are just not going to get the same results. the system was set up to fail, it fail like make

politically, it was ok to say we are going to hold poor schools accountable because white parents in these towns, just like white parents and all most every town didn't really want integration or to do the thing that was necessary to give these kids the same education. prof. dessen: you said at this point you realized the one thing that would work, integration, is the one thing that people refused to do. ms. hannah-jones: it was a process. i was an older reporter, i was like the oldest intern at the observer. i was 27 years old and interning. there's a new journalist, news education, just learning about education coverage. it wasn't necessarily what i sought out to cover as a journalist. i didn't know what i wanted to cover, i just knew i wanted to write about race. so i was learning a lot, but because it didn't already have

preconceived notions about what would work and what should work in education, i could just look at all the things they were doing in test that out and say where are the results? isre's the school that segregated and poor that consistently performing on par with you the other schools. you just can find those results. also love research. i read a lot. i read a lot of history and sociology. every study that comes out in this area, i was reading. it is really starting to formulate in my mind this picture where if we could do it, someone would have done it. place can't ever show a that did it, maybe we should stop pretending this thing is working. everyone knew it wasn't going to work, but it was the most politically expedient thing. i feel like the great story that you derived that is the story of resegregation. when did you start feeling like that was what you were seeing? mean, thereones: i

are two stories. i grew up in the north and is not really resegregation in the north. it's just continuous segregation. it really wasn't until i move down south that i experienced living in -- the south has been the most integrated part of the country in terms of housing and schools for the last 45 years. so the story of resegregation is really a seven story. the northern story is the story of a willful blindness to the continuous ongoing segregation that has always been here. at much higher levels than we see the last 50 years. started --n i really i find annoying people who write about race but always write about it as if these inequalities just flow down from the sky, as if they are all a the only the past and important work that we value is who is the racist of the week and who can we show who said something verifiably racist?

or we write about studies that say black people are doing badly here, they're living in these conditions. which isn't news to anyone. we know that. why, like,nderstand what is causing this? why neighborhoods still segregated 50 years after we passed the second housing act? -- the fair housing act? black andry measure, latino students are getting the least qualified teachers, less likely to get access to academic courses that would get you into an institutions like columbia, systemically across the country. i want to understand why that was. so that's really my work began to focus on looking at the particular actions that we had taken in the past, but also, that people are taking right now they maintain segregation and racial inequality. with schools, resegregation was

a way to do that, because if the place had been segregated and then it was integrated, you could go back to that point where it starts three segregating.- re someone had to do something. i started looking at school district that have been ordered by a federal court to integrate. they lay out certain things that as a school district, you must do. you have to have racial balance or pair of white school and a black school. once a school district is released from that court order, they can do whatever they want. they can create all-black schools of they want to, as long as they never say we are doing this because we want to discriminate against black kids, they can do whatever they want. it was easy then to go to this point where a school district or school have been integrated and now it was going backwards and you could find who did what. who made the decision that we segregated the school, and then ask them about it. when i wrote about tuscaloosa, i

would literally go to the record and look at the public meetings where they are voting to create an all-black feeder system of schools. i could show the map where someone sat down and drew an attendance zone that would create an all segregated school, and you could show them the intent in a way that we don't write about racial discrimination and inequality, were we ever show intent in conscious action. i think that is what my work has been trying to do, is showing this history. we also know americans don't really care about history. and they certainly want to ignore the history of race in this country. so really setting up how we got here, but also saying this is people righty, the now are making decisions that maintain this and i'm going to show you how that works. was it the red pill or the blue pill on the matrix? whatever pill it was reagan seal the code, that is what i think of my work is doing. we live in this computer

program, where we can cut a pretend that all of this is accidental and we go about our lives and people all kind of have the same choice because we all on paper have the same rights. i work at showing the code behind, where all of these inequalities happen and how they happen. prof. dessen: the tuscaloosa story, i guess i'm trying to wonder what were the sort of stories you could do for the newspaper and then, what stories could you not do for the newspaper? ms. hannah-jones: segregation and was like 10,000 words, so you could never write anything that long. with that allowed me to do was tell the story from -- i was say my stories started in 1619, which is the year that the first africans were brought to this country as slaves. or to be slaves. youy that because i think just cannot understand anything about racial inequality today without going back and looking at a lot of things that happened

in the past. with a newspaper, you just can't take the time to build a history into the story. but i think that fundamentally help to understand. everyone always wants to know wise it still like that? and i said because we have been working on this for 400 years and we've only been working to undo it for maybe 50, and then, halfheartedly. helping understand how these systems were created helps us understand how much work is going to take to undo it. there's justwithout a newspaper. you get maybe two paragraphs. in the segregation now peace, two thirds of the story's history. only one third of that story takes place in the present. if you look at the piece adjusted in the new york times magazine, i would say about half of that story is in the past and half of the is in the present. i think that is what is so important is building this case that one then cannot deny of how this inequality is structural

and systemic and nonaccidental, sociallyit was engineered, and therefore, we are going to have to socially engineer our way out of it. prof. dessen: when you won the blessed -- the best black journalist of the year, you said you were considering quitting journalism towards the end of your time at the oregonian. can you say why? ms. hannah-jones: of course, the speeches on the record. what i have found, and a lot of journalists of color find, is that newsrooms want phenotype diversity. , peoplet diverse people will look diverse. they don't necessarily want people who think that verse or who think about stories about race in a different way. when i went to the oregonian, i made it very clear -- i only ever became a journalist because i wanted to write about racial inequality.

i like writing about other things sometimes, but when called me to be a journalist was tell those stories. when i got to the oregonian, it wasn't what they wanted me to do. over and over i would find myself pitching stories and being marginalized for those stories, being told i couldn't write the stories. i went to the oregonian in 2006 and that was right when the industry, the newspaper industry was really in a freefall. there was nowhere for me to go. years of just really struggling to tell the stories that i got into journalism to do, i was considering leaving. i was at the point where i felt i wasn't doing what i got in to do anyways, so why was i doing this? maybe i should think of something else. i couldn't think of anything else i would rather be doing. i do feel like this is my calling. was close, but i could never kind of make the leap into doing something else, because i couldn't imagine what else i would do with my life. prof. dessen: how did you end of

the pro-publica? i was rescued.s: the founder was the managing editor at the oregonian why was there. i worked under him they are and he them bringing the on to probe publica. really right at the point where i probably would've left journalism within the next six months. , thed this at my speech national association of black journalists that he saved my life in that way, because this is my calling. if you would not have taken me out of that situation, when he iought me to probe publica, made it clear. if i can't write the stories, don't hire me. he gave me free reign, now i'm here. you said you see a lot of journalists in a similar position who didn't get rescued. ms. hannah-jones: yeah. i mean, i could go down the list

of black and brown journalists who have left news because they became very disillusioned with not being able to read the stories they got into journalism to write. i think newsrooms can be very who don't to people just look diverse, but actually want to tell those stories in a very particular way. one of the things i heard was you want to write about black people too much. i remember having this conversation with the editor at the oregonian, saying have you ever had that conversation with a white journalist? that they are writing about white people too much? you can't even imagine that comes as an happening, though it should. why was told that, i went back to our old story system and printed out every story i had ever written since i had been there. i put on the stack every story that even had a black person in it, even if i didn't identify the person is black i just knew the person was black, and it was 10% of my stories. literally, 10%. i took those two stacks into

that office and i was like what is it about you and me that makes you think that me writing 10% of my stories about black people is too much? it wasn't a really good answer, because in their head, they overestimated how many stories they thought i was writing about race. waswhen i was always told it's not that many black people here, you are not writing to our audience. but you will never get that audience if you're not telling the stories. it's also not an accurate reflection of our society and our communities that we're supposed recovering. -- supposed to be covering. [laughter] yesterday, during the debate, some people were snapping, but no one could hear them. at the oregonian, i read some of the pieces that you did about housing discriminations and those seemed to feed directly into the big piece that you then did about the fair housing act, right? it does seem like you were building a kind of -- really, also with your education work.

what was it like to come to a position where you are now allowed to write at length with five or six or seven years of really solid day-to-day reporting on it? that must've been nice. ms. hannah-jones: it was amazing and scary. when you're writing something every week or every two weeks, not that many people read it, it's not that big a deal. when you've spent a year on something, it had better be good. there's a lot of pressure, but it was an amazing feeling to finally go from where i always felt i could do bigger work and i wanted to do bigger work. i was always a student doing more investigative work, but as we know, a lot of times, women and journalists of color are not seen and groomed to be on teams to do larger work. to have someone trust i could do that and be given the freedom to do that was the most experienced

-- amazing experience in the world. reason iart of the recently founded an organization to help more journalists of color become investigative reporters because i feel it is the most important work we can do in a democracy, holding it accountable for how it treats our most vulnerable citizens. and it allowed me to do what i will always love about propublica is there was not a template for the type of writing i was trying to do, not in investigative reporting anyway. they trusted me to do it and let me do my thing. anything i would say to editors like, let journalists do their thing and you will be amazed at what they can produce, but i think you do not see that enough. prof. gessen: how would you describe the sort of work you did there, when you say there was not enough? ms. hannah-jones: long, lots of work. prof. gessen: excellent.

when you say there was not a template, what do you mean? ms. hannah-jones: my work is not traditional investigative reporting in that way. building lot of time this historical case. if you look at my more recent work, it definitely has a point of view. i am not trying to go down the middle and say i am just laying out a dispassionate viewing of the facts. i am making an argument at this point. i think that is not the usual way this is done. but they let me. they gave me the freedom to do that. i think one, because the reporting is sound. even though i am coming from a point of view that segregation is wrong and we should do something about it, the reporting is very sound. but also, to give that much when i wasings -- writing about school segregation, typically when you

are doing investigations, you are writing about people doing things only now. propublica wanted to have an impact, so they want you to do a story where someone will lose their job or some law will get changed. i'm writing about school or housing segregation fully expecting when this publishes nothing will change ever. i still don't think it really well. but they let me do that not expecting i'm going to get some be passed or there would this huge shift in our society because of the work. a yearf reporters spend on an investigation that will likely not produce any result except people may be outraged. it is pretty -- it is a pretty amazing thing. i see myself as making a record. to force us to confront things we do not want to confront, whether we are going to fix them or not.

i am always thinking about people trapped in these communities, what they could be if we treated them as full citizens. i'm thinking about the children whoped in these classrooms someone says her daughter could be the dr. that saved your life one day, and we are squandering these children. that is what i am thinking about even if i don't think my writing will change the situation for them. i'm not going to let us pretend they are not there. prof. gessen: one of the powerful things about your work is a lot of americans feel if we give it 300 years, this stuff will work itself out. but these kids don't have 300 years. they are in school for 10 years. you come to propublica with this background doing a lot of reporting and you have these two big stories, school segregation and housing segregation which are connected. how do you go about choosing how

to tackle these giant subjects? ms. hannah-jones: the good thing is there was one great thing that came out of my very hard time at "the oregonian." it was a narrative paper. it believed in narrative journalism. i believed in narrative journalism because i understand you can do these fabulous investigations, and if they are dry no one will read them. if you do not connect with people on a human level, it does not matter you have found this on doing. my instinct has always been to tell these hard stories through compelling narrative. i am always at the beginning thinking about the narrative, what is the device or structure that can drive this story that is hard to read? "segregation out" on tuscaloosa, part of the narrative of how i would tell the story had to do with the narrative.

that is where george wallace stands in the schoolhouse door. it is alabama, the cradle of the confederacy, the cradle of the civil rights movement. i am thinking about that when i am choosing where i will go. i am investigating how the resegregation happened here, who are the characters, and can i tell this story in a way that made it interesting. what made it interesting is the black elite worked with the white elite to resegregate the schools. prof. gessen: in case people have not read the article, for ,he tv audience at home tuscaloosa had a big integrated central high school that was integrated in the late 1970's and 1980's. it had a powerhouse in football and debate. and then they resegregated. ms. hannah-jones: right.

most people don't know brown happened.-- v. board there was a lot of foot dragging and school districts had to be brought to court. real integration did not come to tuscaloosa until 1988, which is fairly common. there was a white high school and a black high school in black and white middle school. the judge merged those. everyone went to the same high school. he created this blockbuster powerhouse high school. it was like the dream of integration, the imperfect dream of integration. but this district was expressing a lot of white flight. as soon as they were released from the court order, they destroyed the integrated high school and created three high schools and an entire theater system of all -- feeder system of all-black poverty schools.

you have this place that was forced to integrate 30 years after brown v. board and then creates this amazing high school that is kicking everybody's butt. it was beating sports teams across the country, producing all these national merit scholars. and even that was not enough to hold integration together. you could look at this place and what they did to create these all-black schools, but also the black elite was part of that. that was all. part of the calculation in why i chose to tell the story of resegregation from tuscaloosa. before i went there, i knew i wanted to tell it through the generations of one family. i knew that. i hope i would find the family to tell it through. i understood so much of the history would take place in the past.

if i wanted people to care about it, i needed a human face to connect them from the past to the present. luckily, i found the perfect family pretty early on. prof. gessen: the talked to other families who were less perfect. ms. hannah-jones: yeah. ladyain character, begin ,t the all-black high school she is everything, class president, state track champion, everything we tell kids they should be if they want to be successful she was, but she was at a segregated high school failing her in terms of her education. made the family perfect is i wanted a grandparent who have gone through segregated schools after brown to show how desegregation did not come to this country after brown and whose parent had gone to the integrated high school in that town as a result of the court

order and now family grandchild back in the segregated schools that looked just like the grandparents attended. that is what i was looking for and that is what i found in the family. prof. gessen: are there a lot of schools like that, that were integrated and became un-integrated? ms. hannah-jones: the south experienced a wave of desegregation because the only thing that held it back with the court orders. it,ell ourselves we wanted tried hard, and failed. we fail because we did not want it. there was a brief time where the federal government was forcing it. where it forced it, many times it did work. as soon as we started releasing the court orders that were 40 or 50 years old, the supreme court made it increasingly easy for districts to be released from the court orders. when they were released, we went

back to our natural state of things which is to immediately do things to resegregate. the peak of integration in this country was 1988 when i was in middle school. now black students are as segregated as they were in 1972. the typical experience of a black student in this country is to attend a segregated, high poverty high school. the typical expense of a white student in this country is to attend a low poverty high school. prof. gessen: resegregation was kind of agreed to buy black leaders in the community because they were afraid they would not be able to attract businesses if they did not have a high-quality, majority white school basically. ms. hannah-jones: right. prof. gessen: when did you find that out, early in the reporting were you surprised to find that out? was your initial reaction like this is not a good case or were

you excited? what was your reaction? ms. hannah-jones: i think it is great for the narrative. it gives me once -- nuance. there were all these compromises that have happened. school desegregation was very hard on black communities. it was always the black schools that were shut down, the black teachers and principals fired, getting a- black kids long bus rides to go into white schools. civilny of the black rights leaders who pushed for desegregation, they felt the cost had been too high for black children and they were chasing white children across the city and white children kept fleeing them. the school systems would go for majority white to majority black districts. the fear was if he did not set aside a pocket of mostly white schools, the entire district would turn black and you could not have any integration because

you would have no white kids left in the district. but also every time he tried to pass a tax in a majority white and entirely black school system and try to pass a tax for schools, white parents will not vote for that because their kids are not in the schools. businesses will not support it because their employees they care about do not have kids in the school's. there was this calculation community's were having to make that we will tolerate some level of segregation for our poorest most vulnerable black kids in order to keep white kids in the district. i think that was an important story to tell because that is happening in communities across the country. you see it in new york city. middle-class black kids are typically not going -- they are in schools with white kids. it is the poorest most vulnerable kids being segregated. i thought that was important because it talked about the failures of the civil rights movement.

the black elite at that point thought they were going to broker -- they understood a judge would release the district from a court order. as soon as it did, the district could do what they wanted to anyway. they figured if they try to negotiate terms, they could get something out of it for the black community which they thought would be economic development. unfortunately, it did not work out that way. they did not get the economic development. a lot of people in the community believed the black elite sold them out but they could never prove it. i was able to finally get on the record the black judge in the town who basically signed a deal to admit he did it. prof. gessen: one of the difficulties of the stories you are telling is the fact that white people have gotten much in theat being --

presidential campaign, they have gotten worse at it. they've gotten better at not being such explicit racists so you don't often have the smoking gun of somebody saying the n-word, for example. you have adopted a kind of -- i have heard you describe it almost like the legal definition of what segregation now is rather than a kind of narrative definition. could you say something about that? ms. hannah-jones: what made -- during the civil rights movement, we were dealing with segregation by law. what we are mostly talking about today is called de facto segregation. i think it is a fallacy. it is a term adopted by the north to resist having to come under brown v. board. de facto means segregation by fact but we do not know who caused it.

no one is responsible. we cannot say there was a law that forced it or government officials that mandated it. that is how most segregation outside of the south was categorized. but i would argue and i think my facto, iver say de just say segregation, most of the segregation today is still the result of official policy, still the result of official actors. when the school officials in the city of tuscaloosa made the decision to draw the attendances on that creates 13 years of entirely black high poverty schools, i don't know how you call that anything but intentional segregation. one of the things i talk about a lot with journalists is stop getting so caught up in what you can prove someone was thinking. look at their actions and whether or not they knew what the results of those actions would be. whenf the things i say is

exxon mobil has a spill in the wef, we would never say -- don't care if the head of exxon mobil hates ducks were not -- or not. it does not matter to us how he feels about the environment, whether he likes seagulls or whatever. we only care that there were certain things you should have done and you did not do it, and this is a foreseeable result of that. when it comes to race, the only thing that matters is whether we can prove someone hated black people. you could take every possible action, and if we cannot prove you hated black people when you are doing it, suddenly we don't feel like we can report on those actions the way we need to. my work is saying i don't care. i can show you made a decision in new would be harmful and you did it anyway, and i want to know why. that is how we need to think about reporting on race. legal discrimination has been

outlawed in this country for 50 years. people know how not to do that and write things on paper. but it is not an accident that in every facet of american life, we are still seeing black americans being disadvantaged. that is not accidental or incidental. i think that is how we need to be writing about these issues. prof. gessen: i'm going to ask one more question. if people want to come to the microphones to ask their own questions, they should start. you had a piece where he described your decision to center dot are to a high poverty .egregated school did you do that as a journalist? ms. hannah-jones: did i make the decision as a journalist? no. prof. gessen: but it was based on your experience of reporting on this topic?

ms. hannah-jones: it is one thing to write about public schools when you do not have kids. it is very different to write about it when you have to make a decision about your own child. i guess i would reframe the question. i made the decision as a mom, as a human being who thinks what we are doing to kids is wrong and understanding by pretending it is only systemic, it allows us to get off the hook about our individual decisions. all of my years of reporting informed my decision to enroll my daughter in that school. i remember early on as a new public schools reporter in durham, curing all of the excuses liberal parents would give about why they would not put their kids in school with poor black kids. i remember one of my earlier stories was about durham tried to use magnet schools to integrate certain schools in poor neighborhoods. they did a survey.

a lot of districts were hyper concerned about what white parents wanted because those were the parents they had to keep in the district. they did the survey of parents and asked what they wanted in their schools. every single thing the parents said they wanted existed in the magnet schools in the city that could not get white kids. i wrote a story about that. all of theseinking parents think they are good people, they are good people. they say none of their decisions are about race, but they are willing to tolerate this inequality. enter out the years of my reporting, meeting other journalists cataloging racial inequality. when you asked where they live or send their own children to school, a were not living what they were writing. i could not fathom doing that. i like to say i am not judging other people.

that probably does not ring true. i probably am judging. for me, it was never a choice. it is hard to say that as a parent that i do not think my daughter deserves more than other kids, but i really don't think she does. i did not test her for talented and gifted. i think she is smart. i do not think she is brilliant. i do not think it matters. as parents, we have gotten to this consumer culture around this thing we say we believe is a great equalizer. this thing we say is this important institution where it does not matter where you came from, you all come out with the same thing. but then we have turned it into this thing we have to provide for and use our best privilege for to secure every advantage for my child. i fundamentally do not believe in that. i have choice. anything my child does not get in that school, i can give her.

but that is not true for all the other kids in my daughter's classroom living in public housing with parents doing the best they can with no resources. systemic.nequality is but every choice we make is holding up the system. this is -- there is no way i could do that. but i also understand and that is what the piece tries to grapple with. that is a hard decision for parents to make. i understand that, too. when you have so much inequality, to ask a parent to subject their children to schools not educating kids, that is a big ask. she is great. my daughter is a sassy little child who is doing great. she is doing great. that is the thing. for those of us who can get our kids everything, our kids will do great in any environment. that is why we need to stop being so selfish about it.

her being in that school changes the dynamic of that school. times"owing a "new york reporter is a parent changes the dynamic of the school. integration is about power. it is about access to power and who has it and who does not. when you have an entire school where every parent lives in a housing project, we know officials do not care what the parents need. we know there is nothing the that will get elected officials to come to weekly meetings about 50 kids not getting their first choice for kindergarten. that is really what integration is about. i think everyone knows that. i think white parents know that. black parents know that. that is why people try to protect their power. i have my power whether my daughter is in that school or

not, but i can share that power if i am in that school with those kids. my answersto keep shorter. prof. gessen: i thought that was great. thank you. [applause] >> can you hear me? you did "the problems we all live with." can you talk about dealing with the education beat, how do you generate access to the families in these neighborhoods and communities somewhat closed off in a sense? how do you figure out which is the right person to create that narrative in your pieces? ms. hannah-jones: the families are easy. it is getting access to the schools that can be really hard. always want to

talk because they know they are being screwed. they know that their kids are not getting the education they deserve. i never have a hard time with the families. it can be really hard to get into the schools. what i have also found is a lot of times, the teachers and principals in the schools also know they are being set up to and that you can get access by talking to people who know them to get them to meet with you and getting access into the schools that way. in terms of the narrative, this is something i struggle with a lot because i am always trying to balance two things. i want to take a kid who is fairly representative, but i am also understanding who i am writing to and i need to pick a kid people think deserves an education. i very troubled by that.

i struggle with that because i think the kid who is a c student with issues clearly deserves an education, too. but i need to find the kid someone will be outraged about, and they are never outraged about the c black student. they are outraged about alisha, making all a's, doing everything she could possibly do, and is being screwed. i am working on that. i have a lot of inner turmoil about that and about not being able to write about the typical kid in the schools because i need white people to be outraged so they will do something. typically when i am looking for a student, i'm looking for someone who can articulate what is happening so when i am interviewing them they have given some thought to their circumstance, which a lot of us don't. when i was in school, i remember

in tuscaloosa in the black high classes andad no ap the white high school had 20. the school board member when confronted by a student said we should have asked for physics. i'm thinking, what high school kid looks at the course catalog and says there are no classes i want to take, i'm going to ask for what i want. you take what you are given. you only know what you have seen. you don't necessarily know you're getting a bad education. i think most kids do not know. a lot of times it's in poor schools, the parents have not received a good education so they do not know what good instruction looks like. i'm looking for a kid or family who has some sense they are not getting what they are supposed to get so we can talk about that, so i am not just speaking for them but they are able to speak for themselves. that is kind of what i'm looking for.

like all of us, we want someone with a compelling narrative who can evoke some emotion in the reader or listener. you do that by talking to a lot of people and usually going with your gut on who you have connected with and spending a lot of time with them. i said i was going to answer shorter. that certainly was not shorter. tori. my name is like you, i value the historical background that leads to the greater systemic problems. and i struggle a lot in my own figuring out in journalism how you bring that historical perspective to bear on these problems because i think sometimes in reporting it can seem sort of piecemeal. we are looking at problems very much the contextual -- decontextualized. your work resonates because it has that.

not all of us will have the ability to have propublica give us that opportunity, so how do you recommend people were interested in reporting on these types of issues are able to incorporate that sort of historical and systemic understanding into the work in a compelling way that may have to be a lot shorter? ms. hannah-jones: i was a beat reporter for most of my career, so i did not always have the luxury of a lot of space and time. the first thing i would say it is you have to know the history yourself if you're going to write about it. i think a lot of times, journalists are not spending the time to figure out the history of the place. i cannot even tell you when i talk to education reporters, have you ever read brown v. board, have you read any of the case law, have you read the civil rights act, have you ready for housing act? a lot of times, you will not write about it if you do not know. when baltimore was on fire, the first thing i am thinking about

was the fair housing lawsuit where the city of baltimore, the county of baltimore, and the federal government were sued for intentionally segregating black folks in the inner-city. that gives you mad context for why baltimore is on fire. but if you do not know the history, you are never putting that in the story. it is not necessary you have to spend 3000 words on the history. you have to have some understanding of the history. if you even put three paragraphs in the story, you have given the reader a lot more context to understand what is happening. to me, the biggest problem is not time and space. it is lack of curiosity amongst reporters to figure out why a place is like it is. this is why i always say as a black reporter, people look at me and think they know what my biases are, they think they know the framework from which i am writing a story. but we do not look at white reporters and have the same assumption. you look at the way reporters

cover education. most white reporters are coming from segregated white, public or private schools, that were very high functioning. it would be impossible to understand why other schools are failing when that is your framework. that is the biggest problem, the lack of curiosity about the history, the lack of trying to get the context and understand the context. if you have that, you do not need a lot of space to put it in. it will also inform how you report all of the stories because we are all building a body of work. it is not ever one story. you are writing multiple stories around this issue. have that context will inform what stories you tell them and what your subsequent stories are. >> thank you. >> thank you for your amazing talk and being so honest with us as well. ms. hannah-jones: i always fear it will get me in trouble. >> i love it.

at a lot of top universities, is the a lack of black students from poor neighborhoods, especially of lower-class. you see like students for middle-class homes. have you done research on why this is an do you believe universities look into family backgrounds when they are looking at black applicants? ms. hannah-jones: i have lots of thoughts. i worked in college admissions right out of college. i can tell you college admissions officers know the high schools. they know which high schools are segregated and have a good reputation. you can have a 4.0 from central or northpoint in tuscaloosa. admissions counselors know the difference between what that means at one school and another. when i went to notre dame, there was a small black population.

but the black population there was very well off. it was a struggle to be both black and working-class at an institution like that. i think universities do not want to put in the work to recruit. i think they do not want to put in the work to help the students when they get there. when you look at the numbers on this, it is not just that they are not recruiting a lot of low income black students. they are not recruiting a lot of black american students. >> very true. ms. hannah-jones: a lot of those black numbers are black students coming second-generation or first-generation from the caribbean or africa. anti-black racism and particularly anti-black american racism is a big part of how hard it is for black american students and low income americans students to get into institutions like this. >> thank you. ms. hannah-jones: you are welcome. >> thank you for being here today. i have a question about

journalism. you mentioned you now go into your store is you have a perspective and that is ok. your sound reporting backs it up. ever worrying if you as being seen as an advocate for an issue will negatively affect the way readers see -- view your work and how you deal with that. ms. hannah-jones: i have been thatopen all of my career i do not believe in unbiased journalism. it does not exist. all reporters have a perspective on what they are writing, it is whether they are hiding it or not. i have never pretended to be unbiased. when i say is my work will be accurate and fair. that is what i think readers should expect from any of us. when you think of the nature of investigative reporting, it is in becauseg wete are saying the government is doing this and should not be. or we are saying this

corporation is taking advantage of these americans and it should not be, and we are writing this because we want it to be fixed. when you look at the mission of newspapers, when i was at "the oregonian," my position was to speak for the powerless. to me, i think when you know where i stand, to an extent, you can judge my work better because i am not pretending to be unbiased. you can judge if i am writing something it that is fair. when i worry about is what all , will ists worry about make a mistake? i worry about being accurate and treating people fair. i don't worry for one second about whether people think i am unbiased or not.

if people think i am biased because i think segregating kids in schools without resources is biased, i am ok with that. enjoyed your recent piece. i wonder how changing media affects how you are approaching people you are working with, whether it makes a difference and how it contributes to the final output. forhannah-jones: i found that particular angle, i found it liberating to do radio because people are speaking for themselves so much more. when you are writing with a magazine, you can give people more space to speak. in newspapers, it is like one sentence. stories,o, most of the people are telling it in their

own words and you're getting to hear them. you are giving them a lot of space to tell their own stories. i found it to be completely liberating. , but it a radio reporter did a krent version of the story first but i always heard it as a radio piece because i thought thepower of clearly hearing mob in the high school gymnasium, there is no way i could have conveyed that in print the way it is to hear it. ra,n i interviewed maria, ned i felt people needed to hear them telling their own stories so i found that to be very powerful. what is hard about it is it becomes much more about the storytelling. i could have lots of fact and data points, and you have to white a lot of that in radio -- wipe a lot of that in radio. no one is trying to hear a lot of statistics on segregation or the percentages of how many

teachers are qualified and all of that. a lot of the investigative part has to get polished out in the story, and that can be a little hard. overall i think in terms of giving people agency, radio was a great way to do that. do you think there is a place for white people to write about , even if weregation are displacing people of color? ms. hannah-jones: yeah. i mean, the story of racist segregation is not a black story. it is not. when i listen to the black lives matter people speak, a lot of them have said this is the time for white people to .tand aside

when you look back in time, a lot of white people have had dominant positions in the forms for being able to communicate. do you think it is more important for us to step aside and allow people of color to communicate their stories? ms. hannah-jones: no. i think journalists of color should be writing about race if they want to. i think white people should certainly be writing about race. i think the problem is white people often think what -- writing about race is writing about white, black, and brown people. white people live in segregated communities and go to segregated schools. white people are often maintaining the racial inequality, so certainly be writing about have power is working -- how power is working and what that power looks like. as journalists, we are always writing about -- i do not know

how journalists do their jobs without writing about different kinds of people and issues. it is not displacing someone. i think it is doing your job. i say all the time there is not a beat you can cover in this country where you should not be writing about race. banking, schools, policing, housing. here is nothing race does not touch in this country, so if you are a journalist doing your job, he should be writing about race no matter what beat you are covering. we are all limited by the range of our experience. on a story oning environmental justice right now, i do not know anything about the e.p.a., the laws regulating the environment and toxins. this is the nature of journalism, to have to learn about things we do not know about an have to synthesize them. i think we need to get out of this mind state that race is somehow different. racismt good about

because i am black. i am good about writing about racism because i have studied it. there are some black journalists i think are not good at writing about race. i have developed expertise in the subject and that is why i am good at it. not because when i wake up in the morning i am a great race writer. this is something we want to do. you get expertise in it, and you will do good work. >> thank you. ms. hannah-jones: you're welcome. prof. gessen: two more. the "yourked in times" piece about the way new york city is dealing with integration as a voluntary measure and making the argument it benefits white families in addition to white and latino

families. i wondering if you think that argument is ever going to -- i know in new york right now, it is kind of covering up real action from taking place. i wonder if you think that argument will hold sway or is just a way to keep kicking the can down the road. that it is in the interest of white families and white students to have integrated schools, too. i think it iss: two different things. integration for black and latino andents is about equality integration for wasting is not. fundamentally, you're making two different arguments. the argument i would make is when you had a country that was thing to, it is one stop 20% of your population from

getting an education and being able to be citizens who can play a role in our society. it is another thing to have 50% of your population under educated and unable to pay social security and work living wage jobs. think as ouri country changes come i don't think that makes us better on race. we could look at any country that has already gone minority white or any city in this country that has gone minority weight and know that does not fundamentally change power. as a country when you have half of your public school students black and latino, if you're going to choose not to educate them, it is going to harm you. there is going to be a harm to white students. i don't think we have realized that yet, but i think that is where we are coming to. i am not optimistic. anybody who reads my work knows that. i do not have a lot of optimism

about racism. i do know we cannot continue to go as we are, that we cannot have half of your population uneducated and unable to take these important jobs and do this important work. we did not have that before, so maybe, but probably not. >> thanks. nikole. we know each other, sorry. ms. hannah-jones: you came all the way from london just to see me tonight. no, she didn't. [laughter] is about your organization for journalists of color to encourage them to be more active in investigative journalism. jones" in article about a month ago about how it is hard for them to continue to encourage this passion in

journalists to do investigative journalism because of funding. does your organization want to work in concert trying to get organizations to continue to push investigative journalism, especially when pieces like , but are doing so well others to change the conversation in society? ms. hannah-jones: i think the funding argument when it comes to diversity is a red hearing -- red herring. investigative reporting is expensive. to pay someone salary to produce one thing is very expensive. what we are trying to push is that there are people who are qualified, and we need to find a way to hire them. i don't think funding is the issue. what you find a lot of times is a lot of organizations

fellowship and that is how they are hiring journalists of color. but i think that is a backdoor way. i think you should i'm talent and hire them. that is what our organization will be pushing for. journalism overall is disproportionately white. investigative journalism is even whiter. we are not giving the training or leadership to do this work. that is one thing we will work on. when we train a cohort of journalists, when a newsroom has an opening it will be more difficult to say we cannot find a qualified person because i can tell you that person is qualified because i have trained them. that is what we are trying to do as a society. >> thank you. ms. hannah-jones: you're welcome. prof. gessen: that is it. thank you all for coming. and thank you, nikole. [applause]

>> fort knox was chosen because it was america's most impenetrable location. it was the golden dawn depository. it had been opened several years prior. there have been lots of gold already transferred there. the secretary of the treasury gives permission to use a portion of the depository for these documents. >> sunday night, the author talks about the decision to move america's most important historical documents to fort knox on december 26, 1941. >> he has to make a decision what documents will be there, the original declaration definitely. the articles of confederation, pre-constitution, for sure. the gettysburg address considered critical. he makes this decision very methodically on what is going to go to fort knox. these are considered the most

valuable documents in the country. the magna carta is the document he has been asked to preserve. "q&a."ay night on >> now, discussion on the history of presidential pardons and how that power might be used by president obama from today's "washington journal." it is about 40 minutes. "> "washington journal continues. --t: our next guest is krent nt, dean of the chicago-kent college of law. he is joining us live from chicago this morning. guest: good to be here. host: in this section, we are talking about the use of presidential pardons. during the campaign cycle, we heard a lot of questions about hillary clinton's use of a private e-mail server and the

of that.-- legality tot can president obama due forestall future inquiries into her e-mail server? he has the constitutional authority to pardon hillary clinton before charges can even be filed or investigations are inducted. many of us remember the pardon of president nixon five gerald ford. as controversial as it was -- by gerald ford. as controversial as it was, there is still contrary -- constitutional authority that rests with president obama. how do presidential pardons work? is this something that presidents have unilateral authority to issue? guest: it is understood that the

president can commute sentences, grant pardons or amnesty, all of these powers are in the constitution. famous last-minute pardons before leaving office. mechanism procedural where people can file and request pardons. they are studied by the office of the pardon attorney and then recommended to the president. like hillary clinton would go directly to the president for his consideration. host: four are off -- for our audience listening on the radio, here is some information on financial pardons. they are in expression of the

presence legal forget that -- the president's authority of legal forgiveness. it does not signify innocence. a person is not eligible to apply for a pardon until a minimum of five years have elapsed. we are speaking with harold krent from the chicago-kent college of law. if you would like to call in, democrats you can call in on 202-748-8000. republicans 202-748-8001. .ndependents on 202-748-8002 you can also send us your thoughts on social media the a , -- on social media through twitter, http://twitter.com/cspanwj.

governmentalf our structures can be traced back to our forebears in europe. the crown would use pardons in various ways. it was used as a way to raise money sometimes. you would be pardoned if you contributed to the crown. sometimes, it was used to help colonize australia. there are various functions in the use of the power, the idea was that it is the most august our of the president. it could wave away the taint of any kind of criminal conviction. that was associated with the crown and some kind of supreme authority for the country. there are different types of authority that you see in religions, but we trace it back to the crown. host: are there certain types of thate or controversies

typically, up from hardening in modern-day -- that typically come up from pardoning in modern-day? guest: typically, president obama has been using pardoning authority to commute the sentences of those convicted for , such ast sentences drug offenses. he is used a great deal of his authority to commute those sentences. he has used a full pardon authority much more gingerly. he is actually fallen behind many of his red assessors in that way. -- of his predecessors in that way. so, it can be used to remove the taint of a prior conviction. george washington used to to get amnesty to the other side, just like the pardon of jefferson davis, as well. sometimes their used as said that the art and that the, too.

used as aa lot of -- empathy,ympathy or too. used typically for minimizing sentences. host: let's hear from our first caller now. katie from new york on the independents line. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i was calling about the prior segment come up but i do have a remark about this. with all since it -- the prior segment, but i do have a remark about this. with all sincerity, being a part white demographic of female, college educated individuals, i would like a pardon from my countrymen and women that might automatically

proceed now, because things are so tremendous. people now automatically -- the racial divisions that may be know -- i would like to who they are? my brothers and sisters of all persuasions and religions, perhaps they are automatically presumed that there are so many of us against them? host: let's hear from lydia now on the democratic line. caller: good morning. you mentioned pardoning hillary clinton? guest: that is a question going around. caller: i thought you had to be indicted, convicted of a crime and sent to prison before being pardoned. lydia, that is a very good point. guest: the office of the pardon

attorney has set of guidelines for a commutation of sentences that president obama has engaged in for those convicted of a nonviolent the money. there is no requirement under the constitution that anyone be indicted or investigated. gerald ford's pardon of richard nixon is a great example of that. even though president obama has not proceeded in that fashion, there is no constitutional requirement they have to do so. that is why in edward snowden or hillary clinton pardon is on the table. that an important point is a pardon has to be specific. in other words, does it have to encompass the potential for a certain crime or legal action? or is it just a blanket clearance for the rest the person's life? guest: an important distinction is that it cannot be forward

looking. you cannot be pardoned for terminal conduct that has -- for criminal conduct a has yet to take place. retrospect, the president does half to specify to individual -- have specify what the individual is being pardoned four. -- for. so, anything arising out of the e-mail server, or anything arising out of edward snowden's leaking of materials -- you have to have a series of events to cardin -- to cover the pardon power. randy on the republican line. go ahead. crimes,richard nixon's if you would have been charged beenonvicted, would have

against the private sector -- against the dnc for the break in. if hillary clinton would be charged and convicted, it would be against the state. is there any difference? guest: richard nixon was investigated, or at least thought to be investigated, for the obstruction of justice. that is a crime against the state in the same way that hillary clinton could be theoretically charged in the obstruction of concealing classified information. either way, it would be in the same authority -- the same category. host: we are talking with harold chicago-kentf the college of law. is there a difference between clemency and a pardon? guest: there is. clemency is part of a group of actions that the president could take that includes a pardon or

commutation. commutation means lowering the sentence. so, the charge of a felony or misdemeanor would still be attached. some of such as the inability to hold a job or public office wednesday. a pardon wipes out a complete offense. it is as if the individual was never charged. no restrictions would be attached. host: ken from rhode island on the independents line. caller: thank you for taking my call. , can a pardon be granted for someone that has committed murder? guest: absolutely. and has been in the past. caller: all right. ok. host: any follow-up?

caller: that was my only question. democraticis, on the -- next is tom on the democratic line. caller: yes, recently the president pardoned a large number of people. could the new president verse that -- reverse that? no, but a interesting question arises with the use of conditional pardons which present obama has used with the weapon dealers in iran that we saw as part of the exchange a couple of months ago. the question is what happens when the condition is not met. in that case, the condition was that the visual not see restitution against government or try to profit by writing a story or biography about what happened with the weapons deals. the subsequent president than >> the subsequent president is

in charm of figuring -- in whetherf figuring out the condition has been met. if it is a conditional pardon, question of a subsequent president can undo some of the intent of a conditional pardon. an absolutely commutation, the way with the drug offenses or if it's a again with gerald ford cannothard nixon, that be undone. >> we're talking with harold krent with the chicago-kent law.ge of here's a story in politico. says president-elect trump due to appear in court. the story says that before his rightmp raises hand to take the oath of office in january, he's set for a the witness taking stand in his own defense in a federal court civil trial over in his trump estate seminar program. is it possible that once donald trump takes office, that he himself, or if this case doesn't go his way?

>> there's been questions about that. and academics have disagreed about whether a president can oneself. it came up obviously with president clinton most recently. is that a president cannot use the pardon power on himself. that, of course, is -- we've never seen it in our history. it's contested. that there has been a -- sort of a somewhat sporadic of stopping litigation when someone comes into office. president wasce, involved in a car crash and was sued. halt thatried to civil litigation, because they didn't want to distract the president when he assumed office. the same thing was true with president clinton and the jones litigation. jones sued him. and of course it was the supreme court which allowed that suit to ended upwhich unearthing the information that againsthe charges president clinton.

so in that fence, the court has recently held that civil litigation can proceed against a though obviously there will be sapping of the president's energies and that's a risk that the supreme court has allowed to take place, which is, i think, questionable. but i don't think the pardon power would be used. >> next up is ross from st. petersburg, florida, calling the republican line. rob, go ahead. >> good morning. this show here. and i was just curious as to kind of outlook this gives for incoming political people and people who are going to be of our country in the future. kind of message this sends cordiallyen we just say, you know, crimes committed

by political people who we have elected into office and held at allowedigh position are to get away with these things. and everybody should be held accountable, which i think is with oure large issues political state of the union at this point. so i'll listen to your response off line. thank you. terrifick it's a question, because it's the political price of a pardon is unclear. my guess, though i have no way of knowing, is that hillary clinton would not want a i think that is some kind of at least suggestion she there's something that should be pardoned for and she has maintained steadfastly her of the e-mailerms scandal. it's not clear that president trump's administration would investigate her anyway. so indeed, she may be pleaing do not even think about giving me or even my

associates, my staff, some kind of pardon. that could be wrong but that's possibility, really for the reasons that you suggest. we do want accountability in terms of our political leaders but that's not to suggest that there's not a wise time for the use of the pardon, to pull the country together. tried what andrew johnson to do when he pardoned jeff davis. that's what president ford tried when he pardoned richard nixon. but there is something, i think, troubling about saying if you're a politician, you get a free pass, whereas if you're somebody else that was caught the till ornd in with drugs, you won't. so that is why i think it's presidents to remember not to give pardons to aybody just because they're politician. so it's a fair point. >> and harold krent, this is a technology point perhaps. but does a person who is being pardoned need to request one, or can the president, as you said,

pardon hillary clinton even if it or didn'tk for want one? >> so in terms of the way the has tois set up, someone request a pardon but that's certainly not binding on the president. it's not clear what richard nixon said about the pardon from gerald ford. so it is possible that obama even ifve a pardon hillary clinton hadn't sought one. i don't think he would do that but it's certainly possible and we don't know. the one thing that i think is a conditionale is pardon, such as we will pardon you if you leave the country, we you if you agree not to write a book about your escapades. those kinds of conditions must be agreed to by the individual, by the offender. but a blanket pardon or a commutation of sentence is within the power of the to grant. so we could have a spectacle of the president pardoning hillary clinton without her even asking

for it. orl we ever know if she did not? we probably would never know, but nonetheless, that could happen. is josh earnest speaking on wednesday about the possibility of president barack pardoning hillary clinton. here's what he said. >> the president has offered to a substantial number were previously time in federal prisons. and we didn't talk in advance president's plans to offer clemency to any of those individuals. that's because we don't talk about the president's thinking, to anylarly with respect specific cases. may apply to, you know, pardons or commutations. what i would direct your attention to, though, is the president's observation that he

rose garden about tone that president-elect trump displayed in his remarks last night. consistent with longstanding traditions of our democracy, and the president expressed hope that that kind of tone would continue. that's relevant, because we've got a long tradition in this country of not -- of people in power not using the criminal justice system to exact political revenge. we go to great lengths criminal justice system from partisan politics. that commitment has served

our country very well for more than two centuries. president is hopeful that it will continue. >> we are speaking with harold krent. he is the dean of the chicago-kent college of law. and he's joining us from chicago. hear from a caller who comes from new york, new york. democratic line. go ahead, ann. >> hi. yes. interested in director comey. i know that there's talk of the against him. i personally would like to see but iied for treason, guess that's just not possible. and how you just spoke about not toal people trying be in that system, in that way, hatch act, i the believe it would be political. but i actually, like i say, i to see him tried for treason. i think he definitely interfered influenced our election, which is just unreal to me. >> all right. new york. harold krent?

>> politically, i can't imagine a donald trump administration trying to investigate director comey. if a democrat had taken over, i don't think there would have been a criminal investigation. i think he probably would have resigned or been forced to resign. what prompted comey to write the letter he did, it made no sense in terms of criminaltions law enforcement. but my own view would be that's for criminalte punishment, but certainly that's not going to happen under a administration. >> we're on the independent line. go ahead. >> good morning. >> good morning. a question. i'm really confused, because tore is something i have tell. this is a story -- are you hearing me? >> you're on the air. go ahead. >> okay. this is a story. things,ss of those whatever happened, hillary

had some --she something, why, from the beginning, is she allowed to to become the president? her. not vote for i did not vote for trump. okay? whatever she is, she didn't the country in the last 30 years. she had the experience, she had everything. my question is this. why, why, why? can i tell -- describe something about the electoral college? the electoral college is of,thing we have to get rid because... way people -- if this people are voting, what is that all about? >> what was your question? >> my question is this. now we are talking about

mr. comey. mr. comey has a job. job.doing his now he has -- the country has to many problems. we have to resolve all those programs. job.omey did his it's over. right now, mr. trump is president. .e have to stand behind him i don't think it's going to be okay. see what's happened to our entire country? >> all right. we hear you. krent, have there been legal challenges to the ability to issue pardons in the past? >> most famously, there was a judicial challenge to gerald ford's pardon of richard nixon. but the challenges in court have been few and far between, and ie most believe, certainly agree, that the judiciary has no role in terms wisdom of a the pardon. they might be able to assess or conditionwhether a should be revoked or not of a

pardon, because the individual whatever terms that the president may have set out. comment on oneo of the caller's comments, is a distinction between an official doing a job, perhaps negligently, and having committed. it's not clear that just because people disagree with director it's and what he did that a crime. people disagree with how president clinton handled the classified information. a technical crime either. that cannot be equated with a crime. that's important as well. >> on the democratic line, adrian, go ahead. adrian, are you there? >> i can't hear you. >> you're on the air and we can

hear you. ahead.t >> okay. i really want to know, since -- an't collusion with russia, foreign government, isn't that treason? a statute ofere limitations on that? we kept listening, well, he's fit for office, he's not fit for office, expecting -- okay, he's not fit for office. why doesn't somebody do something? immunityeally enjoy from prostitutio prosecution on? have no idea what actually happened with trump and his relationship with putin or others, russians, in terms of the hackers. did he solicit a crime? conspire for a crime? i would like to think he didn't. personal knowledge of whether he did or not. immune fromu're not

criminal prosecution as a president. unlikely to happen but impeachment is always a possibility. so if something did arose that would have a smoking gun or show that donald trump actually solicited a crime in terms of hacking, for instance, we go to theould impeachment avenue first as prosecution.iminal but to answer the caller, we simply don't know. at least i don't know that any this is more than smoke. that's important to understand. in a of allegations going, very nasty campaign. it's not clear that there were violated by either side. >> mary from texas is now on the republican line. good morning to you. >> good morning, sir. you have a very good legal mind. i'm wondering if you can tell us if there's anything in the administration's plans for the

gitmo detainees. many of us are interested in for danny pearl. that crime was documented, videotaped, and muhammad took for it. so we want justice for danny pearl. him to beo reason for pardoned or moved or anything. sheik muhammad should be brought justice. thank you very much. >> i think that many in the administration, both administrations, would agree i'm not sureugh what sheik muhammad's actual execution ofhe daniel pearl. what i think -- i think both thisistrations have faced political problem of the difficulty of trying those still on guantanamo in the u.s. courts. obviously president barack obama tried that. rebuffed by members of his party as well as members of congress. it would be expensive, complicated. i think it should be done, if at all possible. i do not know what the trump administration and rudy giuliani would do. continuehey would just to keep individuals on

guantanamo or they would try to into a discog them of -- domestic court of justice here in the united states. no one is going to get a free here. these individuals are serious ofrorists, at least most them are serious terrorists who remain on guantanamo. the domestic court resolution of their cases but happens. what >> harold krent, the washington examiner recently published a story "fif.b.i. releases documents." it says eric holder was, quote, the only person that the department of justice notified of the pardon sought by rich. he did not follow the proper when pardoning rich. the f.b.i.'s public corruptions whichandled the case yielded no criminal charges for anyone involved. how significant are these new were released in this case?

>> i think their significant to they show that the pardon process is a political one fested with discretion. last-minute pardon that president clinton issued bypassed the channels within the white house and indeed violated another sort principle which is that there should be no clemency for individuals who are fugitives from justice. that's really relevant today for the case of edward snowden, fugitive froma justice. that's a longstanding justice department policy. violated that as well in issuing the pardon to mark rich. athink it was just -- also the same time, some of us remember that president clinton half-brother.wn this was the last sort of stage of power and president clinton wanted to use it for friends as well as for individuals who he believed deserved it on the merits. so, bypassing both

justice department policies and internal justice department but, again, under the kungsz, i think he -- under the constitution, i think he had that right. i don't think there's any kind of criminal problems that arose the issuance of the pardons. the only time there have been questions has been in governors using the clemency power, when people buy pardons. crime.viously would be a if the governor seeks money for a pardon, the governor should be well.as but we've never had a whiff of that at the presidential level. the independent line. go ahead. >> good morning, dean. question.eal clear there are many deans, over 200 deans of law schools across the country, i believe. and you are legal minds. is, why, absolutely deans --t any of the

or if they did, i missed it -- speak of when donald trump was bogus birther lie? which youh amendment, obviously teach at law schools. obama's white maternal mother, grandmother and great-grandmother were american citizens. it was a total bogus thing, i think the legal gurus failed to inform the american public, particularly now where have birth tourism, where people land on wednesday, have a baby on thursday and their is a citizen. can you tell me why there was ther any attempt to inform american public of why this was such a bogus lie? and someone who wants to oversee constitution, ignored a very important part of it. answer offline. >> i think you raise a fair

point. sure that the 200 law deans are listened to as a group. usually act as a group and there's obviously not scholars amongst us anyway. but i do think there was a lot thatrious commentary suggested that trump's birther comments are crazy. i think they're crazy. think others think they were. i think there was a lot of articulation of those points earlier. so i don't think there was silence in terms of responding to the birther claims at all. was actually ridicule that i saw in a lot of papers. of birtherhe sort thing had a slow death but finally donald trump turned his claimedwhat he had earlier as well. and then, of course, you raise a very important issue with respect to the idea that someone can be a u.s. citizen just if on our territory. that has been a tradition. ed in thebe change dm

future but that's really nothing charges against president obama. but, again, if we can, as u.s. get along together and use our voice for social progress and to clarify the law, great suggestion, and we need to work more closely together in the future. mobile,rine from alabama, on the democratic line. katherine, go ahead. >> yes, sir. good morning, everybody. i'm very upset. been crying for days, because i'm a female first. i'm over 60. was raised in the mean south in the 50's and 60's. misogyny means. i'm very worried for our country and our girls. sir,rst question to you, is how can someone disparage a 53%, have ation of sexual predator electeds a president? i don't understand how this is possible. but my question is about mitch that.ell, so i'll get to mitch mcconnell, when president

obama was being sworn in, had a decided that they were going to undo our president and anything he wanted to do. they blocked and obstructed. sir, that's the first point i have. understand why that wasn't considered treasonnistic, against a president who has just been elected. that is upsetting me. okay. the other thing that upsets me is that mitch mcconnell has stolen a seat from this president on the supreme court. carry a constitution in my pocket and have ever since i was a child. me -- my to tell parents -- that i was gonna be taken out for speaking out for my life, and all women's rights. and mitch mcconnell has stolen a supreme court seat from this president and refused to bring it up as a vote. the news talked about this either. i don't know what is wrong. it looks to me that the right has already taken over our

country and nobody understands what happened in germany, that elected hitler. and i am very scared, sir. 50% of the po population. >> we're speaking with harold krent, the dean of the chicago-kent college of law. this isrent, i guess sort of related to the caller's point. what is the extent of the president's powers, not just in pardons? we've heard donald trump make very sweeping promises on the trail, to repeal the affordable care act, to redraw, agreements.trade could he rewrite the powers of the presidency? is understoodbama to try to use the power of the presidency quite aggressively did in several respects, though he was criticized by republicans, of course. there now going to see irony of a republican president trying to use presidential power case, his, in this aims.

the president will be using orders, informal management guidance to try to shape the government the way he wants to. it could mean for aggressive in terms of deportation. i hope it doesn't but it certainly looks like it will be. it could be in terms of trying enforcement of consumer protection issues. we'll have to see. leewayre's a lot of under the constitution for the president to change the nation, the nation in directions that he or she wants. and president obama was no ofanger to that kind presidential power. and i think trump will try to mantle in trying to accomplish what policies he prefers. those are, of course, we will have to see. he is checked by congress. duet thats a sort of is played in terms of trying to himcongress not to overrule or at least to acquiesce. as the caller pointed out, we had a very obstreperous congress

that tried to block president could.here it certainly it's in their right to do that. it'sy be irresponsible but their political and constitutional right to do that. probably will happen under president trump as well. anday want certain things congress will just say no or try to prevent other kinds of forceoffs so that they'll or pressure president trump to certain types of goals. so that will be played out in the political process. but president obama did strike for an aggressive presidency. so president trump is sure to follow. have time for just a few more callers now. next up, keith from warren, massachusetts. calling on the republican line. good morning, keith. >> yes. how are you? good. >> the only question i have, i guess if president obama pardons clinton, if she had

committed crimes within the department, while he possibly was complicit in -- kind of blanket coverage follow over to the president also, if it's things that were-- crimes actually committed through the state department against the country or anything? of coveringd himself through this or... doubt it. i think that the idea of a private e-mail server is so far president's the attention that there's a clear separation. i can'to idea, but ma'am any kind of -- i can't imagine any kind of benefit that would have gotten from a private e-mail service. at worst, it's negligence, but if it were a crime, i don't think it's one that can be attributed to the president. out a realll points issue with the pardon power, when you're pardoning close friends. presidents, even president clinton pardoned john deutsche, the c.i.a. director

storage ofroper classified information on a home computer. so deutsche was evidently of that and president clinton extended a pardon to him. i don't think, again, president clinton was complicit in that pardoning a are confidant, there is a line to be drawn someplace. here't think it's close but i'm fascinated by the political issues, because i think in some ways, a trump presidency may welcome a pardon for president clinton, because it would put him off the hook. have to worry about whether to investigate her or not. >> we have time for just one caller. that will be d.j. from killeen, line. on the independent d.j., you get the last word here. >> hello. >> hello. ahead. >> yes. i would like to comment about the presidential pardons and the don't agree that one man or one person, whether it's whatever, a or

democrat or republican or haveendent, should not that much authority to pardon just anybody they choose. selective should be a thing based on each state attorney,district into the congress and the senate recommendations and finalize and approved by the supreme court justices, which is supposed to be fair. but also, i think if they're gonna give a pardon, through all wards that we've had that -- all the wars that gives us our freedom to have election systems and elect people to be a president and congressman and our deadone of soldiers ever got a pardon. if you want to give a pardon, give a pardon to veterans who have survived, because the ones that are dead don't get them. >> all right. texas.d.j. from harold krent, your final thoughts? >> just one clarification first, that a president can only pardon violations of federal law. governors can only pardon violations of state law.

state law -- iof think your point is that it is an august power, to be able to say, anybody in the country can prior sins.of to be able to say that is an incredible power that presidents think take seriously, i do take seriously. but you can say, i think, that power can be used for good or bad. we'll have to see what happens in this last couple of weeks or months of president obama's administration, because my prediction is he will use it just tovely, probably commute sentences of people he thinks have been in jail for too long. but there may be some surprises. >> all right. that's harold krent, the author powers" andtial also the dean of chicago-kent college of law in chicago. us!ks so much for joining >> also on today's washington journal, a discussion on how policy might change during the administration of president trump. this is about 45 minutes. journal" >> "wan

>> we're joined now by chaferred then, a senior fellow at peterson institute for economics. thank you so much for joining us this morning. so you are here to talk about trump's trade policies. he has said he would rip up free agreements. what do we know about his stance on trade? election, itthe was very clear that he was not a huge proponent of either trade trade agreements that the u.s. is a party to. that includes nafta. major trade agreement between the united states, mexico and canada. renegotiatingd nafta. what it is that that actually sure. we're not quite there are provisions for which, you know, a president can pull the country out of nafta. whether, in reality, once he gets into office and seeks to do to just tweak it a

little bit, is unclear. so we're still waiting for some the specifics of that. but it's clear that he is not know,f the current, you trade agreements that the u.s. is a part of. >> and how dramatic of a move be if he did decide to pull out of nafta? tradepulling out of agreements is quite unheard of. at least for the united states. obviously we saw a little bit of this earlier this year with the vote in the u.k. united states, that is not typically how we have sought to change our trading with otherps countries. and the obama administration, came intodent obama office in 2009, he had similar concerns with nafta and decided a differentmately approach, which was to, you know, negotiate a new trade agreement,this ttp trans-pacific partnership, to deal with some of the same that mr. trump has brought up as well. >> now, donald trump has also

out china as a country that he is concerned about. what has he said about china, and what might he do as president? >> well, what he has said about they manipulate their currency and he's impose tariffs upwards of that%. are basically a tax, additional tax, on imported products that come in. threatened to impose that new tax on products coming in from china. is concern with doing that we do have a trade agreement with 163 other economies of the called the wto. and china is a part of that. sort of actionat unilaterally, we would be violating our legal commitments to our trading partners under that deal. so china would be authorized and probably would retaliate and theke back and probably do same thing against the united states. and that would mean u.s.

porters that ek make -- exporters that make agricultural products that send those to china, would ad up suffering as retaliatory response. >> and you can join in our chad brown. with here are the numbers for you to call. democrats, 202-748-8000. republicans, 202-748-8001. independents, the number is 202-748-8002. you can also send us your thoughts on social media. is @c-spanwj.ndle trump has said he wants to change america's stance on trade. so has this issue resonated much during this election cycle? >> so the data aren't all in on question. but i think what is showing is share of supporters

in the election were folks that have been either suffering disaffected or economically or they're just very concerned about their own economic future. a lot of economic uncertainty. that they're currently working in going to be there in the future? many have either lost their jobs 10, 20, 30 years. some have lost their jobs and to find adequate employment. and he really tapped into that amongst that electorate that hasn't been able to benefit from the new economy in the united states, you know, in the 21st century. some of the job loss, some of uncertainties, some of the dislocation is due to globalization, is due to trade, is due to imports from countries like mexico and china. but not all of it. even the vast proportion of it isn't due to trade forces,ily but other like computerization,

automation, the plants and manufacturing facilities that amountake a tremendous of output and goods, automobiles in the united states, steel, they do so today but fewer they did 20, 30 years ago. the workers they employ have a skill set.ent so he's tapped into the folks that have been disaffected by of the changes in the u.s. economy during this time period. >> this is a copy of donald trump's contract with the american voter put out by his campaign. he would do ongs his first day in office. the first day of his first term office. he said that he would announce his intention to renegotiate nafta, or withdraw from the deal, under article 2205. withdrawalnounce from the trans-pacific partnership and he would direct secretary of the treasury to label china a currency manipulator.

direct the secretary of commerce and u.s. trade representative to identify all foreign trade abuses that unfairly impact american workers everyrect them to use tool under international law to end those abuses immediately. dos trump have the power to these things on his first day or within the first 100 days he's office? >> for the most part, he does. significant -- there's significant discretion given to the president over foreign policy and trade policy to take these kinds of actions. under nafta, there is a clause says united states or any of the countries in nafta can withdraw, provided they provide six months notice to other countries. the president is supposed to congressional consultations but this is ultimately something he can do unilaterally. about currency manipulation, working with the instructions, the to the commerce department and the u.s. trade representative's

office to pursue more trade enforcement activity against has the authority to do that. a lot of that is actually bothdy being done under the obama administration and the bush administration before it. wto havey cases at the been filed against china. ofre are a number anti-dumping. this is an area of u.s. trade law that companies can resort to ask that import restrictions be imposed against china if they feel as though their production has been adversely affected. many of these have already been used. in some sense, indicating that he'll continue on that path as well. phone's turn now to the lines. carolyn from shelby, mississippi, is our first caller, calling on the independent line. carolyn, go ahead. >> yes. i wanted to comment on statement. initial it appeared to me that it was in a slightly negative

manner rather than a unilateral trying to be fair. he does not know, because it has not been specific what mr. trump is intending to do. of what i haveon heard him say is that he would current trade agreement and where he felt they were unfair to the united states, he would work on those. and mr. brown, as well as other i have spoken to, seems to take the attitude that he's a piece ofto take paper and tear it up. i don't feel like that's the way. am nottion, if i mistaken, china currently has taxes or tariffs or fees on our goods coming into he failedtry, which to mention. >> all right. so i think that's an excellent point. whatnk it's unclear

exactly the steps that mr. trump respect towith nafta. you could say, if we think about really mostat is concerning to the electorate, a the electorate kind his presidential win, those are workers,fected midwesternin the american states, ohio, maine and wisconsin. one thing you might do with is to ask mexico and other countries out there to try to improve their labor standards. you might say, well, one of the reasons why the u.s. workers are bit isntaged a little because they have to work under -- companies have to under conditions which makes it a bit more expensive. our workers in the united states ability to unionize and bargain. our workers are subject to wage laws. the companies who employ them have to abide by occupational

standards andlth regulations. you might say, well, that's one of the things we could renegotiate with mexico. ask mexico to adopt similar types of laws that would protect their workers. could do that. interestingly, that was actually one of the provisions that's in that he hasement, signaled he wouldn't be interested in pursuing. either het sure that yet or his advisors have really dug into the depths of what was tpp agreement or what was in the tpp agreement that they might like. one particular aspect at. they might look >> mike is on the democratic line. go ahead with your question or comment. morning. i love c-span. thank you for mr. brown this morning. a comment and then a question. comment is that given that of bipartisanind dissatisfaction among the manufacturing class for the last

30 years, i would say -- i go and hisross perreault popularity running with the vast sound of american jobs going overseas. okay. so you have that trend. you have the political class, rt sting with bill starting with bill clinton, a huge promoter of nafta, promoting it. and, you know, democrats and republicans, they come through with their think thanks and tell us that we're better off with trading. to hearld like mr. brown, the economist, give figures on how dependent given that, you know, our economy is very well-developed. has more to gain because of their domestic demand. it's growing, in a trade war, if it ever gets to that.

percentage of our economy, in terms of total dependent on foreign trade? on how much room do we have the domestic side to put the manufacturing class back to work? that's my question. >> all right. west virginia.m what are the goods that we export to china? >> goods that we export to china out of the united states, a wide range. so we export a huge amount of agricultural products. our biggest export to example.soy beans, for so any trade war -- soy beans are made in other countries, though. so any trade war that we got into with china, we could expect agricultural products and farmers to suffer, the inability to be able to trade. the specific questions about how

united states is compared to china on international trade, i think it theertainly true that united states is a much bigger economy in terms of what it is, the vast array of things that we do, and we are less reliant on than perhaps trade china. but we are reliant on trade in hard to capture through numbers alone. and so i think a really good example of this, and sometimes also why the numbers overstate is on trade --na the iphone i think is the best example that people have given out there. in the united states, we import iphones, apple iphones, that are now, from china. that would come into the united states in the trade as, you know, a $500 import from china. but most of the value of that not being made in china. the memory cards and the theuter chips and semiconductors are made in korea, taiwan.

the research and development, to come up with a product in the that istates, all of the united states' effort. that value, a big chunk of that ultimately come back into the united states. it's just not captured in our trade statistics. hard to measure exactly how reliant both u.s. and china are on international trade, except to say that if it were to disappear, both sides severely adversely affected be it. >> but to follow up on the caller's point -- i think that's some of the frustration felt election.rs in this why aren't the semiconductors and the memory chips, et cetera, the u.s.? in could they be made in the u.s. under different policies? could. of them perhaps i mean, some of the semiconductors are made in the united states. i don't mean to suggest that they're not. it's primarily allowing economic markets to determine what it is that's made where.

mean, that's the system that the united states has advocated, you know, since essentially the 1940's. it's certainly the case that not doing as goodare a job at living up to the rules of that system. problemshave major with china in terms of, you know, their active involvement a government in promoting subsidies that, they give, concerns over not intellectual property rights. the question is, how do we address that? do we go into a world of an all-out trade wor in which there would be -- war in which there substantial dislocation and a huge mess in ultimately getting to a solution? or do we try to work through a system of rules and that kind of approach? >> mark from massachusetts is on the independent line. mark, good morning to you. >> good morning. thank you, guys. thank you for this segment.

with with respect to donald i'm justrade policy, confused, because it seems like statements that -- obviously one of them being that he wants to end nafta, which i just completely isiculous, because mexico our number three trading partner. i think we need to learn from brexit referendum, you know what happened there. we're talking about leaving for france or germany. it just doesn't make any sense. trump relied heavily on union support. he's a capitalist, how is he going to support the unions too? you can't have it both ways.

you. >> so i think -- that's a good point on nafta. theink, you know, one of difficulties in understanding is, youlexity of nafta know, suppose we stop to think countryxico as a morn or -- a foreign country or andda as a foreign country, just thought of it as one big region without trade borders. nafta agreement allows the united states auto industry to do, for example, is to become competitive. mexico is a huge export market for u.s. goods and services. now that it may be we're importing a number of final automobiles from mexico be produced, 30 years ago, entirely in the united states. amount of theus parts and the components and the is,e added of that vehicle you know, u.s. material. there was a great visual, and i wish i brought it today, in the wall street journal this week, showing what parts and

components of automobiles across the nafta supply chain look like something simple like a seat that you would find. the front seat of your car. basically, the final seat, just the seat of a car, the parts travel back and forth andeen the united states mexico multiple times. the head rests, the fabric, the and bolts, all of those pieces, to ultimately just form the one seat, which then has to combined with hundreds and hundreds of other parts and components to ultimately make a final car. of it now is just -- we've taken the old way of usedg an automobile, that to be all just done in one simple plant, but that was costly to do. up theve split production process across different geographic regions, the united states but now crossing country borders as well. >> harriet from maryland is on line.publican harriet, good morning to you. >> hi. good morning. like to thank president being -- around our

economy, that i believe nafta destroyed. and i don't believe that you can just stop nafta, because we don't make anything. what are we gonna have? slowlyonna have to do it and turn it around. remember when obama first came to office, he was giving people unemployment for two years. isis no wonder that our debt $20 trillion now. we used to have people as the largest buying power of the globe. that's gone. pretty soon people won't care whether we take their goods or not. >> all right. that's harriet from maryland. week, c-span "newsmakers" interviewed house chairman congressman luke messer of indiana, talking about the relationship of house

speaker paul ryan and incoming trump.nt donald >> trump and ryan sparred quite a bit. there was a lot of speculation unseatump would try to ryan or somehow pressure members to vote against him. seen them mend their relationship at all? >> yeah. we are in the midst of our leadership elections. i'm running for house republican policy chair. was encouraged by the meeting that speaker ryan and trump had this week. clearly president trump is going to have a voice in what our team looks like, moving forward. initial indications seem to be very comfortable with our existing leadership team. and i see some wisdom in that, all the other moving parts we have to deal with, given all the big challenges we have in front of us, i think there's wisdom in have, unitingm we that team and moving forward as a nation.

>> and how important will donald trump's relationship with congress be when he decides to of hismplementing pieces trade policy? incrediblynk it's important, understanding the complexity of international inde and trade agreements particular relies on a president that's willing to work with that's willing to work with his or her cabinet, and a underlying expertise that is required to actually negotiate and understand the nitty-gritty details of these legal agreements, both the legal of these things and the economic complexity of them as well, because they're not unilateral initiatives. we are going to be negotiating with very sophisticated partners other side, if you're talking about mexico or china. they have considerable expertise understanding these deals and president trump is going to need to have to rely on that on our

side as well. >> and we saw some of the fractious a relationship with congress at times. here's a story, the trans-pacific partnership is dead. be -- the soon could trans-pacific partnership, the trade deal at the center of obama's -- it will not be ratified by congress. theain to us what trans-pacific partnership is or called.t's sometimes >> so the trans-pacific partnership was president trade policyture initiative. in many respects, it was his attempt to renegotiate nafta. it includes canada and mexico, have a freeeady trade agreement through nafta. and then six, seven other across the latin americand region, and then some other developing countries in asia,

and malaysia in particular. and australia, new zealand, countries inher which we already have free trade agreements. it was a new deal in the sense it added some new rules. i mentioned previously, attempts to improve the labor standards, conditions in already existing u.s. trade agreements like nafta, making them if countries don't live up to the commitments they take on for labor but also newmpting to deal with issue areas, especially of importance to the u.s. economy the the last 20 years, with internet. trying to make sure that our economicfrontier development, you know, facebook, google, and the issues dataiated with e-commerce, privacy, and those types, writing rules for the trading which there are fun currently. that's really what the tpp do.ement tried to

>> let's hear from debbie in gainesville, florida, on the democratic line. debbie, good morning and go ahead. taking my call. i've been calling in for decades, and now we have someone phone that the intair gaits you. it's -- interrogates you. keep focus when they want to interrogate you by asking what your comments are going to be. i'll try being said, to remember why i called in. regarding -- i think most people understand the automation. but there's still so many people who have lost their jobs. there's hidden costs that a lot people don't think about with all the cargo ships having to come over and the 18-wheelers our freeways. and the quality of the products. my aunt has a toaster that she's years.r 50 i have to replace mine almost every month. slave laborg about oftentimes. we have seen, you know, the out of of people jumping

the windows in china, from the apple factories and the environmental problems. know, i just think it's time to bring more jobs back to have all have these cargo ships and 18-wheelers busting up our roads taking care of the people in our country. thank you for taking my call. >> so you raise an excellent point. on the automation issue, which i think is incredibly important, you know, one of the ideas of the proposals that are have been put out there topresident-elect trump renegotiate these trade agreements is attempting to manufacturing to the united states. that has ever moved or decided for the first time, not necessarily move but start for the first time in a country like mexico or china. think the problem with that approach is the difficulty in thatnizing that the jobs were there in manufacturing 10, 20, 30 years ago aren't going to

if thee, even manufacturing comes back. one of the callers said earlier, we don't make anything in the united states anymore. unfortunately, that's absolutely untrue. more manufacturing output in the united states than we have ever done before. use many,ence is we many fewer people to actually ore those same autos electronics or semiconductors than we did before. andow rely on computers technology in automation to do so. key underlying question is, well, if we don't need people, if we don't need the same type of labor force to make as much as we were making before, what do we do? of the future?bs those are the key questions that are going to be facing the president-elect trump. fear is that ripping up or renegotiating trade agreements is not going to answer that problem. the production may come back but the jobs aren't going to be coming back along with that production. >> john from georgia is calling

independent line. john, good morning. >> good morning. how are you? >> i'm good. >> good. a couple of points here. soy beans, going to china, being exported to china. you talk about all the electronic technology. you talk about all the computers. running things. you talk about jobs not being here. well, you know, it's laws, automation that took those jobs away. in the world would you jobs because of people? mosteople are the important asset we have in this country, not the automation. other stuff. our people. our people did these jobs 50

years ago. 70 years ago. before automation ever came about. and i guess my point is that we regulationsy rules, and too many people that are thinking about making that themselves.lar for other countries, for cheap labor. put ourt we feed and own people to work and quit worrying about the rest of this damn world because of this new world order crap that's going on? john. right, we hear your point. chad brown? completely -- i think one of the big frustrations we face is this concern and uncertainty associated with automation. on the one hand, it provides things for us. you know, if you can now make things more cheaply than before, gives us new goods and services that we didn't have access to before.

now use thecan income that we make to buy services, youse know, take care of ourselves, take care of our families, care. health you know, more time for leisure. spent leisure than we would be able to before. but the problem is that not everybody is getting to enjoy benefits of that. not everybody is being able to enjoy the benefits of either or globalization. and the question is, how do we address that, right? and how do we help people that been able to take advantage of the new economy, be able to do so? i think that's the key question facing, you know, the next probably the president after that as well? we've seen a lot of stories recently about even technological

if we are someone currently in that type of job, then think about how you prepare yourself for the future. what kind of skills do you need to take control of the economy in the future? bill, north -- spartan bill, north carolina is spartanburg, south carolina is an area of manufacturing. tweet from it -- there. our next call now. caller: at the end of the cold war, russia started sending its energy -- coal, natural gas, oil -- to europe.

when the ukraine situation came up come up they tried to blackmail europe to go along -- came up, they tried to blackmail europe to go along with russia attacking ukraine five threatening to stop shipments -- by threatening to stop shipments of energy to europe. what is the unit cost of energy that goes from russia by your -- or railcar into europe versus what the unit cost is now, sending energy the ,nited states by ship to europe and in the future, if we expanded our energy production in this country with a pipeline or clean coal, what are the unit costs now?

russia versus our ship sending energy to europe -- and what could this be in the future if we expand our energy production? guest: those are excellent questions. i have no idea to be honest with the unit costs are. i can tell you that you have pointed to an exact problem -- what happens when a have market powers over other countries in terms of certain, critical products like energy? you mentioned europe's reliance on russia in particular for natural gas. ,hen prices went up for that they filled a little held hostage by that. it affected some of their geopolitical decisions, as well. i'll countries want to be a little more diversified with their energy choices, and they want to be more self-reliant. a lot of strategies that

european countries have taken have been in response to concern about climate in limit change. hange. climate c many european countries have been at the forefront of singer technologies through wind -- cleaner technologies through wind or solar products. that is a way that they have tried to break this had her of being dependent on other pattern of-- this being dependent on other countries. host: is the united states the only country that is rethinking the way it approaches international trade? what are we seeing elsewhere? no, i think this election we just had in the united states is part of a bigger trend that much of the across industrialized and high income

world. in june, we saw the united kingdom had a referendum. they had a vote that went out to the public on whether they should lead the european union. ae united kingdom has been part of the european union since 1973. what that meant for them is that it would not only be a free trade agreement as far as importing and exporting goods or services to france or other european countries free of charge, but it also had the three movement -- the free movement of people, of labor, of money. they have come to realize that they do not know what is next for them. they do not yet know what they want outside of the european union. ,hey want increased sovereignty but what that means they are not quite sure. we are seeing similar populist

increases in other european countries, as well. there are upcoming elections in one party is stronger than it ever has been historically. so, what is going through the united states right now -- struggling with the forces of automation and globalization, we now want things like clean energy. another -- ating number of industrialized countries across the world. host: edward from louisiana on the credit line. edward, -- on the democratic line. edward, good morning. ma'am, please do not cut me off. i was stationed in the military in 1973 at fort polk, louisiana. i was pulling overnight duty

with the national guard. into talking one night, and he told me what was going to .appen in this country the manufacturing jobs were going to go overseas. "if you have kids, get them into the service industry, because that is an industry that is going to grow in this country." also, recently within the past , you have aars thate economist on c-span looked into the lens of the camera and told the american "we are losing manufacturing jobs mainly because they are going overseas because of cheap labor."

we were told that those jobs would not come back. our government has known about the loss of jobs and why they are being moved overseas since the 70's. no one has looked into the lens of the camera and told the what was going to happen. and now here we are. we are almost at that point jobs continue to leave this country, and no one will tell the american people why. host: that was edward. here is a comment on twitter. that is a good question. i do not know the details of that. the was a trade adjustment for workersrogram

that were displaced or lost their job because of trade agreements like nafta. in nafta, there is a retraining component that says you can have extending unemployment insurance if you are willing to go through retraining. that is there to assist you in trying to find a new job. i think that is a very useful and important approach. i think the point that we are increasingly realizing is that those are the kind of programs that we need for our workers in the united states regardless of the reason why you lose your job whether it is because of a job regardless of the reason why you lose your job. whether it is because of automation or some other reason, theou lose your job this -- reason does not matter. you just need the training to

help you move into the next job. that is where we have fallen short in the united states in the federal government providing the right types of programs that are helpful to workers especially. host: martha from texas on the independents line. caller: i would like to say that i agree with the callers. the last man was fabulous. the first lady that spoke about about "rip up." commentators keep saying radical things when he just said examined. you is he was going to going to throw out the criminals. commentators are not saying it properly. the lady that spoke about that

was so right. was -- when ig read about some of these trade agreements, we are restricting ourselves sometimes to third world rules. we are not a third world country. we have to renegotiate where we understand we are not putting ourselves under undue antrictions, because we made agreement that acts like we are a third world country. host: martha from texas. here is the language from donald's contract with the american voter. he says that he will announce his intention to renegotiate nafta or withdraw from the deal. from the peterson institute for international comics -- economics.

guest: we are waiting to find out what that means. we have not found out a lot of clarity about what his priorities are in we negotiating the deal. right now, a trade agreement is a sickly -- is basically an elimination of taxes on goods to travel between countries free of charge. that is what a basic trade agreement is. if he wants to negotiate that, what does he mean by that? the last administration went to renegotiate nafta, they said that they wanted countries like mexico to have higher labor standards and minimum wage laws. the ability for their workers to bargain collectively in the united states. that is what they negotiated for. agreement that donald trump said he is not interested in pursuing, those provisions were in there.

so we are waiting to find out what donald trump has in mind when he says renegotiating nafta. host: tony from colorado on the democratic line. tony, go ahead. caller: glad to get on. obviously, donald trump hanginged on the lowest fruit which was nationalism and protection alyssum -- and protectionalism. trying to seal off the borders as far as trades. i think he's getting it taste of that he is getting a taste of reality after meeting with president obama and -- i think he is getting a taste of reality after meeting with president obama and our country's leaders. can you describe to the american people how deep the recession if we cut down our exports?

secondly, what role does ttp ?lay as an alternative does it help us in terms of foreign policy and keeping militarism out of it? hope the question made sense. guest: thank you. ray questions. on the second one, -- great questions. in the second one, i think the rest of the world will pursue their own trade agreements. countries agreed on a trade agreement, it ultimately shuts out american workers because they are now disadvantaged in that market. if china forms new agreements with all ttp countries that

united states does not have a new agreement with, that is a disadvantage for u.s. companies in that region trying to export their goods and services. brown rom perspective on the 20 16th election results and donald trump election as the next u.s. president. founding editor with american conservative magazine on donald thep's white house win, and future of the republican party in conservatism. to thel reaction action most pressing foreign-policy challenges when he takes office. with ceo and editor of foreign

policy.com. be sure to watch "washington journal" lives 7:00 a.m. eastern sunday morning. join the discussion. >> to talk with the capitol hill reporter about the agenda for the lame-duck congress returns next week. cap at the elections are over, congress returns next week for his lame-duck session. we are joined by senior staff writer with "the hill." you covered donald trump coming to meet with mitch mcconnell. the headline of one of your current pieces says "trump arrives, signals a new chapter in the relationship." how does this play into next week's elections for speaker? does this bolster their chances in the house? >> i think it does.

donald trump votes to make life difficult for paul ryan, saying he would come after him. now that donald trump is the president-elect, died dynamics have completely shifted. the two men that many yesterday were praising each other. paul ryan rolled out the red carpet for donald trump, then brought him back to the capital, where he took them out on the speakers company and showed him the view of the entire d.c. skyline, jo tim the platform -- showed him the platform where he would be inaugurated january 20. the relationship, which has been a pretty testy one throughout the campaign, has completely shifted. >> ahead of the inauguration, congress has plenty to do.

walk us through this lame-duck session next week in addition to the leadership elections. the presidential race has completely changed everything, as one leadership source told me today. the thinking before the election was that congress would try to perhapsn omnibus bill, break it up into smaller pieces with a minibus type of the process that would extend funding through the 2017 fiscal year. now the thinking with republicans controlling both the white house and both members of congress is that congress republicans will try to push for intothat will take funding early 2017, perhaps february or march. that would allow then-president trump and a republican-controlled congress a much better deal

on spending levels than republicans would have gotten in the lame-duck sessions with president obama. victory onld trump's tuesday night changed almost everything in washington. host: on that cr spending measure, let's reference where things stand. let's go back to september 28, an appropriations committee chair on the house floor. >> mr. speaker, i rise to present the senate amendment to hr 5325. this legion -- this legislation includes that your fiscal 2017 continuous resolution, and full-year provisions for military construction and veterans affairs. it also includes funding to fight and prevent the spread of the zika virus, and assistance to communities affected by recent devastating floods. this is a reasonable and necessary compromise that will

keep the government open and operating, addressing urgent needs across the country, and provide the necessary support for our service members, their families, and our veterans. speaker, foremost, mr. this bill helps us avoid the unwarranted damage of a government shutdown by providing the funds required to keep the government operational test our september 30 deadline, the funding invited at the current 1 trillion and last through september 9. just short time frame will allow congress to complete its annual appropriations work without jeopardizing important government functions. secondly, the package contains the full year military construction va bill for fiscal '17, which was conferenced by

the house and senate, and passed already in june. in total, $85.2 billion is provided for our military info structure and veterans health and benefits programs. $2.7 billion above current levels, with targeted increases to address mismanagement and improve operations at the va. it is important to note that once the president signs this bill into law, it will be the first time since 2009 that an individual appropriations bill has been conference with the senate and enacted before the fiscal year deadline. includesis legislation $1.1 billion in funding to respond to and stop the spread of the zika virus. this funding is directed to programs that control mosquitoes, develop vaccines,

and treat those affected. this funding is spent responsibly, balanced by $400 million in offsets of unused funding from other programs. lastly, this legislation includes important provisions that address current national needs, including an additional $37 million to fight the opioid epidemic, which has struck my district especially hard. i believe this legislation is a good compromise that the house should support. it is not perfect, but ensures that we meet our nation's critical needs. i have said many times before standing in this exact spot, that a continuing resolution is

a last resort. but at this point, it is what we must do to fulfill our congressional possibility to keep the lights on in our government. so i urge my colleagues to vote on this necessary legislation. we consider to the president's desk without delay. host: paul rogers from september 28. hill," thatf "the cr runs through section 25, the president requesting additional military spending. the house republican study committee wants a short-term cr into the trunk administration. who will win out in the end? mr. wong: i think it depends on what donald trump wants. she has a lot of political capital. of course president obama has a few months left in his term, and will ultimately be the one

signing any funding bill at the end of this year. but president-elect trump will be dictated a lot of what happens during the lame-duck session. she has the support of the--- he has the support of the voters. members of congress on of the republican side are falling in line with president-elect trump. we have not yet seen any signals about what he wants. i expect there will be a short-term cr into either february or march. host: another on that to-do list is aid to flint, michigan. the house passed that on its waters projects built. the congressman talked about that aid package before they recessed. >> this amendment is something i have been working on for some time. it would bring urgently needed aid to my hometown of went,

michigan. for over a year, the flint water crisis has been public. we have not yet been able to act in congress. it has been even longer since the water residents of flint have been drinking and using water that has been poisoned, poisoned with lead. two full years. to be clear, what happened in flint was a failure of government at every level. through these amendment, congress can take its rightful place in fulfilling its obligation and responsibility to help my hometown recover. the amendment would authorize $170 million to restore the safety of water infrastructure in communities like my hometown of flint that have lead in their water. more importantly, it would create a concrete commitment from both copies of congress to get aid for my hometown to the

president's desk. the senate passed similar legislation i voting 95 to 3. this amendment would ensure that the house also supports communities like flint that are suffering with this terrible problem. we have waited an awful long time for this. he worked very hard to get this amendment in a bipartisan fashion to the floor. i want to thank all of my friends. particularly mr. molinari, who cosponsors this amendment with me. host: michigan congressman dan kildee. that wong, he mentioned the house passed their own measure. what is left to do? mr. wong: the two sides, the senate and house negotiators need to come together and settle on a final product, then present that dr. their present of chambers.

that is another item that needs to happen during the lame-duck session. in terms of flint funding, the house bill that was negotiated by kildee and speaker ryan is about $170 million. the senate bill contains a little bit more -- $300 million. they will probably have to meet somewhere in the middle. the good news for the people of flint is that donald trump has been very supportive of those efforts. he visited flint back in september. he spoke to a number of the residents and has been talking a lot about infrastructure spending on the campaign trail. up in the air, but i would expect the two sides can come together. host: mitch mcconnell also prioritized the defense authorization bill and this 21st

century cures bill. tell us about that briefly. mr. wong: i don't have much information about the senate side. i do know that when mcconnell spoke to reporters the other day, one of his top priorities obviously was the repeal of obamacare. i think a lot of the discussion that will be happening in the lame-duck session will be about what republicans do in the first 100 days of the new trump administration. that was part of what happened yesterday between trump, mcconnell and ryan. reince priebus was there as well, one of the folks being talked about for chief of staff as the white house. what i'm hearing from members today is that a lot of the focus will be on the top priorities of those first 100 days of the trump administration.

probably at the top of that list is repealing obamacare. host: let's talk about senate elections. the senate democrats will elect a new minority leader, with harry reid retiring. it is likely to be chuck schumer. what is that relationship between chuck schumer and mitch mcconnell? schumer is think more of a deal maker compared to harry reid. harry reid was someone who would often throw up roadblocks in the process. and also accuse republicans of doing the same. he was a fiery leader, obviously a former mobster -- chuck schumer is from new york, much more of a deal maker. it will be interesting to see not help -- not how he works across the aisle, but with his fellow new yorker donald trump. that is one relationship i think

all of washington will be watching. host: a preview of the lame-duck session. tott wong with "the hill" on onill.com and scottwongdc twitter. >> george knox was chosen because it was america's most impenetrable location. it was a gold bullion depository. several years prior, there was lots of gold transferred there. secretary of the treasury henry morgan fell gives port of the treasury for these documents. >> on q&a, the decision to move america's most important historical documents to fort knox on december 26, 1941. >> key has to make a decision what documents are going to be there. the originally engrossed declaration -- definitely. the articles of confessional the

-- articles of confederation, sure. the gettysburg address, considered critical. he makes this decision very methodically on what will go to fort knox. these are considered the most valuable documents in the country. the magna carta is the document he has been asked to preserve for the prince. -- for the brits. host: sunday night on "q and a." host: a look at executive and presidential brent transitions -- branch transitions. this is an hour and 20 minutes. those wh