♪ hello welcome to "kqed newsroom." coming up on our show, california congressman adam schiff will discuss this week's events in charlottesville. plus, a one-on-one with carol chris, the new chancellor of uc berkeley. but first, steve bannon is out. president trump fired him today. this comes in the wake of continuing fallout from charlottesville. san francisco city officials are calling on the national park service to deny a permit for a right wing rally later this month near the golden gate bridge. in washington, republican lawmakers found themselves weighing the cost of remaining loyal to president trump after his controversial comments about white supremacists.

>> excuse me, what about the alt left that came charging at -- as you say the alt-right, do they have any semblance of guilt? >> mr. -- >> let me ask you this. what about the fact they came charging with clubs in their hands, do they have any problem? i think they do. i'm not putting anybody on a moral plane. what i'm saying is this. you had a group on one side and you had a group on the other and they came at each other with clubs and it was vicious and it was horrible. and it was a horrible thing to watch. i think there's blame on both sides. i have no doubt about it and you don't have any doubt about it either. >> and joining me now to discuss the political cultural and economic firestorm are a political writer. and welcome to you both. lonnie, steve bannon gone. your reaction? >> well, he may be gone but the influence of steve bannon is not

going to be gone. what's pretty clear he's adopted the nationalist tone and the rhetoric and the language of steve bannon even though his influence has been waning for some time. you look at the president's tweet regarding confederate monuments and statues. and i mean, that has steve bannon written all over it, even though his influence in the white house hasn't been what it was at the start of the administration. so he may be gone, but i wouldn't expect the influences, the nationalist inward looking influences to go away. >> look, this is starting to look like survivor. who's next to be voted off this island? i think you're right, lonnie. a lot of people are watching bannon's departure with a sigh of relief, but the pact is he's -- but the fact is he's had the influence and he's done the damage already. who will fill his shoes if anybody? does jared kushner and ivanka trump fill in the role that they're supposed to which is

somehow bringing back rational and sen -- more centrist thoughts to the president, i'm not so sure about that. i think bannon is going to do a lot of damage back at breitbart. he's going to become i think a figure head for that movement and that group and i think he can work outside the white house and still have a tremendous influence on trump. >> do you think the firing actually enhances his public image at breitbart? because now he has grounds to come back and say, you know, i was there, they kicked me out. let's lead a new movement. >> you know, i don't know that that's what's going to happen. i think if you look at people that have left the immediate orbit, people like corey lewandowski, they remain in contact with the president, remain friendly with the president. jason miller is another one. they remain friendly with

making decisions. gary cohn definitely not your sort of fire brand conservative nor a nationalist. somebody who adopts centrist policy. ivanka and jared, both of them seen as moderate. the interesting question is at some point do they take over, do they sort of put a more legitimate imprimatur coming out of the white house? >> some of the ideas that steve ban an advanced that inference remains on the white house and it's still -- he's had tremendous influence on the alt-right and the white supremacist groups out there. we'll see if that continues. even outside the white house. >> let's talk about charlottesville. it's sparking reverberations here in the bay area as it is throughout the nation. we have upcoming -- the chrissy field rally by right wing groups, two local men who lost

their jobs after it was revealed they were connected to the white supremacist event in virginia. were they appropriate reactions, lonnie, or do you think this is having a chilling effect on free speech? >> let's be clear. there's no room for kkk neo-nazi views in a civilized society. i don't think there can be any debate about that. but it's clear there are differences of opinion about politics. i think people on the right for a long time, not the alt-right, but people who are conservatives have felt particularly in the bay area there isn't an opportunity to express an alternate point of view. so i think the question is what is the sort of right line to be drawn? what is the right line -- the right needle to be threaded if you will? i think that's something that people are grappling with. there's a legitimate set of complaints about the suffocation of an alternative point of view. not of course this sort of crazy point of view that was articulated in charlottesville. but how do you differentiate between the two, that's the problem now. >> one of the big problems i think is both for berkeley and

san francisco. officials here are between a rock and a hard place. if they deny the right of these right wing groups to speak out, then they're denying free speech. on the other hand, we have seen what's happened at berkeley before. so this is a very tough situation, but you have dianne feinstein, you have a growing number of public officials really worried about what could happen. we'll see how that plays out but i think we are going to see more and more of these events. berkeley particularly, free speech has been targeted so many times by the groups. >> and far left groups have come in and created chaos as well. i as not just far right. >> that's right. that's right. >> and also, what we are seeing more and more of in the country is also confederate statues and monuments and symbols coming down. in fact, nancy pelosi now wants to remove confederate statues from the u.s. capitol. we have seen it happen as well in los angeles and san diego. is there a risk here though that we're moving toward revisionist history which is the argument

that some people are making. >> yeah, it's interesting. so my colleague condoleezza rice has actually opined on this very topic. she has said look, there are a lot of these things that may be personally offensive to her. maybe offensive to people she you go up with, but there's a role for these -- for some of the statues and monuments to remind us of a path we don't want to go down. to remind us of a darker period in history. so i think we have to be careful about blanket conclusions. this is something that local authorities have to make a decision about. so if people in l.a. feel like there's a particular monument that's offensive to people there and doesn't stand for anything but values that are offensive to a civil society then they should have the ability to remove those things. i don't think we can make a blanket conclusion. >> should they be in a public space, or be in a museum? if you want to see the history go to the museum. >> that's the conclusion that some places will draw. here's a tough thing. you know, the symbols of the confederacy are so loaded, they

have meaning for so many people in a very hurtful way. that's why this discussion goes beyond merely sort of saying, what is historical, what is respective history and what is not? ultimately we'll review this differently sitting in the bay area from those who live in birmingham, alabama or tallahassee, florida, so we have to be careful to allow the localities to make the decisions. >> isn't this where the president got in trouble in terms of calling them beautiful statues, part of our culture and worse, equating robert e. lee with george washington and thomas jefferson. it's showing a sort of a lack of knowledge about history. that's where i think the real issue lies in the public discussion. i think as lonnie said, yes, history is important to remember robert e. lee's role, but let's not suggest he was in any way on equal footing with the fathers of our country. >> well, he lost. which surprises me that president trump wants to celebrate someone who lost. >> yeah.

>> amid all this, some republicans have spoken out. very few have mentioned president trump by name. some have stayed silent completely. has this caused irreparable damage to the republican party this week? >> i think that it has created some divisions that are not going to heal any time soon. i won't say it's irreparable because in politics people have multiple lives. but there clearly is damage to the relationship between the governing majority in congress and the white house. there are divisions between individual members that frankly the president needs for his agenda. you take a guy like senator jeff flake who has voted for the president's agenda. he voted for neil gorsuch for the supreme court. he voted on the replace and replacement of obamacare and he's something -- not like he can waste his vote. but the president is out there tweeting all of the crazed things about jeff flake. so there is damage and i think in some cases it will be very difficult to repair going forward. >> i think we had a moment here, a line in the sand when you had

senators like bob corker this week raising questions about president trump's stability. his competence in office. >> this is someone who has a cordial relationship with the president. >> i think that's shocking. you see more and more republicans speaking out. marco rubio, ted cruz, you don't want to mention the "t" word this week, trump. you're starting to see them come forward and starting to question the president's judgment. that is a big division. you have seen some republicans, mitt romney included, and arnold schwarzenegger who this week delivered a real jab at trump in a video that got something like 8 million views within a couple of hours. so republicans are starting to speak up. the question as lonnie says it's all about the poll numbers. it's all about where they thi think -- what they think is going to cost them. >> and the poll numbers show that his base is sticking with him. >> yeah.

i mean, you know, there are some polls that have showed a slight dip in his base but it's nothing that is really significant enough for people to say that the base for donald trump has left donald trump. until there is more of that departure politically i think it's going to be difficult for members of congress. by the way, the bob corker thing is really interesting because senator from tennessee. chairs the senate foreign relations committee. he was one of the first supporters of president trump's foreign policy pronouncements, he was a candidate for secretary of state. for him to say competence and judgment and really go to the questions was really significant i thought. >> i want to ask you about the white supremacy groups too. there's a lot of coverage obviously. we're sitting here and talking about it. but at what point is all of this coverage actually helping white supremacy groups because it is amplifying their message. >> i think they have learned to use social media, cable television coverage to great effect and that has helped grow

their -- their audience in a disturbing way. in fact, we are seeing things that we have never seen before in american politics when you had dana rohrabacher, daily caller reporting that a white supremacist holocaust denier helped to arrange his meeting with julian assange. that would have never happened in the past. >> is it an ethical dilemma for reporters like yourself, how much coverage to give? >> this is an issue we have to grapple with. you had vice news this week embedded with thes why supremacists. i think it showed a lot of people this horrifying image of who they are. at some point though you're right. how much do we give them coverage when it comes to some of these rallies and protests and how much are we just amplifying what they're saying. >> i have to wrap up. we have about a minute remaining but i have to ask you this. it seems like lonnie, this week trump and corporate america broke up. >> yeah. >> advisory council -- >> i don't know who broke up with who, but it was a breakup.

>> it started with eight people resigning and then it kind of snowballed from there. >> yeah. >> what's this -- was this a tipping point? is it a permanent breakup? >> well, look, i think in is an interesting thing that's happening which is that you have a constituency that traditionally has been very supportive of republicans. i mean you think about the ceos of the major companies. you think about the business groups. these are people that are very much aligned with paul ryan and thinking of tax reform and they said, look, we cannot associate ourselves with the president. that is a remarkable thing to see these constituencies moving away from a republican president. i never thought i would see that in my lifetime. but we're at dangerous point for the conservative movement an i'll conclude briefly by saying that the challenge for the conservative movement is that there are legitimate conservative views now that are getting comingled with these ridiculous views reprehensible views and it's a time of choosing an presenting a legitimate -- >> a lot going on. lonnie chen, carla, with

politico, thank you both. as we have just discussed the events in charlottesville have ignited debate about race, free speech and our nation's history. joining me now for a congressional perspective on the week's events is congressman adam schiff, the top democrat on the house intelligence committee. welcome to the show. >> thank you. good to be with you. >> what is your reaction to the events following charlottesville? >> i think like most people i was appalled. i was at the time in normandy with my son who is a teenager and we were looking at the bitter cost that was paid to defeat these ideas of racial supremacy and to turn on the tv and see back home these ugly actions by these neo-nazis and white supremacists and the violence and the attack on that woman who came to protest that pernicious ideology. that was just horrible. >> what are your thoughts on the way that president trump responded, congressman jackie speer this week said he should

be removed under the 25th amendment. do you think he should be removed from office? >> i think his reaction was just appalling to suggest that those that gathered to plo test -- protest these nazis and white supremacists were equally to blame was just -- just awful. and reflected i think a complete lack of judgment by the president and some flaw of character that i have a hard time defining. >> do you think the president should be removed from office though? do you agree with congresswoman speer on that? >> i don't know if those comments rise to the level of incapacity in office. certainly this is not a president who i supported or believe in. i think a lot of his actions are imicable to the national interest and whether it's rising to the article 25, i don't know if we're there yet. but you have a lot of people on both sides of the aisles raising serious questions about his

fitness for office. you saw senator corker with some very strong words about the president's capacity that we haven't heard from republicans until very recently. i think that's significant. >> we have seen a number of confederate monuments and symbols come down across the country. there are still confederate statues inside the u.s. capitol representing nine southern states. house democratic leader nancy pelosi has called for their removal. what is your position on that? >> well, i agree with leader pelosi. i think those statues belong in museums, in the proper context so that people can understand when they're erected what those figures' role was in history. but in the capitol, that's a place usually where we have statues that bring the country together that are a source of pride for the country. these statues don't fall in that category and i think they should be in a museum. >> do you think congress should at this point convene a special commission to look into the rise

of white supremacy groups, see what the dangers are? the southern poverty law center says there are nearly 80 hate groups in california alone. >> you know, i think that's a worthwhile idea. what we're seeing in the united states right now frankly we are seeing in other parts of the world as well. we have seen a rise of anti-semitism in europe and particularly in places like hungary. we're seeing, you know, strong anti-immigrant sentiments that were in part responsible for brexit. and i think this is also not unrelated to the rise in authoritarianism around the world. this is a real global challenge. so understanding why this is coming out now, why it's rising to the fore i think is very worthy of our study and every effort to resist it. >> is this something you might call for yourself? convene a special commission on this? >> i would support that idea and i have to say though one of the

things that is most concerning about all of this is that rather than have a president who unequivocally rejects this and tries to bring the country together we have a president making the problem worse and i think just fanning the flames. and more than that doesn't seem to recognize that's what he's doing. a commission can solve -- no commission can solve that problem i'm afraid. >> i want to ask you about the international issue of north korea as well. this week's south korea president moon jae-in said that the president has agreed to seek his consent before launching a military action against north korea. how would you characterize the relations between north korea and the united states? >> well, they have always been, you know, extraordinarily poor given that north korea has been run by mercurial dictators since its founding. i do think they have reached a new and dangerous stage where you have belligerent statements from pyongyang matched by

bombastic statements from our own president. and that's not helpful. i think what is helpful are the sanctions that we obtained at the united nations, putting additional pressure on china to clamp down on the trade of north korea. we have to hope that we can impress upon china the importance of really cutting off north korea's financial and export life line until it comes do the table. to bring about a cessation of the nuclear weapons programs and ultimately a roll back of the program, but the belligerent statements, comments out pyongyang are going to be fire and none of that halts in some ways. 's deeply counterproductive. it's a dangerous situation. i read with interest the comments from south korea. i don't know that frankly you would have a commander in chief say something that broadly if the united states needed to

protect itself we're not going to seek the permission of other countries to do that. >> are you casting doubt on whether or not mr. trump said it at all? >> who knows with this president. i would hope the case that if we were going to embark on any military action that was not an emergent response to a direct attack or impending attack by north korea that we would consult with all of our allies in the region. but i would never as commander in chief give a veto over what was necessary to protect our country. >> we have only three seconds remaining here, but if i could ask you for a quick update on the russia investigation. i know your panel's investigation is continuing but have you had any contact with special counsel bob mueller on his investigation? >> we have. we're doing our best to coordinate with him, with his office. we obviously don't want to take any step that might interfere in his ability to prosecute someone if he finds the evidence to support that. >> are you privy to any of that information along the way? >> well, you know, we're

certainly developing our own information. we have some insights into what the special counsel is doing. but again, it's a relationship of coordination, it's not working hand in hand. >> all right. congressman adam schiff, so nice to have you in the studio thank you. thank you for coming by. this is orientation week for thousands of freshmen at uc berkeley. it's also the start of the academic year for the first woman chancellor. cris must tackle how to handle the future events involving the white supremacists and there have been clashes over having right wing speakers on campus. at a press conference this week, she said she's determined to protect both free speech and student safety. >> we now know we have to have a higher number of police officers ready in order to assure both the safety of our community and to assure that the events that we -- in which legitimate

student groups have been invited can take place. >> i sat down earlier with the chancellor at uc berkeley to talk about her goals for the university. chancellor carol cris, thank you for joining us. >> oh, it's a pleasure. >> well, you first joined uc berkeley in 1970 as an assistant english professor and at the time only about 3% of the faculty were women. >> right. >> you are now the first woman to lead cal in its nearly 150 year history. what is this moment like for you? >> well, nobody asked clark kerr what it was like to be the first male chancellor and yet, people constantly ask me what is it like to be the first woman cans chancellor? of course it's exciting, of course it marks a kind of change in women's opportunities and situations since i joined the faculty in 1970. but i think that if you think of yourself in just a gendered way

in a leadership role that diminish your sense of that, of all the ways in which you lead. >> as chancellor, what are your biggest goals for uc berkeley? >> first i want to rebuild community. the last few years have been hard years for berkeley and the morale is flagging and so i'm -- i'm really focused on rebuilding a sense of community. secondly, i want to enhance the undergraduate experience. a big piece of enhancing the undergraduate experience is developing more housing. in addition, our students, faculty and staff can and should be more diverse than they are. and we are no longer as generously funded by the state as we once were. and so we need to develop a new model that's more dependent on diverse revenue sources. >> part of the student experience is of course tuition for many students. and uc is set to increase its

tuition for the first time in six years. what impact will that have at cal? >> half of our students will not pay that tuition increase because they receive financial aid. i believe that we need a steady policy for very low tuition increases so we don't have the kind of situation that's unfortunately characterized the university of california for a number of years of no tuition increases for a urge in of years and then a -- for a number of years and then a spike in tuition. i myself believe it's appropriate for students whose families can afford to pay tuition to pay modest tuition. >> there has been much talking about free speech here at uc berkeley and given what happened with the milo yiannopoulos appearance, the ann coulter appearance, how much controversy and how much bitterness there was, how would you handle similar situations in the

future? >> so first what i'm going to do is have many conversations at the campus about free speech and about community. then i hope we can model a kind of robust debate between people of sharply divergent views that we have unfortunately lost in our democracy. so that people can understand what civil discourse is like between people who disagree. i believe that berkeley should be able to host people of very conservative views and indeed berkeley does host many of the people, though perhaps not of the controversial profile of either milo yiannopoulos or ann coulter. >> do you think the university mishandled the situations with yiannopoulos and ann coulter? >> no, there was no way we could

see the invasion of the paramilitary group that outnumbered the police and was committed to use violence to stop milo yiannopoulos' event. >> these paramilitary groups show no sign of letting up, so how would you address that? >> i hope we'll be able to create such a strong consensus in the berkeley community that this is our campus and we do not want violence on our campus that that will be a counterveiling force. we have learned how to use the police. >> you succeeded nicholas dirks and his tenure is marked by widespread criticism of his handling of the sexual misconduct situations here. how would you describe your style of leadership? >> i'm a shoe leather kind of person. i tend to be present on the

campus, to be very much engaged with people in all of their various communities. i think that the campus community needs a lot of healing and in part the chancellor does that by her presence. >> well, chancellor, we wish you all the best. >> thank you. and that will do it for us. you can find more of our coverage at kqed.org/newsroom. thank you for joining us.

robert: he's out. under pressure the president's chief strategist, steve bannon, exits the white house. i'm robert costa. we discuss bannon and the political turbulence sparked by the tragedy in virginia. tonight on "washington week." president trump: you had a group on one side that was bad and you had a group on other side that was also very violent. and nobody wants to say that. but i'll say it right now. robert: dea fining moment -- a defining moment. president trump: i think there's blame on both sides. you had some very bad people in that group. but you also had people that were very fine people on both sides. what about the alt-left that came charging at the, as you say, alt-right? do they have any semblance of guilty? robert: another national inflexion point.