welcome to worlds apart. from a week, i'm still until triumphant return of dignity and decency s.s.m. and of the us elections and is just as polarized as america itself. and while i don't buy it, in present system is more likely at this point, willing to bring the rehabilitation of america at home and abroad, that he supporters so intensely crave. while to discuss that, i'm now joined by louis caldera distinguished and junk professor of law at american university, and formerly a senior military official in the obama and clinton, administration's critical dairy. it's so good to talk to you. thank you very much for your time. they are having many world leaders have already congratulated joe biden on winning the elections, even though some states haven't finished counting the votes. and donald trump's camp has been exhausted. its all its legal options. i know that you have supported joe biden from the get go. so on the emotional level i'm, i'm sure it feels right,

but when it comes to american law, due process, the american republic, which requires some semblance of neutrality, g.c. that's actually a sign of respect. the election's over in the united states, we have a tradition that when it is clear who's going to win because they have the majority of votes that are needed for any office and for president, it's the majority of the electoral college votes. even though there are still some technical things that have to do, there are, in some key states have to certify the elections. the certification often doesn't happen for weeks after the election. and yet on election night, you may know whether the margin for the winner is so large that it is impossible for the defeated candidate to catch up. so there may still be 10000 votes to count by the margin is 80000 votes. it doesn't matter if all 10000 votes went for the

defeated candidate, they cannot possibly catch up. that's where we are today. joe biden's margin is so large in all of the states that are being contested, that even though some other states have not finished counting, they still know who won and job. i'm one majority of the electoral college dropout propecia sickle. there are, there is anderson that there is, you know, history, history to dish and there is an emotional side to this question, but then there is a legal side as well, and you were a legal scholar. that's why i'm asking, what makes joe biden president elect at this point? i mean, can you point me and our viewers around the world primary source material? not the media projection. not some speculation. not that even a paul, but a legal document, a legal decision that legitimizes cell designation as president elect.

so democracy depends on very fragile norms, including that the defeated candidate graciously acknowledges that he had lost the election. and then particularly in a presidential context, the defeated candidate says, congratulations to the winner and says we as americans will unite behind you. because your success is important to our country. and my government will do everything it can to cooperate with you in a transition. so that when you become president, you can hit the ground running. they do that even knowing that the formal date on which elections are certified by states by which electoral college votes are cast in state legislatures. and by which those votes are counted in congress won't happen. for another 2 months,

so if i hasten that it applies to you would be his 2nd, contended the winner as well, and joe biden didn't wait in declaring himself president elect, if not in the american su, it's totally up to him, but i am in my life experience informs me that hastiness, especially when it comes to such politically loaded issue has always produces some sort of backlash. they don't mind declaring himself president would work well for joe biden. at this point of time, how do you think? no one descendant 1000000 americans who bolted for trump would react to that. no, no, joe biden didn't wait because the states, although the other they knew on the day after the election that the analytics told them that there was no way trump could catch up in the states where he was leading . they still waited until the states were called pennsylvania was called and put him over the top in electoral votes. and so you count going on in georgia. do you

mean to say that the votes in georgia don't matter for deciding the outcome of this elections? because it since this way, they don't matter for deciding the outcome, because you need 270 electoral college votes. and he already has 279 and the president should be mature and dignified enough to accept that even if georgia went into his column, he would still lose the electoral college vote. he would still lose the presidency . there are even the legal claims that they're making in court, which are completely manufactured. the judges are throwing them out and telling the lawyers you have no evidence whatsoever. you're coming in here with claims, but with no evidence. so they're throwing them out, even if those the claims are minor claims. that in fact, that make, could affect 10100 votes, 50 votes, a 1000 votes, it is not enough to make up the millions of votes, language donald trump lost this election. now speaking about those claims are for

irregularities. i think it here again received the same type of you know, exchanging mutually exclusive opposites that the democrats and the republicans a so used to playing because as i'm sure you know, the trump tests, i'm making an argument that those violations of, by spread that fraud nationwide fraud has taken place, the biden has claimed that there. 'd is it's all one big lie even though there are evidence that there were some irregularities, some deaf people vote if we just don't know because that all of the violations that has not yet. i mean, i have talk of spoken to many election observers and they always say that if you, you would have some mistakes in the course of any election. if joe biden indeed wants to unite the country, you wouldn't be batter for the democrats to say ok if you think there have been some irregularities. if you mistrust the integrity of the both. let's get down to

the bottom of it. of this all. wouldn't that be the best way of reaching out to the skeptics was just, it's just really not true. so 1st of all, we have a very, very, very well developed election administration procedures implemented by people, democrats and republicans. there are republican secretaries are saved saying there was not irregularities now might in california, there's a republican city councilwoman who also has voting in oregon. that's illegal. that has come out recently. you could call that an election irregularity, but one person double voting is not systemic fraud. it is not fraud at the level that it would change millions of votes and change the outcome of this election. professor garet, well there are, there have been instances and they, they're well. 1 documented, i mean, i wrote a post a link to them in the description of this video. they have been instances of people who have long been declared that voting so. it's not just one instance. there are

a couple of them. again, i'm not an actor, but if you're talking about in this election this year, absent is this, look, it is simply not true. and even if, what, if you could show me an instance, a one person like this republican woman who's double voting. that is not enough to change electoral the electoral outcomes. there are irregularities at that scale. the lawyers for trump have women to nevada and said we want to show you that dead people voted. and then by the end of the year they had, by the end of the day, they had filed no papers and they've still filed no papers. and their evidence is we heard someone say, we heard someone say it is called hearsay. it's called, i don't have direct evidence, but i think someone has direct evidence. menu fracturing, people who might know someone who might know something is not the does not have the standard of evidence in a u.s. court of law. ok. now, speaking about the way forward, as i said in the beginning,

it looks far more likely that we are going to see the bidens presidency over the next 4 years than they are there. and there is, there are lots of speculations about what mr. trump will get doing and in that time, and one thing for sure is that he is very unlikely to you peacefully retire the way president obama. deed, do you think trump will continue being a challenge for joe biden, even after the official action results an ounce? and if so, how do you think the democrats should be dealing with that kind of challenge? truckers really undermine democracy in the united states? is we can confidence in our, in our elect, he continued doing that over the next. now we're here 1st because that is, trump, trump has one interest and that is trump himself. that's his only interest is himself. and he is thinking also about his future career after he's president,

including whether he wants to continue to be a voice in a politics or media or his business as that 0400000000 dollars and are in danger of failing as is previous bankruptcy bankrupt. businesses fail. so he will continue to be a create difficulties. yes, he'll do it right up until election day. but at that point, his presidency ends by operation of the constitution. joe biden's presidency begins and he'll take over and he'll begin to undo some of the damage that donald trump has done in america and on the world stage. now i've heard sound bite and supporters and it could be me and the think tank community suggesting that one of the 1st things joe biden should do when coming to office is to launch some sort of legal proceedings against donald trump. and that putting donald trump behind bars and all the airwaves will be and major help or

a major factor in ensuring the success of the future administration. do you agree with that? some sort of legal proceeding. a legal challenge should be mounted against trump, when joe biden has said is that he will let the justice department make its own determinations about whether anything should be done. and whoever is attorney general could appoint a special prosecutor and say, you are independent. you make your own assessments and decisions. donald trump is already facing legal jeopardy in new york state attorney for nonpayment of back taxes. he may have committed other eve being sued by women who the law accused him of rape and assault. so he has plenty of legal problems, and joe biden does not need to put his finger on the scale. joe biden has said he want to unite the country, and he's not going to waste his time being vindictive with respect to donald trump . if there are legal consequences for donald trump species, you're, whether they're criminal, civil, private, or otherwise,

he will have to face those himself based on the evidence and the decisions of prosecutors and lead in those cases. there we have to take a very short break now, but we will be back in just a few minutes. stay tuned. l. look forward to talking to you all. that technology should work for people. i robot must obey the orders given it by human beings, except where such orders that conflict with the 1st law show your identification for should be very careful about official intelligence. and the point over you see, is to trace evidence here conflicting very chummy with artificial intelligence where some of the

robot must protect its own existence. as a new gold rush is underway and gone up. thousands of ill equipped will goes off flocking to the gold fields, hoping to strike it. rich is a good, as by those that work children, a tool in between gold, from me was very poor. i thought i was doing my best to get back to school, which side will have the strongest appeal.

welcome back to will's a bar in bed. louis caldera distinguished adjunct professor of law at american university, and formerly a senior military official in the obama and clinton administrations. professor, you've been very explicit about your endorsement of joe biden, based on security grounds. you argue that donald trump is not fit to be the commander in chief, and maybe that's true when it comes to use the mastic policy. but when you look at that from an international perspective, don't trump for all he's flamboyancy and you may argue incompetence hasn't launched a single new war. whereas president obama, whom i'm sure you hold in a very high regard, had at least 3, bloody wars in the being in syria and yemen started under his purview. sure. president obama over ice president biden seem like nicer guys. but when it comes to the issues over war and peace, when it comes to the issues of global security,

should we actually focus on the record on the actual record rather than at character, the measure of a president success xterm. so 1st of all joe biden's, number one task is get control the pen demick, which donald trump failed to do. we are 5 percent of the world's population and 25 percent of the deaths from the coronavirus is also heavily harmed the u.s. economy, including 10000000, people still out of work. so, number one, job or job, i get the pandemic under control, get the economy going again and help people who are suffering. number 2 is rebuild our alliances and our role in the world. because donald trump has been a disaster, is a mare. first, policy has turned its back on our traditional alliances in nato, and in the end it in asia. and that is what makes the world less secure, not whether there's a firefight. here are a firefight there. if you want to,

you know, donna trying to wave your missile money. how dare i trying to tell me that 3, bloody wars that i just mentioned made the war more secure. donald trump makes the world less secure when he embraces authoritarians, like kim jong il and like lead member putin, like air dog on in turkey. when he embraces authoritarians, do where to in the philippines. when he embraces of or terry's who by leaps human rights and act in anti-democratic ways, he makes the world less secure because of those individuals, it's a name how this is just not a rake in brazing. no, it's either and you know, it has or it's president obama oversaw the destruction, one of the most prosperous immigrant friendly, stable countries in africa that crisis in and of itself and created. that's huge immigrant wave into europe. you know that i know that everybody in police a community agrees on that. that's great. let's see the rise of far right populism

in europe. you know that decision was a finance proportions and you're trying to tell me that whatever donald trump's asked was more damaging than launching the war against libya since 2001, the war on terror and radical islamic fundamentalism. not peaceful islamic countries, but those who, who unleash terror and who started the effort to create a caliphate, isis, all of those forces have been making the world a much more difficult indeed. just place for, for americans and for, and for others in europe and other parts who are all, here's the problem with, with, with troops turning his back on a traditional american allies is that it can lead, it can lead to miscalculation on the part of people like you who didn't like she in china like john, that the u.s.

no longer has the resolve to stand by its allies. joe biden. we believe very clear that america stands by its allies, that countries like russia should not miss underestimate our willingness to stand by our traditional anyone except doesn't mean again, it's in the retorted kill phrases. the democrats like could be. what exactly did that doesn't mean? you know, he, i mean, absolutely like alan to be taking russian. moving into crimea happened under president obama's watch, joe biden was vice president back then. did he stand by his allies in ukraine? do you think? it means that countries like russia should not miss underestimate with things like territorial adventurism that, that will be responded to. and that if you want, if you focus and want to focus on russia, russia did do what it wanted to do when obama was in office. and when biden was by his side, and i don't speak for the administration. and so in due course,

all of those issues he is now president will be one that his national security establishment will address, including can leave us, continues to oppose russia's engagement in the ukraine. you were in the obama administration only a few months in that 2009. so you're all busily responsible for what happened to libya, but many of the people who served that administration at who advocated that campaign against me. i'm talking about susan rice, michele flournoy. they are speculating. it's you consider it for the high positions of power in the by an administration, joe biden, by the way, i think, was one of the very few skeptics who opposed that decision. but obviously he is, vision was not heated. at that point of time. do you think this political establishment, or his believe are all establishment that is clearly coming back to power to

washington? hasn't had enough time to consider what it means by the american leadership in the world and how these american lives should be advanced. do you think these people who spent the last 4 years trying to, trying to oust, did they have enough time to consider how they're going to move forward and whether they're going to stick to the same rules and to the same vision that they tried to endorse during the obama administration, i think he, i think president biden will have very seasoned, very experienced individuals helping him navigate the world stage. and that, that what they will do is underpinned by respect for human rights. the rule of law, the spread of democracy. understanding that we have to have cooperation in global matters, including to address climate change to address pandemics, to try to solve problems or they are including in places like syria where russia's

support of assad has been a disaster. so, and you just haven't asked pacify, because if you know that the level of casualties is how much that my is much lower than the united states was more actively involved. would you have imperial people dying on a daily bases you might consider, since it is a, it's a very complex, difficult world to navigate. none of these problems have easy solutions. we have to find ways to build mutual ties, including with countries that have been our traditional adversaries. they may be adversaries. in our geopolitics, our philosophies of governing whose evolution is they may be adversaries because they interfere in our elections and because of their cyber attacks. so one level we have to respond to them in that manner and at other levels, we have to find ways to cooperate in a, in russia's military docked doctrine. the united states is not identified as an

enemy or adversary, which is a big difference from the americans that's changed on the tram back. and i think 2018, when russia was formally declared the an adversary. do you think joe biden, this president, will continue in the same vein as donald trump seen russia as an adversary and do you thing russia in return should change his doctrine and approach the united states as indeed in that an enemy, with all the consequences, military strategic planning consequences that stem from that change of post. i think a country that attacks the united states elections is attacking the united states just as if it was a military attack. the us needs to respond to that in light time and cannot permit that kind of thing and to happen, nor can we permit threats or attacks on our allies in so that so it's very,

it's very important that russia understand that and act accordingly with, with respect to, you know, metaphysical there, i'm sorry for interrupting yourself and, but it's well known that back in 2011, joe biden personally traveled to russia to talk to allied to mere putin, to try to talk him out of running for president. again. you know, that's as clear an interference in the russian electoral profit process as it again, gad, i mean, i can't imagine putin traveling to, or, you know, his deputy traveling to washington and telling joe biden, a donald trump, what to do. so we have multiple instances of the american interference. i mean, russian elections, but even elections around the world that my question is different. do you think russia, given that and you, administration clearly has an adversarial rhetoric and a formal adversarial post trade towards russia. do you think russia should change, its military doctrine? because u.s., military, military expert,

using russia should start viewing the united states formally as an enemy. i don't advise a russia or unhinge military, but i do think that russia doesn't have a real democracy and would benefit from having a real democracy with free and fair elections as messy as they might be. would benefit from. and you've said that they oppose democracy and that they work to undermine democracy. they're not going to do that. i think, i mean, they're working to undermine democracy in the world. so we have a contest between forms of government of what we believe is the best way to protect me right there you have you live in a country where half of the population believes that that election was stolen from them. and you still lecture hasn't democracy seriously? like if it takes them guts, can i ask you one last question? because i think, and that's not that laughing matter at all, because there have been a number of predictions coming, not only from russia,

but from many european countries, have been the case chief of the defense of being just the latest person to your voice. such concerns, concerns over 30 whole world war. do you think that's likely to happen on did the biden harris presidency? i do, that's just information. i think actually the likelihood of that is information to quote by the u.k. chief of defense that you can record. well, what you're saying right now, but i think that the, i think that actually the world becomes a safer and more secure, under abiding presidency than under donald trump. that he made our nation less secure. and i'm not the only one. there were record number, almost a 1000, former retired general officers, defense officials, intelligence officials, and basters, democrats, republicans and independents who supported joe biden,

who said donald trump is unfit to be president and commander in chief. and even though it was the 1st time in their life, their words were democrats. so what they want and really appreciate your candor, have to say that given the old, if years here in russia concerning potential flare up of conflict, i think that conversations like this need to happen, but we now live in the world of, well rather, joe biden will become president in 2021, which is a very, very different year from let's say, just 1016 when he left office. do you think he's approach you will security will have to stay the same as it was practiced all those years when he was in office or do you think it needs to be changed in accordance with current geopolitical realities? and let's admit, while the democrats were out of power in the united states, a lot of things change and many of your allies. i'm not talking even about your

adversaries, but many of your allies have very, very risky policies. i'm talking about saudi arabia. i'm talking about turkey, many of those allies, and very, very difficult to manage even for the united states. how do you think joe biden approach to those countries should change if change at all? now that is decades of experience on the world stage and as chairman of the senate foreign relations committee gives him both the backgrounds and the perspective to be an effective leader of the free world. and i think you'll do that, you know, in a very responsible manner. and that he, his priority is to get the us recovered from the pen damage to get our economy strong again and to work locally for cooperation to address issues like climate change that that's those are, those are his priorities. yes, of course, always to support a u.s. values, human rights, democracy, protection of minorities,

of minorities, another and other groups. you know, those are the, his priorities are going to be aligned with traditional american values. ok. well best of luck to him. definitely, and thank you very much for talking to us. it's been a great pleasure talking to you and a great honor. as i said, you are going to be with you about that and thank you for watching. call to see you again here on the worlds apart next week.

the impossible soup wolf was to be pushed for a trip to wu club or was if you're sure the movie border doesn't actually matter. vegetable would've been murdered by hugo when you're all of those going to use the bunkers. those told me jamie was in the movie, confused with it would seem more serious, but it's the most severe. some of it is in your speech. come off and use the i'm the 20th century was thing in or of revolution. the great depression and world wars, the 21st century of mental illness. those aren't my words. that's what surfaced some psychiatry to tell us. the only question is should we accept it as a fact? yes or no?

in the store was it shaped the way care or not tina story. peace deal brokered by moscow was signed by media and disappeared. john, ending almost 2 months of bloodshed in nagorno-karabakh rush minutes or in the region to uphold the troops was i mean, while i mean, eons have been taking to the streets of the capital, the keys in the country's prime minister, the trial of branding the troops a humiliating defeat in america, clashes break out between donald trump supporters and counter protesters that is thousands to send.