at its core it's about a set of beliefs and practices about improving the quality of individuals and populations for their collective future. susan: is it always controversial? ms. nurridin: it has been, yes. it is a tough call because there are a lot of questions of when do we sort of go wrong with eugenics. a lot of historical actors i look at in my work really believed there was a right way to do eugenics and a wrong way to do eugenics. nowadays it is a bit more controversial because of the types of associations we have with the term. the questions never really go away. the idea we can improve people on a biological level is still inflected in a lot of scientific practice. susan: as you pursue your phd you have a particular area of interest. would you explain what you are delving into? >> it is still a very preliminary but what i'm interested in looking at is the ways in which african americans use these ideas of racial science to think about racial improvement and racial equality. thinking about how science and medicine can be mobilized for the political project of black liberati

it's crazy. >> we do talk about it. these are i guess -- >> what would cnn talk about? >> we would talk a lot more about the issues. because he is tweeting a lot this weekend -- you mentioned comey. the president repeatedly has called him a liar just hours after comey's memos were released the president tweeted this. james comey's memos show there is no collusion and leaks classified information. here is my question. how can the president have it both ways? >> very easy. first of all, comey said conflicting things on his own book tour this week. he can't keep his story straight when he is out there among what he thinks is hero's welcome with mainstream media. many people pushed back at him last week. this is jim comey who in the memos never says the president of the united states obstructed justice and told the president he was never under investigation. he has proven leaker and liar. by the way, ask nobody else no other than andrew mccabe his attorney was pushing back on jim comey and arguing about criminal referrals because of lying about leaking to the press. lying a

there are opportunities that talk about so much more about what we want to talk about through the lens of the opioid epidemic. and we also know that upstream interventions would mitigate not just opioid -related issues but all the issues that you care about. as i said to audiences, we've been trying for years, for decades to get people to pay attention not just to addiction, not just the mental health but to the social determinants that exist in all communities but especially communities of color. we've got a great opportunity now for folks who want to talk about that. i was a cabinet meeting and you have ahead of the secretary of labor, the had of hud, agriculture, all these folks talking about social determinants of health. you have a great opportunity here and i have to say great and miss the tragedy but it's a unique opportunity to really push public health or the lens of the opioid epidemic if we're willing to ride that way. i want to close by stating that every single one of you in this room, every single one of you and i talked to people who've been in public health for a while,

make the story was about the oval and more about america. at allthe president has times and understand i respect the office of the presidency and i also respect the president. and i takeesident pride in who we are as americans. thereere are times when are certain things the president really doesn't need to tweet about. he needs to find the discipline, the judgment, the temperature -- the temperament to not always respond because he sets the tone for the country. i don't think he understands the impact that has around the world. the president needs to do a better job of finding in himself to bring the country together instead of always feeling that he has to respond to everything. the president has done a lot of good that often is overlooked. democrats saidth would be the worst thing since sliced bread. they are more interested in winning and demonizing the president instead of working with him. talking president is about in terms of immigration, restoring credibility and creating jobs and opportunities. even talking about putting the nationa

what about comey? what about comey? how about that? so, comey, how about this guy comey.er night the fake dirty dossier, and he said the other night on fox, and he said very strongly, no, i didn't know that it was a paid for by the democrats and hillary clinton. he didn't know. he didn't know. how about that. they start something based on a document that was paid for by the dnc and hillary clinton. honestly, folks, let me tell you. let me tell you, it is a disgrace. we have to get back down to b business. it is a disgrace what is going on in our country, and they did that, and they did that to admiral jackson. they are doing it to a lot of people. innuendo, and you know, in the old days when the newspapers used to write, they would put the names down, and today, they say, sources have said that the president trump -- sources. they never say who the source is, because they don't have source, and the sources don't exist in many cases. they don't have sources, and the sources in many cases don't exist. these are very dishonest people, many of them. they are very, very dishon

but he is talking about something that nobody really knows about but basically paints a -- kind of a lorta lynch in a bad light clearly. >> so i pointed out in one of the issues people like jim and i and jim clapper and phil mud and others have. the president doesn't seem to be constrained by norms anderson. one of the great dangers we have in pointing that out and arguing against it we are tempted to break the norms of our own profession as well. and here is an example where i think jim overreached he put it out there. it's not a question of classification. it's a question of he put the dark cloud over the former attorney general and since it remains classified she has no ability to identify or push back against this -- this apparent accusation. i just think that's an unforced error and that should should not have been in the book. >> director hayden thank you so much. >> thank you. >> i want bring in our panel. alice stewart and frank bruni. molly what stands out to you in this. >> so much. but i mean to me it's the overall portrait that comey paints and the thing the general was t

tell me about import about this, that about-face. we'll talk about what the president had to say, first talk about this point of the president's speech. >> if there is a connection between the russian lawyer and the russian government, then that gets closer to a direct link between the trump campaign and the russian government. not just a happenstance possible meeting to discuss some russian law that has to do with child adoptions. no, that would tend to show that there's a direct nexus between the trump campaign, that meeting, and the russian government. that could implicate several different laws. and that could be the connection that the mueller team is looking for. trump's position, as he just stated, is that there's -- the more evidence of collusion that there is, is more evidence that russia is conjuring up evidence of collusion. at least that's basically what he just said at the rally in michigan. so trump has an answer for this new evidence. but you can guarantee the mueller team is going to take that apart to demonstrate whe

a lot to talk about. but i want to bring in now cnn contributor, john dean, who was a nixon white house special counsel, cnn counterterrorism expert, phillip mudd, and cnn analyst, ryan lizza. thank you all for joining us this evening. i have to get to this "washington post" reporting, very interesting, john dean, you first. they are reporting tonight that as part of negotiation with the president's attorneys that the special counsel robert mueller told them that while he is still investigating the president, still investigating the president, he does not consider him a criminal target at this time. remember the president said, i'm not under investigation. well, they said, he is under investigation, he's just not the criminal target at this time. what does that mean, john? >> well, it doesn't mean a whole lot in this context, to me. first instance, as a matter of policy of the department of justice, he can't be a target, really. a target is somebody they're going to indict. and the president by the policy

complaints about china, complaints about immigration.tement after statement that just flat outbreak the fact check machine. like this. >> in many places like california, the same person votes many times. you probably heard about that. they always like to say, oh, thats c that's a conspiracy theory. not a conspiracy theory, folks. millions and millions of people. >> that performance put in full force the dilemma for republicans that are not so trump friendly. that's the conversation for 2018. if you're a republican in a place that's in play, that's vulnerable where the president doesn't have 100% approval right like he does in west virginia, would that make you more likely, or dairy vre i venture, less li to let the president in? >> before that one he was campaigning for the guy who lost in pennsylvania whose name is escaping me right now. >> rick saccone. >> thank you. rick saccone. the president is getting bolder and bolder and now tossing papers. if you're worried about whether trump will be about you, it's not about you at all. >> all

how we talk about it. the question is why if there's a box of puppies in a pedestrian, which with the automated car decide to hit? that's important but it's very forward-looking and touristic. it's not what's happening right now. because of my experience i understand that poor and working people are already working in that future. so to acknowledge that is important to rob ourselves as a community of important insights of how these systems can work particularly when they're developed and tested in communities with low expectations that their rights will be respected. so it's like what i think of the loan rights environment what i want to do is tell you about the different systems that i talk about in the book. i'm not can i go into the technical details but kathy may push me so will do that later. but i wanted to hear about the families who are targets of the tools who have important information about how they work. >> the three stories i tell, the first is an attempt in indiana to automate and privatize a

i have written a lot about reconstruction but this book is about going much earlier and talking about the things that ended up in reconstruction policy, especially the 14th amendment, had their origins. >> fantastic. thank you so much. everyone, please join me in thanking her. [applause] >> we would like to open it up for questions. just a note because this is being recorded. please speak up when you ask your questions. >> from your perspective, was there anything you would consider a new insight into lincoln that evolved from washington? kate: definitely. if you do not consider things like establishing elizabeth's existence, and her relationship, one thing that is significant from washington's work and verifiable in documented records is how lincoln seems to have treated people who worked for him. a lot of the people that washington is writing about are employees of the white house and employees of the lincoln's and who worked for the lincolns. there is a story, to stories about two men who had worked for the lincolns in different ways. lincoln worked really hard to get them jobs in

did i hear about it? you're darn right i heard about it. i can't even repeat the language that the heard. >> did rudy giuliani and therefore the trump campaign have advanced notice from inside the fbi, from the new york field office or wherever, that this announcement from you was coming? >> not that i know of but i saw that same publicity and so i commissioned an investigation to see if we could understand whether people were disclosing information out of the new york office or any other place that resulted in rudy's report on fox news and other leaks that we were seeing in the media. i don't know what the result of that was. i got fired before it was finished, but i know that i asked that it be investigated. >> did you -- you write in the book about how the new york field office, how some agents in the new york field office had been leaking information related to the clinton investigation. you talk about that on page 208 of your book. i read it many times. >> thank you. >> whether or not they were behind those leaks to rudy giuliani, did

articulated about what we think the first amendment is about.it should not just be a one-way interchange with teachers pouring information into the student. students have something to say, too, and it should have input, too. it should not be an enclave of totalitarianism. it does say substantial and material disruption. i had a situation where a student was wearing a black lives matter shirt to school and arizona. the administration was saying there had been an argument between her and another student a few days earlier. well, that is not a substantial disruption. but as soon as the school can use the ruling, actually at times against students -- and they do all the time, saying it was a substantial disruption. it also pretty much, prior review comes in there, because if you can predict a disruption now, it is also something -- erik: things you could never do with grown-ups, to restrict grown-ups speech. you can do based on some of the qualifiers in tinker. this gets cited all the time, not for the qualifiers, but for the higher principles. susa

the fact of the matter is most people are concerned about the economy, about their taxes, and about north do you believe his memos? >> i don't believe him. >> you don't believe his memos? >> i believe this. i believe the memos vindicate the president in this regard. >> you're missing my point. do you believe his account of his meetings with the president? >> i think they were carefully written thinking ahead that he would have a problem. >> were they accurate? >> no, they're not accurate? >> they're not accurate? so he walked out a room and five minutes later wrote something that didn't happen? >> you talked about truth telling. there's going to be an inspector general investigation. let's see if this guy is one of the leakers. he says in it, i hate leaking. >> i'm talking about the conversation with the president. >> he says i'm against it. >> you're doing -- >> i'm not doing that. [ overlapping voices ] >> you're saying comey is a leaker. [ overlapping voices ] >> it's no big thing that we spent the week talking about stormy daniels and what might have happened at the ritz-carlton in ru

this class is about an hour and ten minutes. >> so today i'm going to be talking about the strategy. the republican south and the origins of the modern right and we have been talking a lot in this class about the history of the american south and it's relationship to right wing politics from the 19th century on through the 20th century and in recent weeks we have been talking about in particular the revolt of 1948 and the rise of massive resistance. now we talked about the third party movement in 1948 which signals for the first time in national politics this kind of, beginning to see the crack up of the solid south, right? the solidly democratic style that existed since the early 19th century really and we have also been talking in recent weeks about massive resistance. and george wallace was one of the figures that emerged out of the politics of massive resistance. so we're picking up the story there in the early 1960s to look and see what was going on. it's clear by the 1960s that white southerners, the conservative white southerners are fleeing the national democratic party. it's

children we're talking about post earthquake i mean look at the situation sophie we're talking about two thousand and ten the catastrophic politike earthquake that killed over three hundred and ten thousand haitians that made over two million haitians homeless and then you have this army of n.g.o.s coming in and that's where oxfam comes in with a director who has been recycled in different other n.g.o.s. as a sexual immoral person to me he's actually. he was in liberia and fired by a british in g.-o. in liberia in two thousand and four this role in person. and then he was recently and he was recruited by. and he had what they say i mean it's so nasty what he was doing callignee less sex that's beastie ality that's orgies with people who have lost everything and are looking at these charitable organizations as. their savior come to help give. their savior is yes and this is not just oxfam we have the un doing the same thing so you have to talk a lot of enters coming in and we don't talk about the u.n. further down in our interview so only the u.k. division of oxfam has been banned oth

how about economists? how about climate scientists? how about a fortune teller? a fortune teller is a professional. how about somebody who writes an advice column for parents? wouldn't we be getting into very dangerous territory if we do this? >> so justice, there is a lot there. i want to make a few points. i think the third second's opinion does a nice job of this. the court already talked about professional speech. now it's often talked about it in the context of commercial speech and lumped them together in cases like zouder. but what we tried to do in our brief is say there are similar doctrines. this he overlap. but they have different origins and historically there are certain professions regulate that's wouldn't include fortune tellers or journalists. it would include doctors and lorz and maybe accountants. and so we do think that there is some room for the states historically in that area. what we tried to say is whether it is zouter or some equivalent or professional speech, if it's a disclosure about what you're doing that, is a low level of strut y sc

her class is about one hour. morning.out: good today we are going to continue our investigation of american environmental history through the lens of nuclear testing. firstday we had our conversation about "savage dream," which has this really interesting structure that is not at all chronological. i really pleased with the ground we covered during our discussion of the first half of her project, loosely centered on the nevada test site, but moves back and forth to engage things like indigenous homelands, the study of physics before and after world war ii, the history of the test site itself, as well as anti-nuclear activism in the 1980's and early 1990's. today i will go back over what they explore, as well as more depth and context for what we might call one of the lines of convergence. will look at mid 20th century science projects, to examined different frames of the nevada test site, and close by thinking of questions of risk and scale in our contemporary moment. by way of getting us into the proper mindset,

in the world we read about ai we think about a day when it's all at once. each piece advances them are ready living in a world where it's in pieces. we don't always stop and think about it. bmw has a feature in a car called a pedestrian alert. the car has a camera it recognizes a human being. the car will display the red icon even in the dark of night and the driver doesn't see the pedestrian. the car will be been apply brakes. that's an element of artificial intelligence. were taken out called steno. you can bring it to a meeting and it one it will record and transcribe what is said. it's understanding human speech. nonwork with a hundred% proof collection. but neither do human beings. the real test is when will the computer get as good as an average human being. is making progress in these areas. rescind this with language translation. one of several things where you can speak in one language and the computer will show the written word in another language. it's not far-fetched to go to a meeting and you can people who speaks ten different languages. inste

let me tell you a short story about the development of the index over the years about the impact of one of the indicators used in the index to evaluate the companies. i fondly remember coming to the first major private meeting of experts that rebecca convened in america to get feedback on her ambitious goal. it was in the fall of 2012 before i even worked here and from there it was three long years of hard work building, refining and applying the first version of the indicators leading to the publication in 2018. in that first corporate accountability index there is one indicator just one that every single company got a zero on. this was the indicator asking whether the company regularly published data about how much had been down because of its violation of terms of service. at the time of the many companies published data about government demands for information about government demands for takedown and about copyright -based civil demands no one reported anything about the content they were taking down voluntarily based on their own content guidelines even though there was clearly th

about him.e is selling moonshine and driving fast cars, and meeting pretty ladies. [laughter] as it is usually told, when the history of nascar is explained, the sport grew up out of informal races between liquor drivers in their souped-up cars. what you would do after you went to asheville, knoxville, atlanta, and you delivered your alcohol, you would sit with other drivers and say, who has the fastest car? and you would start to race. that is the story. tim is an early nascar champion, and he explained it the same way. it got started in the mid-1930's in a cow pasture, no safety equipment, just a bunch of bootleggers who had been arguing all week about who had the fastest car, and they would get together and prove it. so there is this spirit that i have been trying to talk about, mainly this stuff, that gets you channeled into a sport, that we will eventually call nascar. tim continued, 30 or 40 of these bootleggers showed up, made a track by running around and digging their heels in the groun

yet that i'm proud about it and i'm excited about advancing issues i care about that and that is what i'm most proud about. >> and lastly, i find it hard to believe that january will be the last time you're on the political scene. i find it hard to believe that you won't run for senate or governor or president some day. you're shaking your head. you don't think -- there is no chance you'll reenter politics. >> not while my kids are growing up. and not in -- i don't see that. i really thought when i took this job, jake, this is the probably last elected office i would have. i'm not going to run for president. that is not my plan. i will not do that. i want to spend time doing the things that i've just discussed doing. i'm always going to advocate for the causes that i have but right now the last thing i'm thinking about is running for something. >> i believe that. but we'll see. i'm going to believe that we'll see. because your kids are teenagers, they'll be out of the house soon enough and that is why you're going home. >> i really don't think i'll change my mind, but thanks, jake, ap

talk about everything you are feeling. talk about the injustice.k about what happens in society. me as a white male, i don't know this world. i have a whole different experience when i am pulled over by the police. tell my world what happens in your world. so i kind of want like, i said, ok. i did it and started performing the speeches in a lot of places. i started winning a lot. a newspaper wrote an article about it. this basketball player is doing the speeches and talking about playing basketball and the police profiling them. i said, wait a minute, i got attention from it just because i played basketball, when there are all these people i know for who this happens all the time. that's when i found my voice. i just continued on from there. brian: that was about 23 years ago. etan: that was a little while ago. brian: what happened next? etan: i went on to syracuse university where i continued to use my voice. when i was younger, i was always taught about the athletes that use their voice and use their positions and their platforms, my mother taugh

they are trying to destroy a man. >>. >> he is clearly venting not just about jackson but about his long time lawyer as well. >> he had put forth the nomination. you could question their preparation to put someone who had been lifetime military into the political realm. there is a lot of evidence against that. what we saw is someone who had wanted to answer these charges but the pressure became so great in part what he said in a statement is i did not expect to have to dignify notaries public attacks on my character and integrity. these have become a distraction for this president. today he decided he has not and with drawn. >> i want to bring up what's happening right now. that's cabinet chaos with scott pruitt too. this is potentially a big moment for pruitt. that's his tie on the screen. walk us through what's happening on the hill and the president calling out john tester in a really explicit way for bringing up these accusations against ronnie jackson. here is the president talking about tester, listen. >> for john tester to start bringing up stuff like candy man and the kind of thi

jim knew about the environment, about nature. i think bill appreciated pretty scenes but not quite a naturalist like you. as for me, i think of my favorite woody allen line, i am two with nature. i want to mentioned, too, bill loved -- do you remember this, roger? gadgets. a great gadget man. could be fascinated by anything new. jim one christmas late in bill's life gave him an indoor/outdoor thermometer, which he thought was pretty cool. he was always buying batteries which exasperated pat, as so many things did. bill would disappear for awhile. >> and so many people. >> where is bill? out to buy more batteries, surely. but at least he never ran out. well, we have specific charges. katherine is to talk about faith. roger is to talk about sailing. i believe we can say recreation and leisure as well. i'm to talk about music and artsy-fartsy stuff. i want to say before turning to kathryn, she told me she's at the tail end of a cold and i'm reminded of james taylor. i was at a james taylor concert once. >> this is a transition that'

about 15 points. let's show you what's happened overnight in asia as we flip the board around you're looking at red arrow in japan. but green arrows on the hang seng and the shanghai composite. let's show you european equities treasury yields as we get ready to talk about some big news making headlines you're looking at the ten-year note, 2.795. >> just pinned up there. 2.8% here are the big stories the head of the imf out with a warning on trade christine lagarde says the entire global system is at risk as the u.s. and china go head to head over trade. she urged governments to steer clear of protectionism of all forms. >>> we're watching crude prices after a 3% jump during yesterday's session. that was overshadowed by mark zuckerberg's apeernls pearance hill crude approaching $66. syria not a significant oil producer, but tension in the region can put crude markets on edge >>> "wall street journal" reporting sprint and t-mobile restarted merger talks they called off previous discussions in november a

are we talking about?ay two thirds of african americans live in what would be described low opportunity settings and 40% of black children live in very low opportunity settings and they don't have much in the way of economic mobility because they're living in a place where there tends to be disinvestment in the majority of black kids are in segregated schools and have in this country what i call opportunity hoarding. direct, horizontal competition between high opportunity and low opportunity places we tend to disinvest and over police and have a lot of black kids in schools where no one says it out loud but let's disinvest in the school and give them the weakest teachers and often teachers who aren't certified to teach what they have and everywhere you turn if you are in a low opportunity settings you are constrained in terms of access to jobs and access to education and access to network. that is what i mean by housing in the. >> we put a lot of this on black students especially. we say the way out is to

allegations about dr. ronny jackson, picked by the president to head the va affairs department, that he wrecked a government vehicle on drunk, and that on at least one occasion he could not be reached when needed because he was, quote, passed out drunk in his hotel room. then there's a claim that dr. jackson provided such a large supply of percocet to someone from the white house military office, it threw his own staff into a panic. those allegations are laid out in a document by democrats on the senate veterans affairs committee, based on allegations of 23 current and former colleagues of dr. jackson. that is stunning, serious allegations by 23 people who know dr. jackson. yet sarah sanders says he's been authorly vet -- thoroughly vetted and investigated. and in the same breath said that none of these allegations came up, which they certainly would have in anything remotely close to a vetting process. now white house sources say president trump is beginning to wonder out loud if dr. jackson should step a

it was about the trump brand. the president says things that are ideological, but he has no real ideology other than himself, and honestly, and people like me don't use the word unprecedented lightly, but that's as near as unprecedented as we can get in the history of the republic. >> one thing comey says in the book when he talks about trump's personality. he said he was struck by the fact in all the meetings the president never laughed. he says after having one of the meetings with the president, comey went back and googled and looked up youtube videos to try to find examples of the president laughing, and he writes about this in his book. he says i expect his inability to do so is rooted in deep insecurity. his inability to be vulnerable or to risk himself by appreciating the humor of others which on reflection is really very sad in a leader and a little scary in a president. >> that's an interesting read. i'm sure a lot of americans are going to be catching up on some of the excerpts we're talking about over t

it reads about what happened and decided to do what to do about it. if it can't read the original story because nobody was there, then the local television station doesn't know what happened at the school board. and these things are very closely linked. and if there's something that is very important for this country to wrap its arms around, it's going to be what is the model of community journalism. when i was in television, i worked for three newspapers in three different cities. each city had a competitive newspaper environment. competitive newspaper environments almost don't exist anywhere anymore. they barely have a single heavy weight newspaper anymore. community journalism, that place within a community where people talk to each other, learn about each other and cover a community events and participate in that experience either in covering it or watch iing it is an experien we're less andless familiar with than it we were just ten years ago. and in the era of donald trump, "the new york times" the big corporations and the big newspapers have fo

how much of this is about jeff bezos? how much is about re-energizing his base? >> that's a great question. the president often conflates jeff bezos dual role as owner of amazon and "washington post," even though those are two separate entities. he's attacking amazon as a proxy for attacking "the washington post" for the coverage of his administration which he doesn't like. in reporting the story, i've reached out to amazon and they've made clear when the post office writes deals for package delivery, by rlaw, those deals have to be written in a way that it is profitable for the post office. postal service officials say yes, they are losing money year over year in part because of the huge retirement obligations they have to pay out, but that one of the bright spots of its financial picture is actually package delivery of which amazon contributes a great deal. on the merits, the president's arguments just don't hold up. so what we're left with is what you suggest, that he's trying to find something here to energize the base, again, as we head into a midterm electi

it wasn't about the war anymore. it was about a domestic policy. and i think walking into the tough neighborhood they had spent their day speaking at notre dame. and he had been speaking at ball state. how can you have such faith in this country he said i just do. how things work in a make out in the country. they're not working out. they rise it to the neighborhood. they thought there would be a riot. this -- the cops would not had squared them. they went to the evening news. and the guy next to them said i don't know yet. so whatever was in him he thought he could talk to them. and he was awkward again. what an awkward thing to say. but to bobby it was a way of saying something about i know of the hora. the crowd understood. there never was any in indianapolis. it was the case at a time when very few white people did. they get to know pretty well. i know lily martin pretty will they also got a lot more rapport with white people. i think that makes sense. that's where they came from. eventually. i think the irish. his brother was killed he went up

i am very excited about it. we are second amendment advocates but we think there are things we need to do to bring about gun safety in our state. i received good news today. i will shine some shoes when i get home tonight. do is be theing to best governor i can be. this will sound like politics. christopher shays and johnson a knew -- john nson sununu said keep your answers short. i am trying to be about stability and objectivity in our country and unifying. i have decided, as i look at the landscape, that the far right and the far left, god bless them, but, they are not the ones i will be able to change. maybe not right now. i look for those folks who are people who can be objective. who can look at the truth. and can have a civil discussion about how we address the problems that we have in our country. the people on the far right, many of them feel as though they have been taken advantage of and ripped off. and ignored. it does not mean we ignore them. but as a community, we need to address their problems. we

and the point about trust. there's an monmoth poll asking, is facebook doing enough to stop the spread of fake news, not doing enough at 69%. i know you know a lot about polling. how are they doing on that front? >> i think they've gone very much on an apology tour as a strategy, quite different history seems to be repeating itself. i worked with bill gates when he was called before congress. look, this is going to be i think a relatively tough setting for mark zuckerberg. it's one of the first times he's asked questions that are fully not in his control. there will be a number of cross currents here. i think interest in news, interest in cambridge analytica, interest in privacy, his advantages that no one has a clear kind of ability to develop questions. the public basically is in the dark about technology platforms. they don't understand what news is moved, how it's moved, how much power there is in this data. the op ed, i say, look, you can't have facebook both be a common carrier and media company. it's got

the president has weighed in on twitter about that lawsuit, about the 2016 election. the president writes, so funny. the democrats have sued the republicans for winning. now he r's counter and force them to turn over a treasure trove of material including servers and e-mails. so a bit more concisely saying what he said in that earlier tweet about what might come out of discovery. give us a sense of what the president's been up to here on what is the second to last day of his trip down to florida. >> hey, david, well he has no public schedule. i can tell you this morning he was sort of shuttled off to golf. the intent, we assume, was to get in a round of golf before the funeral for former first lady barbara bush began. so on his way to the golf course is when he fired off those tweets about that "new york times" story, suggesting that michael cohen might flip on him. i know we'll talk about that later. since then he's returned to mar-a-lago, where apparently he's watching cable news, we believe msnbc based on the timing of that tweet, and what i believe you were report

especially about something you're not asking about.t tends to reflect a consciousness of guilt. >> you have noticed that in past interactions as a prosecutor if somebody is lying about stuff you haven't asked about, that is a tell? >> two tells. if they bring things up you didn't ask about it and if they bring things up. then make a false statement about it. it makes you concerned about something that may be going on with that. >> it sounds like president trump did that a lot with you. brought up you didn't ask about. >> correct. i don't know what was in his head. maybe when he said, he thought he didn't stay overnight. but he definitely said that. >> next question from carl fredericks, a professor here. carl? >> hello. what else do you think putin might have on trump that makes trump reluctant to criticize russia? is it proof that russian organized crime money has been laundered through trump's business? >> i don't know and i am not in a position to speculate. i was struck that the president was reluctant to criticize president putin

well, let me tell you a short story about the development of the index over the years and about the impact of just one of the indicators used in the index to evaluate the companies. i fondly remember coming to the first major private meeting of experts that our founder rebecca convened at new america to get feedback on her goal of an index. in the fall of 2012 before i worked here. from there it was three long years of hard work, building and refining and applying the first version of the index leading to the first publication of the first rankings in 2015. one indicator that every company got a zero on. an indicator ask if the company published data on how much context it took down because of violation of terms of service. at that time, they published government demands information and take downs and about copyright based civil rights demands take down, no one reported anything about the content they were taking down voluntarily based on the content guidelines although that was the largest category and most impactful on users free expression rights. based on the growing consensus range of

about . the truth is for this aspect of rex that i don't really understand it so i'm going to go to the tribune and read their explainer let's talk about the decline of local news that's an issue you're interested in because it's not just here about reaching for objective truths in big. changing events it's also about looking into small corners of the world where local journalists used to do the digging into anymore because the model has fallen apart the avatars go on and you can perhaps once again fill that gap yes so i'm really interested in the problem of local journalism the number of journalists left to keep an eye on the p. banks so to speak right to keep an eye on what's going on is so small now that we run a real risk of seeing a lot of local corruption a lot of a lot of bad things happen when nobody is paying attention so i think this is a fundamental problem that we need to really focus a lot of attention on trying to solve and my thinking here and we're not yet doing local it would

report about the allegations? >> no, there was not. >> reporter: how much vetting of the house before you were formally announced as the nominee? >> i appreciate it. >> reporter: you are going to continue this process, sir? some of the choreography of this, you saw him meeting with senator moran of kansas, the number two republican on the veterans affairs committee. dr. jackson has already met with a lot of the senators on this committee before these allegations surfaced late last week and over the weekend, which means unless he does a whole second round of other interviews with these folks, we may not see these things come out, we may not see senators get a chance to ask him about this, until if he does ultimately have a confirmation hearing which means it will all happen in public. that's a particularly brutal way to go through this. i bring that up in part to also point out that even some democrats who are probably not folks who would have voted for jackson in the first place have expressed to me they almost fe

you talk about examples where ai can help society but you also talk about issues with it. how do we go about regulating and mitigating these negative concerns. >> there's two things, one in general if you look at it in objectives terms with human development indicators, the increase in wellness of humanity is correlated with the development of scientific process. the overall thrust of headed in the right direction artificial intelligence just an area of work is the area of work. in his new discoveries in a broad range. attempting to curve, stopper drastically reduce the effort that people can apply would be disastrous for scientific progress. what was talked about, this was a difficult call. another difficult from the book i was cited earlier researchers has been done judges were adjudicating cases on folks out for perl. there was a timeliness to whether they would accept or deny the cases. around noon they would start to have a high rate of rejection. in the morning it was high tape or fellow then after 1:00 o'clock it increase. after the psychologist in the study they sa

about dr.artin luther king and malcolm x., you can go down the list of people who sacrificed their lives to be able to stand up for what they believe in, especially in that time. period, that is what makes them even more courageous. we are blessed be able to say what we say and have a certain level of criticism. our lives are not threatened the same way. you're not dealing with situations of cap or neck or lebron james. you see the level of criticism that they receive, it is completely different. >> how did he die? by, thereassassinated it.a lot of haziness around wasou ask how dr. king assassinated, there is a short answer but there is lot behind that as well. >> do you think that he was assassinated by someone of his own race? >> yeah. >> somebody close to the leader? >> -- and, it is abi complicated answer. >> why would somebody -- what do you think the reason would be why someone would want to assassinate him? >> the same reason you would want to assassinate anybody at the time. you would k

it's about -- not even about donald trump. it's about something much broader that i thought it was important to talk about now. >> i was just going to say, is your -- what's the goal for the reader? what do you hope the reader takes away about donald trump and what do you hope the reader takes away about the fbi? >> i hope the reader takes away that donald trump and barack obama and george w. bush and others illustrate something about the importance of values in the life of this country and about what leadership can and should be. i hope they see the fbi as an institution committed to values and caring deeply about being separate from the political tribes in this country. >> director comey, i would love to go farther, but there's so many questions you say you can't answer due to this investigation. i guess it means -- can i ask you this? do you believe that director mueller is mindful of the political calendar as he goes through and that the closer things get to an election, the more investigations can play an outside role fai

can you tell us more about that case and why it specifically struck you in writing about the subject. >>> when i was an undergrad i got a history degree, and in law school i think everyone is trying to find their niche, something that they feel comfortable with, and i remember when the district of columbia came down from the appellate circuit, and they talked about the history of the right to arms and not only the history, but it was central to the holding of the case, to the analysis, the legal analysis, and that drew me in, being a history major, but what confused me is it was all history i was unfamiliar with, stuff to me intuitively did not add up. however, of course, as any historian would, you start asking questions, how did you come to this and start doing research and that's really how i became involved and i came to locate other misconceptions and myths and things that the court misconstrued and i began delving, i would say, a year and a half spending times in the archives looking it up and i came to the opposite conclusion at least as a matter of 18th century constitutional

one is to talk about kant. one is to talk about hobbs. if we're going to throw down, going to double down on some philosophers. the primary purpose of the state, job one of the state is to secure the rights and lives and protections of its citizens. this is very hobbsian, right? the whole job is to actually protect the body politic. and so when we want to start talking about technologies and the regulation, what we're really talking about is the regulation between civil society, civil applications of a technology for peaceful purposes and serving the economy and something used for military purposes. the flip side of that is that same technology could be militarized in a way and used for security purposes or for weaponization. so we have to be very careful about how we draw lines around these technologies. one way to think about this is through a series of arrangements we already have in place. we have international treaties like the missile control regime. so the mctr. we also have things like the vassnar arrangement, a voluntary arrangem

to meet with robert mueller, about dealing with the way he goes about -- even the decision about firing rosenstein or mueller is really wrought with legal peril because it could be additional evidence to bolster an obstruction of justice charge. i think having a criminal defense lawyer at his side right now is incredibly important. >> carol lee, julie ainsley, kristen welker, congratulations on the megascoop, on your professionalism on this reporting. it is an incredible peek into where things stand. we are grateful to have you with us. >>> when we come back with the president still enraged about the raid of his personal lawyer's office and home, a flesh round fresh round of stories about hush money being paid to keep bad news quiet. michael avenatti, attorney for stormy daniels joins us live in the studio. also as the president impulsively tweets away about a defense strike in syria, testimony before the house arms services committee carefully warns retaliation must be, quote, balanced against the threat of a wider war, and seemed to walk back some of the president's menacing language

about and a lot of things going on the worldview should be angry about. so i don't say you shouldn't be angry and you shouldn't be cynical. i expect you to be. but to jump ahead, the difference between optimism and pessimism as pessimist bank the things you should be angry and cynical about are going to overwhelm us and the optimists think they can be fixed and that's the main argument that first you have to see how the world is improved to the present day and then you have to use the lessons you can draw from that to see how we can fix the problems that face us today. this book does not claim that we feature phone if you want to be cheerful that's great and i hope you are. and optimists can be a cynical person. an optimist can be very upset reading the newspaper in the morning. you don't have to be chair full. our feelings should be based to guess a better way to say it is whether you feel pessimistic or optimistic about the world there are two levels. one is the choices. he you read the news needs aside in my going to be up to mystic or anger at the pre

that suit is officially about antitrust, about market competition.urtroom is all about whether it's premised on the president's political or personal animus towards cnn. here we are with another case. the president targeting a giant company, but it seems to be all about the newspaper he doesn't like. >> dylan, previous administrations have been very careful not to pick winners and losers among private companies in the united states. i'm wondering how problematic you think is it that this president seems to be doing that very thing and, again, saying that the taxpayers are losing money on the postal service. the postal service doesn't use taxpayer money for their operation. >> anderson, you know this as well as i do and brian does for that matter too. this president is actually remarkable in his ability to identify critical issues like massive technology monopolies that are destroying jobs, taking business, not in a negative way. amazon is beneficial to us. amazon is a new world for us. but the reality is the president is really good at identifying th

take a listen about what she said about waymo. we have million miles of driving on city streets, adding the latest million in just three months. we announced a long-term partnership with jaguar, land rover for their fully electric high pace vehicles. is really waymo comprising a bigger portion of the bets because they moved nets under the google umbrella or it now you have -- google umbrella. that's have waymo and where they all are at the moment. and it's a big one. >> i think it is. verily is the revenue they are getting from fiber, but longer-term loamy think about actual bets, waymo is the most important that. -- important that. philosophically, they are not trying to do the semi autonomous driving. they are saying we know people get distracted and we know the situation that occur are going to occur and we are going to wait until the technology can do that complete picture. that's an interesting philosophical difference. that will be a good bet for them in the long run. on the compute side, they will be able to drive ai servic

but at the same time, it's helped me think about the period that he's writing about and think about, you know, the possible paths in a more imaginative way. i'm also working on a book, one of our editors is working on a book by a writer named victor duval. it's actually an anthology called the people's future of the united states, so it's kind of a play on the people's history of the united states. and we're just finding writers from different communities who are able to use fiction as ways of imagining different possibilities. not distopic necessarily possibilities, but, you know, hopeful, even utopian in some cases possibilities for what, you know, can happen. >> thank you. >> okay. i -- my name is ron howell, and i teach journalism in the english d. at brooklyn -- department at brooklyn college. i just want to say you all are tan be tsaic, and -- fantastic, and the whole experience the past couple of days have given me reason for hope because sometimes i'm not full of hope really. i wanted to ask you if if the sometimes-gloomy perception of the publishing industry that a lot of bl

we know about the particulars of this game but note a lot about him. next you are going to hear from harvey snyder talking a bit about charles caps, and our producer, naismith hurts, his efforts to find out more. we know he paid his legal bills in cash. >> by the time we were heading back to warrant, charlie katz poperas, which he could no longer pay fees. but if you get a case before the supreme court, you don't worry about whether your client can pay fees. >> he had eight felony counts and had a profile. we cannot find a photograph of man. it was never published in any sort of newspaper, hike that. even while he was case was being adjudicated, he never showed up to court other than to be arraigned. >> in today's age, it is pretty hard for somebody to disappear that completely. does surprising? >> it is surprising. a lot of this case relates to modern area and are smotrycz phones protected. are they protected from government surveillance without a warrant. it is amazing that the pro general torre of all of this discussion came from the other guy. >> w