you've had guest on before who've actually written books several books on this topic we watch institute after institute published articles on this and i think that it still is big in america but that's not the case so when we see something like this where this black woman is married to a caucasian male and every other home in their community is already appraised $500000.00 and their home is actually bigger than their neighbors on both sides and there is ranked in that 300000 dollars range and simply if you hide the pictures of the wife's grandmother the wife's children all of those things you know all of those pictures and sprinkles of color go away and all of a sudden your property value goes up that truly hurts you know one of the things when you look at look at trump in the south dakota governor you know all they seem to be doing is trying to you know what the tactics and the language of the you is on twitter and things and we're kind of talking about earlier is that kind of amplification of like all of the problems and i'm the only one who can save it and all of that is that actually going to help

institutions. we've seen them destroy institution after institution, including the justice department, for example,u talked about in the last segment. there were people like bill barr who were normal people back when, and he's just undermined our faith in institutions and he sapped the moral strength of people. when you do it to the post office, you've cut down to the backbone of what first made the american colonies the united states of america. >> a follow-up and then we'll get to vin gupta. but what is the responsibility of mike pence? of members of this administration that clearly see something is wrong? i have to believe that there's someone in the white house with a modicum of power that sees that this is wrong. what about republicans, mitch mcconnell, those worried about losing the senate? what is their responsibility at this moment? >> their responsibility is to their nation and their sense of patriotism and sense of mortali mortality. when you talk to some of them they'll say maybe we'll be in a post trump era and we don't want to be the republicans that messed him up, got him in trouble b

young democracies and emerging institutions and we need institutions, it's key to getting after the elicit flows. this corruption which eats at the democracies and the institutions and it's an environment that the transnational and criminals have thrived on corruption. external actors thrive on those same conditions, corruption, emerging institutions and young democracies, weak democracies in some cases and we see cuba, russia, china, iran, nicaragua, venezuela, all of these countries mixing it up in that space. covid has complicated the ability to do anything for all of these nations and also has really exasperated the problems as you mentioned. so venezuela, it all comes together in venezuela and just stepping back and we look at what the impact has been, 5.2 million migrants, human suffering, the increase, drastic increase in narco trafficking coming out of venezuela, which is killing lives, killing people here in the united states, whether it's miami, pittsburgh and the same central america and throughout the hemisphere. so at the heart of the threat, it's the lives that we're losing unnecessarily and it's the undermining of democracy and that was a choice m

institutions. and they need strong institutions pre-that is really achy here to getting after it flows. which eats atn, democracies and institutions an environment that transactional criminal organizations and narco terrorists have thrived on. external state actors also thrive on those same conditions, corruption, emerging institutions, young democracies, weak in some cases, and we see cuba, russia, china, iran, nicaragua, venezuela, all these countries mixing it up in that space. covid has complicated the ability to do anything for all these nations and has also really exasperated the problems. venezuela, it all comes together in venezuela. stepping back, and we look at what the impact has been, 5.2 million migrants, human suffering, the drastic increase in narco trafficking coming out killinguela which is lives, killing people here in the united states, whether it is miami, pittsburgh, in central america and throughout the hemisphere. at the heart of the threat is the lives we are losing unnecessarily, and the undermining of democracy. and that was a choice maduro made to take a once-thriving state into the current dictatorship

opposed the china travel ban that i instituted very early in the europe travel ban that i instituted quite early. ban thai instituted quite early. followed, if we went after and listened to his advice, hundreds of thousands more people would have died. this is according to many people. i believe that dr. fauci agreed with that. he said that president trump made a great decision when he put the ban on china. joe biden wants to fling open american borders, allowing the pandemic to infiltrate every u.s. community based on his policies. he wants to have ridiculous open borders. i've been saying from the first day i started campaigning for this great office, you have open borders, you don't have a country. you don't have a country with open borders. so he wants open borders. the democrats want open borders. if you look at our southern border, we would have criminals pouring through. 290wall is getting close to miles long. so we disagree with him on that. that is one of the many things we disagree with. allowile joe biden would rioters and looters and criminals and millions of illegal aliens to roam free in our country, he wants the federal government to issue

institute and a visiting fellow at the hoover institution. after graduating from harvard college and before attending law school, he worked as a reporter in washington, d.c. and after graduating law school, he clerked for john on the dc circuit and for justice thomas. he's previously served as general counsel on the senate judiciary committee as a deputy assistant attorney general in the office of legal counsel, where he worked on issues involving foreign affairs, national security and separation of powers. he's been a visiting scholar in several different law schools and the author of many books including one they are going to discuss today which is "defender in chief." david rivkin is on the international environmental team and serves as a cocreator in the practice. he has extensive experience in constitutional administration. he got his undergraduate and masters degree fromaster's degrn and his law degree from columbia. like john, david has held several significant positions in the government including deputy director of the office of policy development at the justice department, legal adviser in the office of the vice president, association at the department of energy, associate white house counsel, and as the associate executive director and general counsel of the presidents council on competitiveness. david has also published hundreds of articles, op-ed, book chapters on a variety of issues and publications across the country, and he's also a commentator. with that, i will rest my voice for a moment and john, turn it over to you. >> john, thank you very much. i am sorry to see that you are not doing well. i trust that it's because you've been doing lots of interviews about my new book. your voice sounds like minefields. i want to thank the heritage foundation for cosponsoring this event, and i'm thrilled to be here with john. john and i have known each other for almost 20 years now. we worked in the justice department together. it's great to be here with david rivkin, who i am and there is to say i've not even longer. we go back 30 years and sometimes have the pleasure of debating and sometimes beyond pleasure [inaudible] >> it is really good to talk about this i think as function sponsored by the heritage foundation and federalist society because this is all their fault. if you go back to the 2016 campaign, many conservatives have thoughts, including myself, about president trump and what he might do to the constitution. and a key moment in the primary -- when it was only trump and ted cruz left -- trump did a remarkable thing for the first time ever. as a candidate, he came out with a short list and said he would only pick a supreme court justice from the list of ten and later 20. and he put out broadly that he didn't know any of the people on the list. only people, john malcolm and the federalist society. so, it is all their fault. [laughter] they didn't put me on, i'm still ticked off about that, but they could rivkin on the list, so we have talking to do. [laughter] let me start by saying, that scene, however, about trump and the constitution has been won, and it's not just liberals that have been attacked. take president trump's recent tweet about whether the elections should be postponed because of widescale fraud with mail-in ballots. henry olson, a founder that cited the "washington post," quote, the single most anti-democratic statement any sitting president has ever made, end of quote. stephen, the conservative northwestern law professor, and also one of the cofounders of the federalist society quoted in an op-ed, the latest tweet is an impeachment ground. this is very similar. at least at frisson dissipates the consistent theme that has been raised for about the trump presidency, also most notable by the liberal critics. he was impeached for violating the constitution. at the time, speaker pelosi, for example said, quote, if we allow one, any president no matter who, she or he to go down this path, we are saying goodbye to the republic and hello to a president king. mind you but th the same time, s today have a somewhat contradictory criticism of president trump. at the same time, people also i would say attacking president trump for not seeking the powers in response to the pandemic. people were demanding that he imposed a nationwide mask mandate or shut down and reopened all the businesses in the country. and so on. but it really is trump -- the main means that he spent violating the constitution, he is a proverbial ball in the china shop, and although i started with the same doubts come at the end of the four years of the first term in s. john quoted me, i was wrong. i think trump has actually been a more stout defender of the constitution as president that has critics. you wouldn't have thought so at first because he's a populist. trump appeals to a broad, popular basis. and the populist historically, if you look at andrew jackson or fdr, populist usually are people who are against it and want to overcome the constitution, and often are the sparks for a large-scale change for the constitution because they are so interested in achieving their mandates. trump is a different kind of creature i think. trump is a populist politically, but good governance and constitutional conservative. it's not trump, for example, that his critics that have discussed seriously getting rid of the electoral college. it was a large number of democratic presidential nominees who talked about increasing the size of the supreme court from nine to 15. there are trump critics today, at least one columnist in "the new york times" op-ed page who called the use of federal law enforcement in response to the recent disorders as an occupying trump army and declared it a time to call fascism yet. his critics want to have more permanent independent counsels. it concerns the political disputes into the law-enforcement matters who supported the rise of a permanent law enforcement and national security bureaucracy who believe they have more rights to say who should and should not be president than the voters of the country. his critics are calling for nationalization of the energy transportation sectors in order to achieve the goals of the pre- new deal. in contrast, i would say trump's achievement is not just from stopping all those things from happening, but also from the battles he's had to fight during his presidency. we get wrapped up i think in the day-to-day political trench warfare, the investigation, the impeachment. but if you take a step back and look at what was the broad constitutional media, i think i would argue it's an effort to restore the understanding of the constitution instead of the 20th century progressive vision of the constitution and i will explain what i mean by that. in the collusion investigation the market for we learn about it the more it looks like the investigation was baseless and essentially, i don't question if it was good motives or bad, but the headquarters staff at the fbi thought he posed a threat to national security. they thought as an independent theocracy they thought there should be an independent theocracy. they have the right. the constitution makes the president, the chief law enforcement officer of the country everybody in executive branch is an assistant that works for the president, the president trump wanted to use the favorite line you're fired. i would say the same thing is true of the impeachment fiasco. those that are in the foreign service side believe they have the right to decide how it could be conducted. lastly i would say the impeachment also reflected the ability to protect the right of any president to be independent of congress. people during the impeachment often complained about the fact that tenet had to vote by two thirds to remove and how somehow that was unfair or unjust but that was actually by the framers designed to make sure the congress couldn't the president under its thumb. they are specifically worried about the idea that subject to removal because they knew that the power to remove was the cover to direct. so of all these cases i would point out president trump pursuing no doubt his own personal political interest of self-preservation, survival, trying to be reelected. but it was set in the separation of power ambition must be made to counteract and they expected people to pursue their political thoughts and cursed. just as they expect in the congress and the judiciary. their idea of constant fighting you would have a broad constitutional good. that may never even intended to achieve or are aware of, which is the limitations of the government and maintenance of the individual freedom. where does trump said in the broad constitutional history? he has been disrupted into political marks of the office, not the constitutional marks. the disruption may or may not be appropriate lincoln, fdr, where we've had such an interested over powerful, yet at the same time obsolete bureaucracy and government to lead a revolution. this might be the possibility if there won't be a second term, to the new questions of the 21st century cannot keep defending a government that was designed in the new deal to handle the problems of the 20th century. thank you for the opportunity to talk about some of the things i look forward to hearing david's comments and john's questions. thank you very much. >> is a pleasure to be with you into read and comment on the excellent book. his comments pretty much covered all of the key issues, but they would spend a few minutes perhaps giving another emphasis. sometimes, unusual rhetoric, behavior was the case but obviously the political norms. pursuing the political interest because the way in which the framers designed to operate both his indeed own self-interest which of course is something that the critics have been emphasizing as somehow unforgivable sin. i remember the discussion during the impeachment process about how i think eventually became pretty clear that it doesn't matter. he had a constitutional right towards ukraine in a particular fashion begets delivery of a military aide or seeking to obtain enforcement information. that was all fine. and somehow the benefit which of course is a silly argument, and i think the framers it can't be an impeachable offense. if the elected officials were expected to act in ways that were in the self-interest. for the national survival and i hope that he would do the same but the political interests are constant because where you sit is where you stand. on the congressional side that impulse has dissipated so we see instances where members of congress both have the power and surrender power to. i would say not only has he not done anything wrong when it comes to exercising the office at echoing the point john made a key doesn't write his own briefs or deliver his own arguments, but what is good and again, virtuous, the framers didn't expect, they expect the person to exercise the constitution and listen to his advisors and i would say i've probably read every major case and it's not only that i agree with the positions they take. i'm quite honest i cannot think about an assertion of executive power that would be immigration, despite my criticism, the use of presidential emergency powers delegated or any other matter. i cannot think about anything else that i would find particularly objectionable in the administration. the i think the winds are blowing one is the notion there's nothing trump can do this right so it's a sort of never ending but it's dangerous in the short run. if not dangerous in the long run because it doesn't represent the philosophies to elevate into some kind of new body of doctrine. but what i think is more dangerous as john yoo mentioned is the more fundamental constitutional norms of equal representation in the electoral college of course. the federalism, which again the notion that somehow to exercise the powers i think to the extent the doctrine which i find quite objectionable is more on the left. i don't see any tendency on the right. let me stop here. hopefully there are some questions. i would love to hear what about this piece of legislation so we can get to some more granular examples. >> thank you both for your comment. john mentioned some of the threat to that of the electoral college acting in the supreme court. referring to the civil servants and we could have others for the ability to control whether to continue to pursue a prosecution and in the michael fuentes there are calls that he gave to roger stone. you met with the president last week. you talked about questioning the president's motivations on the case and we will also see that in the litigation including some cases which the supreme court or the majority of them, so you have the citizenship question and what are the motivations behind the program and we talked extensively about the fact they come in and implement something and the other president has to make sure so all of this questioning of motivation challenging the party may be a ticket for this train ride only because of the anchor but it did have ramifications that will extend well beyond the presidency. >> it is a very difficult wide-ranging question. let me start by saying one feature seems to run like this even though subject to changes. the opposition goes so far overboard in its claims and poses extreme constitutional arguments and as david was saying to make reasonable arguments based on the constitutional history, presidential practice and i'm afraid to say you do see they've shifted to some of these remarkable. i did go and meet with president trump last week and say here is this copy. but then i stuck around. one thing i will say is unlike others even george w. bush wave after wave questioning his legitimacy i would have expected the impression some people in the media think he did. i came away thinking he was energetic. he's a new yorker to his unfortunate credit. i didn't see this kind of negative pessimistic outlook that he is relishing in the return to the campaign. i would be exhausted after being president for one week in these last years. the second point is i think they do represent something new and they will either disable the jobs are it will be upon ticket for one train ride only. take the example you just gave of the presidential motivation was first raised as the means to attack a presidential decision at the travel ban litigation in 2017. never before have they fough tht they would go beyond an executive order then go behind it to search around for the animus in their decisions even though when trump versus hawaii they did uphold the travel ban it did suggest this mental state of the president. then beth continued interest in this case you just mentioned and you might even argue what was going on in this case but i found completely incomprehensible as a matter of separation of power to say that a president could render the enforcement of the law to basically zero work around 6 million or so cases without any congressional authority to. what he's doing is unconstitutional. so the supreme court had to come in and say they are in violation of the constitution as you understand it and that is incredible and the judicial supremacy of interpretation over the other branches. the other thing about this dynamic is people don't like it when president trump uses powers others have used in the past. so if he has this power, does it work to not enforce the law and if you don't enforce one thing here and there, you have a program all of a sudden i can't he do the exact same thing. his critics were so out to get him that they want to create this law to no other president before or after and that isn't what we think of. >> i will us would use the sames regarding the regional travel ban. i completely agree it is how disturbed the supreme court left the mode. there is a sliver of jurisprudence so in the establishment. it is an exercise in absurdity that it was designed to prevent them from coming here so you can disable it you don't particularly like the people you're sanctioning so it is and enormous enforcement. that is unfortunate to me if disruptive. people criticize trump all the time for example for expressing the positions but let's agree that it's public record that the notion if they say something on complimentary about a judge or justice that's what the last ten years is force it to be it is tremendously dangerous. >> a follow-up on one point. >> to talk about my treatment of judges, it is the subject suffis me again as a double standard because which president was it that actually threaten the independence of the courts, it was president obama and the democratic supporters. which senators were threatening this last term. i don't think that he tried to pressure the supreme court in the same way that the obama administration had. once a decision is out they are free like any other citizen to try to influence the court while it is considering the case he promised to try to orient the production in the lower courts, to back but in a traditional way which is you appoint new people along with your philosophy the critics and opponents talked about expanding the courts have talked about the number of justices. trump could have done that in the first two years of the presidency but they chose not to come of age they chose to use the traditional method is more respectful of the traditional. >> you could have had the beef that was filed by six senators in the second amendment case that implies a lot more urgency. [inaudible] when they do things right and in places like haiti and syria by saying that it requires a declaration of the war bu betwen the democratic presidents do the same thing, similarly on the left they criticized kenneth starr. i want to quote a "new york times" article entitled white house is all out and paying off with his help and in that article that said one official was born on these hostilities but when president trump criticized him on the other hand i'm wondering what you think about the double standard going on here and your comment on th that. >> it is a great reminder, your quote about "the new york times" and the study reminds you the difference not only is there a double standard being applied here where yes democrats used to be the independent counsel until it was used on president clinton and now there are several proposals during the mueller investigation to make him a permanent independent counsel. take a step back. what was really going on, what is fighting for the political survival, there's nothing wrong with that but what he was also doing is reclaiming the right of the president to control law enforcement in the country and the progressives, the bigger philosophical progressives who like the idea of having a large powerful government independent of political control as an idea that was introduced into the politics by woodrow wilson. the framers didn't expect after the track record of constitutional law professors i would say they are unconstitutional scholars. wilson introduced this idea but to beat technocratic government of people insulate insulated ine government surrendered every public public policy decision into the scientific and technical decisions. and you can see that in the report they never went to the lengths. if the people did to kenneth starr. all this fighting but i have a lot of respect for robert mueller and other times at the button finished his investigations. it will clear him and then we will put the russian collusion to bed and that is what happened. but the bigger picture is the restoration of political control over the bureaucracy but he was fighting for even if he might not have realized it. it's not just the use of force and contradictory opinions when he was using drones in afghanistan and force without congressional consent, going to syria without congressional consent even though he would never. what is the trump doctrine and sovereignty not just over immigration but nationstates pursuing its regular interest of borders and ms world that means the united states is withdrawing, not actively engaging and it looks like what do you know, the commander in chief actually has a lot of power to do that in the end. if, for example, pulling the troops out of syria in afghanistan he is terminated the treaties it shows this criticism was wrong all the time because if you thought congress has to give its say-so whenever the president makes an international agreement whether the president goes to war why can't they force trump to stay in all those places abroad or all of those treaties. she has the power to undo the deals, bargains and deployments and shows the president really does have the primary power in foreign affairs despite what they've said one republican presidents were in office. >> sorry to -- john and i would add a couple of points. the whole notion on professionalism and political control is not only wrong but unconstitutional and underpins the way the separation of powers is supposed to work. it's political accountability, the overriding check of the president and it doesn't work in the case of article three so by diluting the accountability from removal of good diplomacy is somehow delegated irrevocably to the mid-level officials. if there were true there would be no accountability. the president can always wash his hands of that cost of these profoundly anticonstitutional into the policy but necessarily produces the results because in some instances you go in where political opponents don't want to go in. you don't have the notion that the u.s. should be involved everywhere or nowhere. it's driven by how you see the national interest. you may disagree with that but under the trump doctrine it's a begin the framers would not have had a problem. >> i want to remind people to send in questions. what thelet me ask a couple thae received. one question about the executive orders and it seems to be growing to their importance and whether you see this as a symptom of the breakdown. >> having dealt with this issue before, executive orders to be honest john may look at the administration bush 43 was criticized quite robustly but not as much as this president in the classic elements. there was a lot of emphasis as we both no on the number i personally think this is fake news to use the term. the question is are you trying to do something that didn't have constitutional discretion. i'm not aware of any that are problematic in this administration. numbers wise, i'm not sure that the notion is kind of silly and reminds me of another debate whether he can issue a signing statement. >> i agree the number of executive orders was used as a criticism you can combine several if you don't have too many members and david i is what is important is the authority for the executive order. >> i had my doubts initially because of the first traveled and executive order. you might remember it had banned travel from muslim nations, several but after criticism, the trump administration quickly amended the travel ban. that's the response of people who care about the constitution. some past presidents don't try to modulate their positions or try to come into coherence with existing constitutional law and try to go through a different efficiency like andrew jackson or fdr but their positions as pointed out hasn't done that. there's a lot of things people are upset about this use of executive orders they are not the kind we should be worried about. what he's doing is exercising delegated power from congress. we are in an era as we know the president now can buy congress, by congress as to location, pause travel for many countries on national security grounds. nobody was claiming this was unconstitutional when it came time to shut down between china and arab. people don't like it. it's not trump's delegated cover that is the problem. whether congress should have given that power to the executives in the first place. it goes back to john's point are they imposing a double standard david was one of the leaders of the constitutional fight, the challenge to obamacare but huge delegations of authority. i don't remember our liberal friends complaining about that. but when trump tries to make the case, this is another example where he isn't a populist but a constitutional conservative using his executive orders to manage the branch to try to make it smaller and more modest. there is a huge key regulatory push going on. the heritage foundation has been an advisor to the white house about this and how many presidents do you know go around and say i want to stop regulating things. if you complete there is a role that for every one regulation they should have to repeal three. that is incredible. it's almost an abdication of power by the white house. i actually think regardless of the numbers we see him trying to reduce the overall effect of the power when it comes to domestic affairs. >> with youtubwhat you do when e comes january 3 to transmit the apportionment he's going to exclude illegal aliens not from the census baseline that there will be efforts to. for something obamor something d become for many months but it's interesting so i don't know if you agree that it's probably the most orders he's ever issued. i think it was like the 21st or 22nd of july. >> another order the travel ban and building the wall the way to the states. >> i've got some great audience questions. one is about going on in poland and whether the government can sue the local officials in portland. let me take that it can expand. let's talk about federalism in the trump administration. lots of push back in the states about travel bans and sanctuary cities and mail-in balloting. the administration challenging the restrictions as they pertain to religious institutions and now obviously what's going on with the protests in chicago and minneapolis and portland what does this say about the use of his authority in the long run healthy development? >> i think actually the trump administration has been respectful of federalism, sometimes in ways that have reduced its ability to get political goals and i think that is a good test of how committed any president is to the constitution. one was the pandemic response and there i think clearly president of trump would like to reopen the economy a lot faster than the state governors are. in a weird way the fate of the economy is tied to the decisions of a lot of blue state governors are happy, happy might be the wrong word but to clamp down much longer than they should. i could see him trying to override them trump hasn't. he said the government play a normal constitutional role which is the public health and safety is a primary job of state governments and federal government supports with technical expertise a

i have read lots of complex institutions, i cannot remember ever shaking up an institution, and an important institution afterfive weeks on the job. he does not nobody's doing and he certainly has not looked at the unintended consequences or maybe their intended consequences of the decisions i have been made. and we have got to just say no, we have got to stop this, it's not just about the election, it's about life and death and people getting hurt during a terrible pandemic that is clearly been mismanaged. >> thank you very much. do we have any questions for the panel. >> hearing none, chairwoman maloney, mr. lynch. you are dismissed. do any members wish to testify? >> hearing none. this closes the hearing on hr 8015. at this time the chair will entertain a motion from the decembesenator from florida. mr. hasting. >> thank you very much mr. chairman. hr 8015 and delivering for america act, the proposed rule, the rule provides two hours of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on oversight and reform, the role gains consideration of the bill, it provid

institutions. i can't remember ever shaking up an institution, an important institution after five weeks on the job. he doesn't know what he's doing. and he certainly has not looked at the unintended consequences or maybe their intended consequences of the decisions that have been made, and we have got to say no. we have to stop this. it is not just about the election, it is about life and death and people getting hurt during a terrible pandemic that is clearly mismanaged. i yield back. >> thank. are there any more questions? hearing none, chairwoman his on amr. lynch to plane somewhere i guess, thank you for your testimony. you are dismissed. and the other members wish to testify? hearing none, seeing none, this closes the hearing on the bill. at this time, the chair will entertain the distinguished gentleman from florida. >> thank you you, mr. chairman. hrove the committee to grant 15, the delivering for america and the rule provides two hours of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member on oversight and reform, through all points of order regains consideration of the

institute for employment research. can you briefly explain who you are and how long you have been around? guest: sure, thank you. this year is our 75th anniversary. upjohn institute was established in 1945 right after the war. it was established based on an endowment. the founder of the upjohn drug up a month before he died. dr. upjohn grew up on a farm. ofthat time it was a period transition from a farm economy to an industrial economy. , amployment insurances program for an industrial economy where people are separated from the land and the means of subsistence. he set up a farm outside of kalamazoo where people could set up a garden, maybe build a cottage, grow crops. they had some assets that were put into the endowment. some people did use it as that. some people got grants. then the institute operated as a grantmaking foundation. it was finally created as an institute for research in 1945 to study on and ways of dealing with unemployment. that is about the upjohn institute. host: christopher o'leary, senior economist. you have spent a lot of time studying unemployment. when it comes to today and what is happening now with the pandemic, how many americans are currently receiving some form of unemployment insurance, whether from the state or federal government? guest: last week, the report comes out every thursday morning told us that 31 million people were continuing claimants on on appointment. 17 million were regular state beneficiaries, state programs. there were about 13 million on the special pandemic unemployment assistance, which is available for self-employed, gig, and contract workers who don't qualify for regular state benefits. there are several categories. you might not meet the eligibility requirements if you are at home taking care of kids who are in school. y

anywhere out of that hospital they said this after consulting with the special is that right from one of from 2 actually best medical institute's research institutes here in in moscow now they are saying on the on that they so far did not find any poisons in the valleys body that they rent this and they're going to keep on running them for 2 more days searching for more possibility is the method of substance or poison that the wife of my knee was talking about is something actually that was told to the press by by his friend than of his the president of france aggression fought for the violin he said that a traffic officer showed him on her phone a photo saying this is what we found on his things this is barely poison and it is dangerous for not only for him but also for people surrounding him well this was actually denied by the doctor saying that they didn't find anything so far the family and friends say that if they get the permission on which they insist to transport now finally there is a plane waiting ready and equipped of water and boarding the patients in karma and what about the arrival of this german ambulance on squids sure the values

instituted very early in the europe travel ban that i instituted quite early. followed, if we went after and listened to his advice, hundreds of thousands more people would have died. this is according to many people. i believe that dr. fauci agreed with that. he said that president trump made a great decision when he put the ban on china. joe biden wants to fling open american borders, allowing the pandemic to infiltrate every u.s. community based on his policies. he wants to have ridiculous open borders. i've been saying from the first day i started campaigning for this great office, you have open borders, you don't have a country. you don't have a country with open borders. so he wants open borders. the democrats want open borders. if you look at our southern border, we would have criminals pouring through. 290wall is getting close to miles long. so we disagree with him on that. that is one of the many things we disagree with. allowile joe biden would rioters and looters and criminals and millions of illegal aliens to roam free in our country, he wants the federal government to issue a sweeping mandate to law-abiding citizens. he wants the president of the united states, with the mere stroke of a pen, to order over 300 million american citizens to wear a mask for a minimum of three straight months. i guess he thinks it is good politics i guess. no matter where they live and no matter their surroundings. because different states are much different. both in terms of the atmosphere problem.orona he does not identify what authority the president has to issue such a mandate or how federal law enforcement could possibly enforce it. or why we would be stepping on governors throughout our country, many of whom have done a very good job and they know what is needed. also, many of our 50 states are that,the job at a level frankly, people are really surprised, including foreign governments that are calling us constantly and asking for advice. i want to just say, our governors have worked very hard. they've worked with vice president pence and myself and everybody else. we have scott now involved. scott, congratulations. you've already started. and dr. fauci and dr. birx. if the president has the unilateral power to order every citizen to cover their face in nearly all instances, what other powers does he have? biden, why he refused, to take questions. he couldn't answer any of them. he never takes questions. i take questions. he never takes questions. you sort of wonder what is going on because they are not that difficult. some can be nasty but they are not that difficult. but he never takes questions. i guess he just left the podium. put it in your minds. my administration has a different approach. we have urged americans to wear masks and i emphasized that this is a patriotic thing to do. maybe they are great and maybe they are just good. maybe they are not so good. but frankly, what do you have to lose? you have nothing to lose. so we do and we've been saying wear them when it is appropriate, especially in terms of social distancing. if you can't distance enough, what do you have to lose? governorsis up to the and we want to have a certain freedom. that is what we are about. at the same time, we understand that each state is different and is facing unique circumstances. you have very different states facing very unique differences and circumstances. we've entrusted the governors of develop ando enforce their own masked policies and other policies following guidance from the federal government and cdc. we are working with each state to implement a plan based on the facts and science. we will continue to urge americans to wear masks when they cannot socially distance. but we do not need to bring the full weight of the federal government down on law-abiding americans to accomplish this goal. americans must have their freedoms and i trust the american people and their governors very much. i trust the american people and the governors want to do the right thing to make the smart decisions and joe doesn't. much.esn't know too unlike the biden approach, our approach is guided by science. that is why we are focused on protecting the high-risk americans. that is why we are delivering effective medical treatments, to reduce the fatality rate. that is why we are developing a vaccine and therapeutics in record time. rejects the scientific approach in favor of locking all americans in their basements for months on end, which i think is something scott would be very opposed to. we've been dealing pretty strongly over the last number of weeks. but he wants them in the basement for months on end. and you have governors that have been very strict on keeping people in their houses, keeping people in their wherever they may be apartments. and frankly i don't think the results are necessarily better than other results. but he wants to shut down our economy, close our schools, and grind society to a halt. and he wants it done by a federal decree. ,his would lead to a crippling long-lasting depression. this would be a crippling, long-lasting depression. yesterday i showed you the numbers about how well we are doing with auto sales and manufacturing and used car sales and housing sales at numbers nobody would have believed. it is very strong. we will be discussing that over the next couple days. but the economy is coming back. the employment numbers are a record in the history of our country. we will be back next year. maybe even stronger than the previous year where we set every record in the book on employment and stock market. our stockmarket numbers are very close to record. nasdaq is actually a record over the last 14 days. that is during what we hope will be the final stages of the pandemic. if we did what biden wanted to do, shut down our health care system and lead to a massive increase in mortality, including suicide, overdose, heart disease, and countless other harms. bad on the other side of the break and when you do something like that. those shutdowns are very punitive, very punitive. they hurt a lot of people in a lot of different ways, through depression, through suicide, through so many other things, alcohol, drugs. biden's approach is regressive. it is anti-scientific. it is very defeatist. it will be very bad for our country. while joe biden has been playing politics on the sidelines, we've been solving problems and delivering tremendous results. the most advanced and robust testing system on the planet. the number one producer of ventilators in the world by far. unprecedented industrial mobilization, biggest since world war ii. operation warp speed, to deliver life-saving treatments and very soon a vaccine. what a plan by joe biden has actually laid out would do, we've already accomplished. many of the things -- it was well reported, every single thing he said to do, we did. and we did them well. idea on his own. he only knows what he thinks we should do and he spews it out and then i guess you could say pleasure arises in our case. because every single one of the events was something we had already done. so we will defeat the virus, but not by hiding in our basements. he's got to come out of his basement. we will defeat this virus through common sense mitigation effort, shielding those at highest risk and unleashing america's medical and scientific genius, which is what it is, and we've already been doing it and we are very close to having something that is going to be very special in the form of therapeutics and vaccines. stop playingd say politics with the virus. partisan politics has no place here. situation forul anybody to try and score political points while we are working to save lives and defeat the pandemic. in times of national challenge, americans, by the way, we are working with countries from all over the world. and they are trying to learn from us. and some of the countries you spoke about our having a tremendous surge right now. but it will work out. but americans must unite together, put politics aside, and really unite for a common good. three vaccines are in the final stage of clinical trials. they are doing really well. we are producing the most promising candidates in advance. part of the largest industrialization ever. that is incredible. the best companies anywhere in the world. it is incredible where they are. withlso the speed which the fda is approving things. by any other standard, you would have been two or three years away from the point we are at. by the end of this week, we will have shipped 1846 rapid point-of-care testing devices to nursing homes, which are very important, as you know, for people that are not handling the plague from china very well. sendingk alone, we are 992 testing devices and 450,000 tests to more than 950 nursing homes across the country. these tests are incredible. these are all new, very modern. and we are also getting on the tests that are not done immediately with a five to 15 minute timing, when they do send them to a lab, they are coming back now in three days, which is about as good as you can do. one day of delivering, one day of receiving, and one day in the lab. we are requiring nursing homes to test all members of their staff at least weekly. we have delivered effective treatments. the case fatality rate for americans over 70 has declined by about 85%. that is a fantastic number. it has declined by 85%. europe has seen 40% more excess mortality than the united states compared to a nonpandemic year. you hear the numbers and those numbers are very interesting. but that is the way it is. we urge all americans to wash your hands, socially distance, wear a mask when necessary, and protect the vulnerable, protect people that are older and especially people that have problems with heart or diabetes or some other problem. earlier today, very exciting news, big news all over the world, it was amazing. we finalized a historic peace agreement between israel and the united arab emirates. after half a century, israel and the united arab emirates will normalize their diplomatic relations. nobody thought this was something that could happen for a long time. it is the most important diplomatic breakthrough since the egypt-israel peace agreement was signed over 40 years ago. we have ambassador to israel david here. thank you for being here. israels a big day for and for the world. thank you. you've been fantastic. thank you very much. the deal that was reached today will enable muslims to have far greater ability to visit many historic sites in israel and to peacefully pray at the mosque, which is very important to them, which they've ordered to have access to for many decades. this is a monumental step to forging ties of cooperation in the middle east. i think you are going to have other countries come forward. we already do. they want to make a deal. we could have peace in the middle east. israel is also suspending settlements in the west bank, which is a big deal, a bold step toward achieving peace. israel and the united arab emirates have agreed to expand and accelerate tiant to pick collaboration to develop vaccines to defeat the china virus. they've both been hit. virtually every country has been hit. and to save lives in their region and in their world, so they are working very much on the vaccines also with us. and again, some very good news is going to take place with respect to that. our unprecedented diplomatic engagements laid the groundwork for this historic peace agreement, which was just announced a little while ago today. we will not rest as we continue to work toward a world of greater harmony and prosperity for all. i want to thank prime minister netanyahu of israel and crown of the unitedd arab emirates, fantastic people, for their vision and leadership. i look forward to hosting them at the white house very soon. they will be coming to washington. so that was a tremendous day. that was a tremendous thing that happened. great sign. we have a lot of other interesting things going on with other nations also having to do with peace agreements. a lot of big news is coming over the next few weeks. i'm sure you will be very impressed. more importantly it is a great thing for our country and for the world. go ahead. >> i want to ask you about food. one of the real problems when you shut down the school, these are kids on reduced and free lunch programs. they need these meals to make it through their day. with districts shutting down schools, what if anything can the federal government do to make sure the kids will get decent meals as long as the schools are out? pres. trump: you know we don't want the schools shut down. we want the schools open. especially very young children handle it very well. so we want schools open. we don't want to be in that position. we would make payment, and frankly, if the school isn't going to open, we would much rather follow the child with the payment. give the money to the child, meaning the parents of the child, and let the parents do what they have to do. because we are finding that whether it is parents or children, people want to get back to school. some people say they don't want the democrats don't want schools open because that is where you have a lot of polling booths. and if you have a school closed, you can't easily have polling booths at the school. maybe we will be able to show that as fact. but that is another thing that they are doing to try and keep people away from the polls. so we have to look into that. but you've been reading about it, i've been reading about it, and i don't like it, but we would like to see the schools open. ofwhat is your understanding how long israel will suspend its west bank annexation plan? pres. trump: what do you think? we put all our eggs into the basket of peace. we have an agreement with the emirates. thate going to extrapolate to the rest. how long that takes, i can't tell you. peace, but it is not off the table. peace every single chance. want palestinians to take away from this deal? pres. trump: that they are supported largely by some of the countries we are talking to and that have already signed. others will be following. palestinians, i think they very much want to be part of what we are doing. peacesee alternately between israel and the palestinians. big,nk as these very powerful, wealthy countries come in, i think the palestinians will follow. please. >> do you believe a deal could be reached without agreement to temporarily suspend annexation? pres. trump: could you make it louder? >> do you believe a deal could have been reached without the agreement to suspend annexation? pres. trump: what do you think about that? think, prioritize peace, think they -- i don't two could have been done at the same time israel -- >> should israel consider -- >> this is a temporary process. >> before you said that you didn't have to fund the u.s. postal service because democrats are trying to expand voting by mail. are you threatening to veto any legislation that includes funding for the post office? pres. trump: no. >> so you would sign something that does include funding. pres. trump: i would do it, but one of the reasons the post office needs that much money is that they have all these millions of ballots coming from nobody knows from where, so what happened in virginia, it was 500,000 applications coming in, nobody even knows where they came from. you saw what happened in new york, which was a disaster, with congresswoman carolyn maloney, it was a basic disaster. you see patterson, new jersey. and we could give you many other locations. what has happened is, that is part of a big negotiation. people, it money to wasn't their fault, it was china's fault. post office is part of it. another part of it is they want $3.5 billion just for the ballots. that is what the democrats want. but if the bill isn't going to get done, that would mean the post offices are going to get funded and the $3.5 billion isn't going to be taken care of, so i don't know how you could possibly use these ballots. absentee ballots, by the way, are fine, but the universal male ends that are sent all over the place, where people can grab stacks of them and sign them, that is the thing we are against. >> isn't that the problem, that you are saying you do not want to give the post office funding in this coronavirus legislation, they say they needed so if the pandemic is still going on in november and people don't feel safe to vote in person, they can vote by mail and it can be safe and secure? pres. trump: i can understand the post office and if we can agree to a bill, which is of much bigger number than just the post office, that would be fine, but they have the post office as one of their requests. >> you said you were against it. pres. trump: what i'm against is doing anything whether people aren't taken care of. and the people aren't being taken care of properly. we want people to get money. it wasn't their fault that they got shut down. they got shut down by china. whether it is the post office or the $3.5 billion -- you know they are asking for $3.5 billion just for the universal ballots but they are not willing to make a deal. the thing they want more than anything else, and you know this, is bailout money for the states and cities that are in trouble, which for the most part are democrat run states and cities. new york has a problem. california has a problem. illinois has a tremendous problem. and others. and we don't want to be doing that or certainly don't want to do a to the extent they are looking for $100 trillion. >> they need that money in order to make the post office work so they can take all these millions and millions of ballots, you said that would be fraudulent. pres. trump: i said it will end up in fraudulent. if you look at what has happened, just look at the few instances where this has happened. if you look at new york, it was fraudulent. if you look at patterson, new jersey, it was fraudulent. the whole thing is a mess. carolyn maloney's opponent, he's gone crazed. he said they took the election away from him and he may be right. i think they should redo that alexion. virginia is terrible. look at some of the things that have happened in california, where they found a million non-eligible voters. that was john by judicial watch. we have to have an honest election. if it is not going to be an honest election, i guess people have to think long and hard about it. but if the post office, if they are not going to approve a bill, and the post office won't have the money, and if they are not going to approve a big bill, and they are not going to have the $3.5 billion for the universal mailing votes, how can you have those votes? the people will have to go to the polls and vote like the old days, like two years ago, three years ago, it doesn't say anybody is taking the vote away, but it means the universal male ends don't work. absentees do work. you make an application and you send it in. it is different. so i'm not saying anything wrong with voting. i want them to vote. but that would mean they have to go to a voting booth like they used to and vote. >> people want to vote by mail because -- pres. trump: they have to feel safe and they will be safe and we will make sure they are safe and we are not going to have to spend $3.5 billion to do it. it would be wonderful if we had voting id and some states have that and some states don't. most states want it. but we want people to vote. when they vote, it means one vote. it doesn't mean ballots all over the place. you saw what was happening in virginia, where piles of applications are dropped all over the state. they had them named after dogs. they had them named after dead people. we want an accurate vote. maybe it turns out to be my advantage. i don't know. but i do know this. i just want an accurate vote. so does everybody else. ok. how does the accord between israel and the uae help struggling and persecuted christians in the middle east? pres. trump: help what? >> struggling and persecuted christians in the middle east. pres. trump: i think it is a big star. and you are right about that. christians have been persecuted by some countries in the middle east. it is going to be a strong start, powerful start. every one ofid and our negotiators, if you look at the way christians have been treated in some countries, it is beyond disgraceful. information and if i had absolute proof some of the stories that we've heard, which is not easy to get, i would do a number to those countries like you wouldn't believe. it is disgraceful. you are right. it is a big part of the overall negotiation. and as countries come in, uae has agreed strongly to represent us -- i think they will, with respect to christianity. it is notdle east, treated well. it is treated horribly and very unfairly and it is criminal and that is for many years. i think it is a great question. it is a very unfair situation. a check-in call with china on the phase one trade deal. what if they bring up tiktok and we chat? would you instruct your team to engage them? pres. trump: we have a deadline of september 15 and whether it is microsoft and others negotiating, we also said that obviously it is worthless if we don't allow them into the country, so the united states treasury is going to be getting something out of this deal, but what we want is total security, but we have a deadline, so i know microsoft and others are very interested, but that is our deadline and it has to be totally secure. we don't want to have any information going into china with what we've been through. talk about the deal, you mentioned the phase one deal. it is a very deal, interesting situation. you've been hearing the largest order of corn in history, the largest order of soybeans, the largest order of beef, they've done more than they've ever done. so you have to figure that one out. they see my attitude. my attitude toward china is not friendly. into orderse gone that are extremely large. happy, farmers are very but with what they did with respect to the pandemic, the plague that came in from china, it just is a different feeling. incredible deal, but i have a very different feeling. but they are giving the midwest, our farmers, among the largest orders they've ever seen. somebody told me today, about 40% of what they are selling now is going to china. so maybe they are trying to make me change my mind a little bit. because you know my attitude on china. it hasn't been very good. we are not talking to them. we are talking to the companies. it is a company within china. that means china. the deal will have to be substantial beneficial and we need total security. >> iforter: can you say annexation is off the table? pres. trump: it is something they have discussed, but israel has agreed not to do that, but more than just off the table, they've agreed not to do it. i think that was very important and it was a great concession by israel and a smart concession by havel, david do you anything further to add? reporter: the prime minister was clear today that he considers this to be a temporary suspension and the deal would still be open to him. right now, we are going -- sometime into the future, that's a big statement, but right now it is off the table. is that correct? >> the word chosen by all parties, was a temporary halt. it is off the table for now. said you want an accurate vote. ask the postmaster general to reverse some of the policy changes to prevent delays? pres. trump: i would not do that at all. i want the post office to run properly which makes sense. they would need a lot more money if they are going to be taking in tens of millions of pallets that have come out of the sky from nowhere. so they need additional financial help. it is part of the bill the democrats don't want to make because they want a trillion much bigger part of the bill, they want a trillion dollars to go to states that are run by governors who happen to be democrats who have not done a good job for many, many years. those are states that oh a lot of money and need a lot of money and they are talking about $1 trillion. $3.5e post office and the billion for the votes themselves, which sounds like a lot of money. think of that. $3.5 billion to have mail-in ballots. good, universal male income a very bad. given that the negotiations are still ongoing to get more money to the postal service, why not put more resources and more money yourself, find a way to do that. pres. trump: all they have to do is make a deal. if they make a deal, the postal service is taken care of, the money they need for the mail-in ballots would be taken care of if we agreed to it. that doesn't mean we are going to agree to it. but all they have to do is make a deal. more important to them is not that. that's a lot of money, but it's small time compared to the other. what they want to do and very strongly what they want to do is bail out cities run by democrats and have been for many years. these cities and states have done very badly and they desperately need money for that. we are open to something but we are not open to the kind of money they need. [crosstalk] reporter: what are you doing to make sure as president that there is a free and fair election? pres. trump: everyone talks about russia, russia, russia, they talk about china, china, they talk about these countries that come in and run our elections, which is false. but what they don't talk about are things like very loose mail-in ballots, universal in nature that, frankly, russia, china, north korea, iran, all of these countries that we are reading about, hearing about, and in some cases writing about intelligence-wise, these countries can grab those ballots corporate forgeries of those ballots and they would go out and have a field day. for thethe easiest way mail-in ballots, the easiest way for a country like a china or a .orth korea or iran i hear iran, that was part of the report, this would be very easy for them. this is much easier. we have been very strong. if you remember, president obama was informed about russia by the fbi in said number. the election was in november. president obama decided to do absolutely nothing about it. people don't mention that very much anymore. that's a lost fact. he was informed very powerfully and president obama did nothing. we've done a lot and we have really shorted up, but what people can never prepare for our millions and millions of mail-in ballots because they can be forged, they can be captured, they can be taken. that's a very hard thing to do. we have to make sure we can do that. reporter: after three and a half years, do you regret all the lying, all the dishonesty that you have done? pres. trump: please. please. go ahead. want to ask about the payroll tax. is it going to be optional or mandatory for employers to defer and not collect the payroll tax? the payroll tax is a very big benefit to people, to companies, because we want the companies to be strong but now it's directly to people and it's a very big number and we are taking care of it and this will go directly to the people, the workers within the company. it's called a payroll tax cut. we are cutting the payroll tax and it's a very large number and that will go directly to the workers of the company. reporter: how will employers collect that? will they be required not to collect that money? pres. trump: you mean later on? reporter: september 1, when i get my paycheck -- pres. trump: the employers will collect it and give it most likely. reporter: they are claiming on social media that kamala harris is not eligible to run for vice president. can you say whether or not kamala harris is eligible to run as vice president? pres. trump: i heard it today that she doesn't meet the requirements and by the way, the lawyer that wrote that piece is a very highly qualified, talented lawyer. i have no idea if that is right. i would assume that democrats would check that out before she gets chosen to run vice president. reporter: she was born in this not seekut did permanent residence at that time. pres. trump: i will take a look. [indiscernible] be able toou might deliver this speech in front of the un's general assembly even though others will be sending in their video recording. pres. trump: i'm thinking about going directly to the u.n. to go to the speech. a lot of people will not because of covid. as you know. i'm thinking it is appropriate and if we can do it, i will do it directly and again, this will not be like in the past because some countries won't be able to escape the problems they are having. countries are having a tremendous problem with the china virus, so we will see what happens. i would prefer doing it -- i can do it the other way, i can do it .iral, as they say i think it better represents the country. also i feel at least a semi-obligation as president of the united states to be at the united nations what will be an important speech. the room won't be empty. the room will have different people, representatives of countries, but i can understand how it's difficult for countries to be there. they won't be there only for that reason. they would love to be there. i've had people call and say i would love to be there. youou want to be there -- don't have to be there. i think the room, there may be a spacing requirement like you have in this room. this room was always packed. this room would be packed again but you have the spacing requirement so i understand the united nations may have that, also. [indiscernible] i would like to ask your question about the recent attack -- how do you respond to this? we gave tremendous incentives to hong kong because of freedom. we want freedom. we were giving tremendous economic incentives to hong kong and we have withdrawn all of those incentives and it will be impossible for hong kong to compete with the united states with respect to that. it just won't be because we've taken all the incentives away. if you look at china with the wto as example, they are considered a developing nation. why should they be a developing nation but we are not? incentivesemendous and we told them it's unacceptable and we've been doing that for a long time. they understand exactly how we feel and big changes are being made, but with respect to hong kong, they get tremendous financial incentive so they can do business and compete in the world. we have now withdrawn all those incentives. it's going to be very hard for hong kong to compete and i will tell you that the united states, and i say this from any standpoint you want to hear, we will end up making a lot more money because we lost a lot of his nest to hong kong. we made it very convenient for people to go there, for companies to go there. we have withdrawn all of that and the united states will be a big beneficiary from an economic standpoint but i hate to see what happened to hong kong because freedom is a great thing. thank you all very much. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> "the presidents" available in paperback, hardcover and e-book from public affairs presents biographies of every president, inspired by number stations with noted historians about the leadership skills that make for a successful presidency. in this presidential election year, as americans decide who should lead our country, this collection offers perspectives into the lives and events that forged each president leadership style. to learn more about all of our presidents and the books featured historians, visit c-span.org/the presidents. wherever books are sold. ♪ >> "the contenders" about the men who ran for the presidency and lost but changed political history, all week at 8 p.m.

complaining state institutions areunowhere to be s people helping each other, which has bee amazing, but state institutions are not there. so overall it was expected. other way but resignation. >> afterrime minister hassan diab made his announcement, he went to hand his resignation to thede pre, michel aoun, at the palace. so a lot has been happening today. l's get context. it was clarified via twitter that the resignation of lebanon's government doe enot mean earctions. it means the appointment of a new prime existing parliament and all tes political ishat come with it. let's get morerom a journalist in beirut. >> the next step is the formation of a new cabinet, but who forms it? it is up to the president himself following consultations with the parliamentary blocks, which are ruled by the major parties. so many are cynical, and they are expecting another reproduction of thca current poli class. going to be?tion is, who is it lebanon failed to successfully negotiate with the imf. the international community is lebanon as they we before. so who will the new prime minister be and what will e cabinet like, and will it be good enough to the political class and appeal to a disgruntled re

after confederate leaders. this is part of the aspen institute annual security forum. -- this is part of the aspen institute's annual security forum. >> welcome. thank you very much, thank you for everybody for setting this up, what a great way to adapt to our troubled times. troubled times, i'm glad were doing this evening for nonaspirin, i wish we were all there obviously, thank you for joining me and taking the time, congratulations to you on taking over the hoover institution, i hope congratulations is the right way to look at it. i can't imagine how you will squeeze in figure skating in the golfing with all of that but if anybody can, i know it'll be you but thank you and nick for helping without book on james baker, you are both generous with your time and recollection to help us make there we got that right, i just wanted to throw that in there too. so i'm going to start off with some pretty big stuff, this is a tumultuous time in our history, here at home and around the world, big things are happening and maybe it's a clichÉ but it feels like a hinged point and i want to get to talking about that, we remembe

bans you know that, he posed the china travel ban i instituted early and europe travel ban that i instituted quite early. if he had followed if we went afteristent to his advice, hundreds of thousands more people would have died. this is according to many people, i believe that doctor fauci agreed with that he said that president trump made a great decision when he put the been on china. joe biden wants to fling open american borders allowing the pandemic to infiltrate every u.s. community based on his policies. he wants to have ridiculous open borders i've been saying from the first day i started campaigning for this great office that you have open borders you don't have a country. you don't have a country with open border sos he wants open borders democrats want open borders if you attack a look at our southern border we would have criminals crawling through wall is getting close to 290 miles long having a huge impact. so we disagree with him on that. that's one of the many different, many things that we disagree with. but while joe biden would allow looters, criminals millions of illegal aliens to roam free in our country he wants the f

model that has done well economically, that after trying to cover up the coronavirus pandemic, is striding throughout international institutions. the very institutionsve just allowed china to have open season and to enhance its leverage in those bodies by the kitting. that is an interesting point, samantha, open season is an interesting point, samantha, open season does not —— by vacate in. can ijust show open season does not —— by vacate in. can i just show the viewer is a tweet by the editor of the global times who really speaks for the communist party. that speaks of the aggression which we re that speaks of the aggression which were just talking about. they have gone more aggressive since recent times of hong kong. how would a biden presidency reign that aggression? well, as you say, the so—called wealth what your diplomacy, the use of rhetoric like that, but also they stepped up militarism, the investments in the chinese military, the increasing confrontations in the south china sea, on the indian border, and in, it really is china that is coming out any much more coercive way than the president at the outset said was his intention. i think the

after words" programs can be viewed on our website, booktv.org. ♪ at the american enterprise institute at washington, d.c., the director of the institute's economicolicy studies, argued that the majority of americans are better off than the current political debates make it seem. here is a portion of that event. >> i'm not trying to diminish or sugarcoat or ignore the problems we face. they face. instead, i'm trying to be accurate about the broad picture of the american experience, how american life is experienced by most people in those circumstances. i think we are focusing so much on these pockets of struggle that we are confusing those for the common experience facing people. and i think the american people keep hearing that their experience is the same as the experience of people that are really suffering and really struggling. ..

research and institute which earlier this month announced that he had granted the world's 1st regulatory approval for the covert $1000.00 vaccine after just 2 months of human trials now the demo institute is expected to submit the results of their clinical trials later this month and vietnam so far has agreed to purchase anywhere between $5250000000.00 doses of that so we'll see in the coming months whether any of these deadline set by these companies or governments goes as planned brandt r.t. correspondents are tender thanks for keeping us up to date. and time now for a quick break but hey here because when we return we analyze the surge in big oil as investor uncertainty looms over the global economy as we go to break here the numbers at the close all red arrows crossed the border. some are established. like yesterday just sort of all out there in this series down today we're covering the big dollars a big global disaster like that with a basket balance or warrants. warrants a lot. he. says. because. of this connection too long to last him should ask for the last company and seeing him down the interest for the batch for who should commission. branches just shoot on disk in the. futu

research and institute which earlier this month announced that he had granted the world's 1st regulatory approval for the covert $1000.00 vaccine after just 2 months of human trials now the demo institute is expected to submit the results of their clinical trials later this month and vietnam so far has agreed to purchase anywhere between $5250000000.00 doses of that so we'll see in the coming months whether any of these deadline set by these companies or governments goes as planned front party correspondents are tender thanks for keeping us up to date. and time now for a quick break but hey here because when we return we analyze the surgeon big oil as investor uncertainty looms over the global economy as we go to break here the numbers at the close all red arrows across the board. action. no. points your thirst for action. is your media a reflection of reality. in a world transformed. what will make you feel safe. isolation community. are you going the right way or are you being that. direct. what is true what is faith. in the world corrupted you need to descend. to join us in the depths. or a maybe in the shallows. what we've got to do is identify the threats that we have it's crazy s

and institute which earlier this month announced that he had granted the world's 1st regulatory approval for the covert $1000.00 vaccine after just 2 months of human trials now the gama'a institute is expected to submit the results of their clinical trials later this month and vietnam so far has agreed to purchase anywhere between $5250000000.00 doses of that so we'll see in the coming months whether any of these deadline set by these companies or governments goes as planned front party correspondents are tender thanks for keeping us up to date. and time now for a quick break but hey here because when we return we analyze the surgeon big point as investor uncertainty looms over the global economy as we go to break here the numbers of the close all red arrows across the board. i. will look forward to talking to you all. that technology should work for people. i robot must obey the orders given to human beings except where such orders would conflict with the 1st law. we should be very careful about artificial intelligence and the point of view is. trust our government. conflicting theories cha saying with artificial intelligence will something different. the obama's protect its ow

research and institute which earlier this month announced that he had granted the world's 1st regulatory approval for the covert $1000.00 vaccine after just 2 months of human trials now the demo institute is expected to submit the results of their clinical trials later this month and vietnam so far has agreed to purchase anywhere between $5250000000.00 doses of that so we'll see in the coming months whether any of these deadline set by these companies or governments goes as planned grant r.t. correspondent sorry turner thanks for keeping us up to date. and time now for a quick break but hey here because when we return we analyze the surge in big oil as investor uncertainty looms over the global economy as we go to break here the numbers at the close all red arrows across the board. i. was a pandemic notice that you know borders just like nationalities. is a. judges. commentary crisis sleep listening to. we can do better we should be. everyone is contributing it's your own way but we also know that this crisis will not go on forever the challenges crave the response has been much so many good people are helping us. it makes us feel very proud that we're in it together. this. summer a so

for a long time it's become an institutional play $800 million market cap after doubling in the last week, so not massive but it is traded on the nasdaq it is institutionalthe home depot of cannabis, in an industry highly fragrance fragrance mean there's organic build and ability to consolidate in the independent profitable at a time they have whole sale and retail business at a time the industry is booming. it's very well ran and it's a nam i like a lot and yes, i own it >> tim, i got a question for you. can consumers by this? just asking for a friend >> this is something that actually, first of all, they don't touch the plant, per se, that's why it trades on the nasdaq it's a choice for folks looking for more an ill airy picks and shovels plays but their well positioned with the biggest multi stage and biggest operators and people that might be asking for a friend. >> good stuff there. on growgen and strong call, top three bands, the who, we could debate that by the way, speaking of grow generation sneak peek of the kraemer cam, don't miss "mad money with jim cramer" at 6:00 p.m. eastern time time for the final trade, kick it off with you tim. >> i thi

know that a pose the china travel ban that i instituted very early and the europe travel ban that i instituted quite early if he had. followed if we went after i listen to his advice. hundreds of thousands more people would've died this is according to many people i believe that dr felt she agreed with that he said that president company great decision when he put the ban on china joe biden wants to fling open american borders allowing the pandemic to infiltrate every u.s. community based on his policies he wants to have ridiculous open borders i've been saying from the 1st day i started campaigning for this great office that you have to open borders you don't have a country you don't have a country with open borders so he wants open borders the democrats want to open borders and if you take a look at our southern border we would have criminals pouring through the wall is getting close to 290 miles long and it's having a huge impact so we disagree with him on that that's one of the many different many things that we disagree with. but while joe biden would allow rioters and looters and criminals and millions of illegal aliens to roam free in

instituted in 1971 after the greaeat postal strikee of 1970. and the idea being, we are going to create a nonpolitical institution and it is going to be a hybrid government agency/business. he assumes what he was given was a mandate to take it further into the business direction. you know,w, unintentionally and ironically, both he and trump i how t the dramatized peperils of postal privatization and partisan intervention and driving our post office into the ground that we don't have to accept this. that we should not have to accept this. we should not have to take it. i'm not surprised there has been popular protests and outrage because that is something that people learn from the springtime with the george floyd protests. so when you see people die getting their medications, when you see people not getting their mail on time, of course they're going to speak up and they have learned that protests can change things. congress that has forced -- i should say, it has encouraged democrats in congress to put this on the agenda. but it is still not enough. what democrats in the house and senate are doing is the best they can do to keep putting press

after name dead men black men and women who have been violently abused at the hands of the police and the refrain is always reporting reform reform we have this institutional racism that exists within this institution has always been there and the answer from legislators is seemingly let's punish the protesters isn't that weird to me i mean yes we've seen you know people go do stupid things burn down a gas station i mean no i'm are back to ferguson is like oh my gosh they burned down the local gas station and all they looted target are all this and that these things are separate though from what actually is being protested those are those are acts of rage from an oppressed populace but the protests are saying we need these actual changes and start now we outlaw the bill in tennessee also imposes man the mandatory minimum 45 day hold of convicted of aggravated rioting whatever the hell that means you know you can call anything aggravated rioting you look really angry while he was running down the street it hansen's the fine for obstructing emergency vehicles from accessing highways and requires a court to order rest. for damages of state and property that's like a new tax i've noticed no words like

institutions -- streets and our institutions. the loudest voices have taken control, and our so-called leaders are scrambling to catch up with them. in city afterstice system. they've passed laws that make it impossible for police officers to do our job effectively. elizabeth: okay. here's the other thing that's happening, joe, there's patrick lynch saying that, we -- and there's, you know, the news from the new york city police leader saying, de blasio, you've got to leave by sup down. the -- sun down. the leader of the black lives matter is now saying boycott hollywood. they're going after hollywood now, the protesters are going after hollywood. final word from you, joe? >> hey, it worked with the nba, so why not go after hollywood, right? look -- [audio difficulty] elizabeth: all right, joe, thank you so much. we really appreciate it. >>> coming up, retired i.c.e. acting director ronald vitello on a warning we've been telling you about, the unitedded nations' 50 member countries warning the world about something that is really serious, transnational criminals are meeting up and connecting with terrorists in prison to try to exploit covid-19

lot about how that institution has grown so my first question is you point out that over the period you're talking about starting after fdr white house has become a much bigger institution. it has more staff, it's more prominent and yet the advisors are maybe younger than cabinetsecretaries . tell us about the growth of the white house's relation to the cabinet and if you can with the many examples you have in your book just a few of them to give us a sense of what some of those conflicts in that area were quick thanks john and thanks kiron for doing this. the book is as you said the growth of the white house staff and growth of the executive office. many people don't realize this before the fdr decision and eleanor roosevelt you didn't have a white house staff per se. you'll say what about nikolai hey and lincoln's and ministration but the president may have had a secretary course to but in roosevelt there someone called the brownsville commission and it had a conclusion with the present needs help and those four words conclusion led to the creation of the executive office of the president which has 1800 people. most of those are career staffers who serve administratio

instituted are defensible and whether or not the reason that they have instituted them are on the up and up, i don't even understand what they say they're doing. do you understand after this hearing today what their own defense of their actions is? >> well, here's my take-away from the hearing today. we have a postmaster general who either doesn't understand the impact of these operational changes he started about a month ago or doesn't care about the impact on real people in my state and all across the country who, as you point out, depend on the postal service for everything from getting their medications to getting business supplies or their social security checks. and as troubling is that when we presented him with this information, he refused to actually reverse course at all. in my state of new hampshire, that's particularly concerning. they have removed one of two critical sorting machines from our biggest distribution sorting facility leaving us just one and that broke this week. that delays everything. he's refusing to reverse course even when we tell him how it's impacting people. the other big take-away was he said they would prioritize election mail as we're heading towards election where record numbers of americans will vote by mail. but he had no specifics about how he was going to accomplish this. so it was a concerning hearing to be sure and we just have to keep after him and push as hard as we can. >> well, again, the sort of -- the mixture of malice and incompetence here is a little unclear to me. on the incompetence side, does -- why is this guy doing this? i mean, what -- and what experience basis does he have? this is a complex system. this is not a guy that's an expert in logistics or ran fedex, right? he's just a wealthy donor. like where does he get off basically i guess is my question? >> i think we're frozen up here. so i can't answer that question other than to say that he seemed to think that this was going to improve operations. that was the excuse he gave. it clearly isn't. the number of contacts my office has received since mid-july about concerns with the post office has just skyrocketed and he just doesn't seem to really confront how critical this service is to all americans, especially in rural america. >> so they issued a statement saying, you know, they're going to stall some of the operational changes. what i'm hearing is a lot of it isn't being undone. those mail sorting machines, for examples are aren't being put back in. one big question here is about what happens legislatively. there is a house bill that gives $25 billion to usps partly on the thinking that if he's pointing to cost cutting as the reason for these changes then we can give the post office the resources it needs to do its job. the president issued a veto. how important is a statutory fix or a legislative fix here to what we're seeing? >> well, i support a legislative fix that would suspend the changes he's made and reverse them and invest more money in the united states postal service. such a critical service to everybody in america, but particularly people right now during a pandemic and particularly rural america where, among other things, they may not have reliable access to broad band, for instance. so we need to invest enough and work to make sure that the postal service can deliver the way it always has and people can again rely on it for everything from medications to social security checks and daily mail and communication. >> well, he's going to be before a house hearing on monday, and we will keep our eyes peeled for that. thank you so much for making a little time for us tonight. >> thank you so much for having me. >>> ahead, how was it the senate was able to find the trump-russia nexus that robert mueller couldn't? jeffrey toobin on the bombshells we learned this week on the trump campaign of cheating ahead. granted. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ (mom vo) we got a subaru to give him some ato reconnect and be together. and once we did that, we realized his greatest adventure is just beginning. (avo male) welcome to the most adventurous outback ever. the all-new 2020 subaru outback. go where love takes you. (avo female) get 0% apr financing for 63 months on select models during the subaru a lot to love event. can it one up spaghetti night? cleaning power of liquid. it sure can. really? can it one up breakfast in bed? yeah, for sure. thanks, boys. what about that? uhh, yep! it can? yeah, even that! i would very much like to see that. me too. introducing tide power pods. one up the toughest stains with 50% more cleaning power than liquid detergent. any further questions? uh uh! nope! one up the power of liquid with tide power pods. ♪ where everybody knows ♪ someyour name ♪ant to go ♪ and they're always glad you came ♪ applebee's. now that's eating good in the neighborhood. >>> it's pretty well established that donald trump is a guy that spent his whole life in business cheating, padding invoices to siphon millions of dollars, for his father's empire and stiffing contractors repeatedly out of millions of dollars, running a fraudulent university that resulted in a $25 million settlement and according to "the new york times" lying on his taxes. when he got into politics he kept on cheating and it worked. earlier this week, a final report on russia's sabotage of the 2016 election and found that trump used russia to cheat, including when president trump directed campaign to stay in touch with roger clone regarding -- roger stone regarding wikileaks and hillary clinton e-mails. we will talk more about this report in a few minutes. there is also of course the criminal scheme where michael cohen ended up going to prison. you remember last year the prison tried to cheat by using the power of his office to extort ukraine into making up dirt on joe biden's family, but he got caught and impeached for that cheating scheme. that was his plan, to try to win the election against joe biden and it didn't work. and now trump is trying to cheat again. he is undermining the postal service while demonizing mail-in ballots during a pandemic when millions of people want to vote from home. last night the president plans to use law enforcement as poll watchers, a threat called, quote, an old and familiar tactic pulled right from the skrim crjim crow play book and often specifically targeted at black voters and voters of color. from his businesses to his election to his re-election, it is all one story. the russia stuff, the stuff now, donald trump is a cheater. he does not believe in fair play. he does not believe in free and chair elections. that's why the stakes are so high. free and fair elections are what's on the table. if donald trump is able to cheat his way back into the white house, our democracy is broken, perhaps irreparably. in the air and on soft surfaces. for 45 days. -always have been. -and always will be. never letting anything get in my way. not the doubts, distractions, or voice in my head. and certainly not arthritis. new voltaren provides powerful arthritis pain relief to help me keep moving. and it can help you too. feel the joy of movement with voltaren. concentration - in we suppohectic times .oments, and focus to win the day. unlike ordinary memory supplements... neuriva's clinically proven ingredients fuel 5 indicators of brain performance. take the neuriva challenge with our money-back guarantee! what if i sleep hot? ...or cold? of the year on the new sleep number 360 smart bed... no problem, with temperature balancing you can sleep better together. can it help keep me asleep? absolutely, it intelligently senses your movements and automatically adjusts to keep you both effortlessly comfortable will it help me keep up with mom? you got this. so you can really promise better sleep? not promise... prove. it's our weekend special. save $500 on the new sleep number 360 smart bed. plus, free premium delivery when you add a base. ends monday. to learn more, go to sleepnumber.com. the xfinity my account app puts you in control with digital tools to give you the help you need when you need it. get fast and easy answers with personalized help 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. change your wifi password to a phrase that's easy to remember. even troubleshoot your services on your own. we're working to make things a little easier for everyone. download the xfinity my account app today. >>> because it's friday and because every week right now feels like a year, it's easy to lose site of the fact that tuesday a bipartisan commission released a report, the trump campaign coordinated with agents of the russian plot to sabotage the clinton campaign. there are two huge bombshell revelations. one is that the guy that paul manafort was working with labeled in the senate report as, quote, russian intelligence offic officer, mueller report said ties to russian intelligence, senate report released by republicans said he's a russian spy who appeared to be running paul manafort as an asset. october 7th, 2016, "access hollywood" tape drops and wikileaks released the emails of john podesta, on a friday. according to the report, no coincidence, didn't look like one. roger stone told his pal corsi to make it happen. wanted the podesta stuff to balance the news cycle. and stone told him to have wikileaks drop those emails immediately. it was what it looked like all along. how in the world did robert mueller not know that? how are we finding out about it now? joining me now to talk about it jeffrey toobin, author of "true crimes and misdemeanors," which centers on the mueller investigations. that one line in the senate intelligence report that says kilimnik is a russian intelligence officer. for years heard ties to russian intelligence, trained by gru. that's incredible thing to include and not what mueller says. >> it's not. and i'm critical of mueller in some respects but there i'm sympathetic. intelligence community had access to intelligence, cia, that mueller did not have, it's extremely important he's identified as a russian intelligence asset. it's not because mueller didn't look, it's just that he wasn't told. but think how important it is. russian military intelligence is hacking john podesta's email and there is a russian intelligence asset in the -- intimately involved in the trump campaign through manafort. it's an extraordinarily close tie. >> it's also, i mean what's interesting about your book, it traces mueller's approach to this, and one of the things i think that happened was the barr whitewashing followed by barrage of no collusion it's all a hoax helped in public perception. and we find out it was exactly what it looked like. >> exactly. and the book in many respects is the story of the investigation and mueller's story. mueller dedicated his life to institutionsfbi, department of justice and he had a respect for them that i think was admirable in an old fashioned way but sort of obsolete. because he trusted his old friend william barr not to distort what he'd found, to release the report as he thought it would be released. and barr completely screwed him to use a technical, legal term. and that is not something that mueller was prepared for. even today mueller has never spoken out clearly in opposition, even though members of his staff remain livid about how barr treated him. >> from what i've read of the book, there's almost a kind of allegorical tale there about what happens when you -- when you kind of have deference and respect and institutional disposition and you go up against donald trump who like doesn't care. particularly on the issue whether he was going to talk to him, whether they got questions from him. they basically got rolled. >> they got rolled. that's one of the areas, the mueller performance was at its worst in the negotiat

institution has grown. my first question really is you point out that over the period you're talking about, start after fdr, the white house has really become a much bigger institution. it has more staff, it's more prominent. and yet advisers there are often maybe younger than cabinet secretaries, but they often have the ear of the president. tell us about the growth of the white house, its relation to the cabinet. and then, if you can, with the many examples you have in the book, a few of them just to give us a little sense of what some of those conflicts in that area were. >> well, thanks, john. thanks, kiron, for doing this. the book is, as you said, about the growth of the white house staff, the growth of the executive office of the president. many people don't realize this, but before the fdr administration we really didn't have a white house staff, per se. people sometimes say, well, what about -- [inaudible] the truth is presidents may have had a secretary or two, but in roosevelt you have something called the brown lowe commission, and the conclusion led to the creation of the executive office of the president which now has about 1800 people. most of those 1

institution. next historian neil ferguson discusses his authorized biography of the former secretary of state henry kissinger was also a fellow at the hoover institution. mr. ferguson appeared on the weekly program "after words" in 2015. >> this is the first of the two buck authorized biography and you say not only has it been written with henry kissinger's cooperation but his suggestion. how did that happen? >> guest: authors ought to be nervous of it because it implies he had some control over it when he suggested this to me just now more than ten years ago, i said yes i am willing to do this, but on one condition you have to kind of accept if you ask me to do this comin this and give me o your private papers i will write what i think is the truth which is incidentally the basis on which i've heard in the previous book. so he agreed to that. so in that sense it isn't authorized. i wouldn't have taken it on and any other basis. >> host: did you know him beforehand, how did he find you? >> guest: he read my stuff. we were at a party in london and i told this in full disclosure we were talking about one of the books that i'd written into the sort of math on that basis and i forget exactly when but sometime after that, the subject came up. i wasn't the first person that had been considered for this job, but when he put the question to me, i initially said no and he then wrote me a very henry kissinger later. >> host: letter or e-mail? >> guest: letters. he doesn't do e-mail. it said what a great shame. just when i decided you were the ideal man to do this and just as i found 150 boxes of my private papers that i thought were lost. once i started looking at the stuff i decided i should do it. it is an extremely difficult like to write for a whole range of reasons. after i started to read the these papers within a few hours i thought i have to take this on. >> host: this is not a man that has been undocumented. he is also shared some information. he spoke with walter isaacson. why do you think that he wanted this book for ten? >> guest: by training he is a historian and a historian knows that memoirs are different from the histories, from the biographies. his three volumes cover this period before 1969 so half of his life and affect that he hadn't written about and walter isaacson's book, which is very good, is essentially a journalist with based on interviews and i think the idea was somebody should write a scholarly biography based on documents into the archival sources because that simply didn't exist. there's a bunch othere is a bunu can find in libraries most of them are not based on much more than hearsay but i think the argument for the scholarly biographer is a compelling one and as it turned out, that material was very good and rich and i was lucky because that whole period from his earlier stage right down to the moment the job of the national security adviser had been neglected by the previous writers. >> host: you are often described as a conservative historian. do you think that he shows you in part for that reason? >> guest: yes. i think it was more important that i'm british so, because i think there is some advantage to being an outsider in writing a work of american history. one characteristic feature of henry kissinger's life has been the extraordinary political controversy since the 70s that has raged on ever since and in some ways it's off the generation of 1968 that came of age during the vietnam war. i am somebody that can come at this i don't have the memorabilia from woodstock to in my attic. i think that it's worth maybe adding a footnote because it means something different if you've grown up in the uk it isn't republicanism and i am not by any means a republican in my politics now that i live in the united states. i'm a conservative in the way the tiebreaker. co- kissinger was a conservati conservative. in the same kind of way passengers conservatism is a european variant, so is mine and that may be one reason that he thought it would work. >> host: when you say european conservative, are they in the national security realm? >> guest: it's the social issues and those things that i regard not being in the name of politics or national security issues. it's often the case people get confused into thinking that there is some kind of argument going on about national security. i've been critical in recent years of president obama but i was also critical of his predecessor in the book colossus published in 2004. i was extremely critical of the invasion of iraq and the way the occupation was handled. so part of the reason for doing this, i can on into the debate about the u.s. foreign policy from the moment that i stepped foot in the u.s. and i'd probably approached his brother naÏvely thinking that i could criticize republicans and democrats. it's hard to be in that position. your expert to the one side or the other but i think on national security issues i'm more of an independent. >> host: there's no question there's been a convergence of the end of the cold war and if you look at issues like iraq itself there were people on the left with humanitarian challenges and others isolationist. i'm not sure besides somebody that chooses case-by-case. >> guest: or somebody that recognizes there cannot be a simple party line on these national security issues and somebody that doesn't want to be on the party line on the social and cultural issues. and arrestingly i found that kissinger as a young man was rather in the same position he thought of himself as a small c. conservative. he certainly didn't self identify as a liberal in the 1950s or the 1960s. but when he encounters the conservatives berry goldwater conservative 64, the republican convention, he was appalled at having an uneasy relationship with the right of the republican party indeed with the neoconservatives as well and that is something to think about and it may explain why he's a controversial figure. he had enemies on the left but also on the right about whether the soviet union was a sellout. >> host: said th so the book isd the idealist which is a rather contrarian take on kissinger who even in the kindly description was described as the ultimate realist, not a direct descendent of machiavelli. so what you explained in the book really is not a wilsonian notion of idealism. can you explain for the audience at home what you mean by idealist when it comes to kissinger and why traditionally that ibut that isn't really the description that you are using. >> iit is true most people think of henry kissinger as the realist and the names they throw around our machiavelli. they argued the united states should follow the self-addressed but he wasn't one of them there was this notion that i begin to think not many people have done. i was really struck by something that was political realism. he's highly critical of so i started to think there's something funny here and then i dug deeper into the development. there is an experience to make them not highly surprisingly critical. it has been a very interesting essay because they were the foreign policy disregarded to the human rights abuses. his own experience makes him suspicious what he saw. he comes to harvard and to try to get rid of this undergraduate, professor of government has effectively come back when you are finished and underestimating and ultimately put it into his senior thesis. particularly in the problem that on the one hand there is such a thing as freedom, free flow, the experience is real but on the other hand argues there is some kind of plan for the world leading ultimately to perpetual peace and the discussion in the senior thesis and ultimately the experience of choice is a real one and freedom as kissinger defines it is in the experience. kissinger rejected the materialism and the materialist views of history and capitalist material that said if our growth rate is higher than their growth rate we will win the cold war. kissinger emerge as as a rarity but that's what made his contribution distinct and stand out from the people who thought you can come forward with systems analysis and things of that sort. >> john yoo worked in the office of legal counsel at the justice department and the george w. bush administration just look at the commonwealth club in san francisco in 2012 about his co-authored book taming globalization. >> with me just briefly describe the case and how that encapsulates. it is a case of a mexican national who across the border committed a capital murder and sentenced to death by the state court of texas. he wasn't however given his warnings under the conventions that require when an alien is arrested in the united states he be given warnings that he can speak access and give translators and so on. texas refused to reconsider its position even though they haven't provided these boardings is provided by the treaty. the country went to the international court of justice to say the united states violated its obligations into the court of justice found against the united states and said the united states had picked violated our obligations and issuehad issued an order toe united states to hold the execution and the others who were in the same situation. president bush issued an order to the governor of texas to governor perry asking him to stop the execution so the united states could come into compliance with the convention at the justice decision. texas refused and actually was sued in the supreme court and refused to stop the execution. in a decision the supreme court said even though you the united states signed the convention that required this kind of warnings, the congress had yet to do something to put it into effect and until congress did the, the courts were not going to get into the business of enforcing the treaty even in the case when someone was on death row. it is complicated but the one case summarizes a lot of issues in this book. the first is its cost a lo causf changes in the political and legal system and we mean a few things, the easy and rapid and chief movements of goods and capital across national borders so for example millions of aliens cross the border crossing the country. billions of dollars of goods and services also cross the borders. the last i think 30% of american gross national product is either related to imports or exports and billions of dollars moved between accounts here and abroad. globalization also refers to the ease of communications and rise of the internet into the creation of new kinds of networks to make it easy and cheap for people to communicate and for things of god to protect us here at home in a way that it didn't use to 50 years ago or 25 years ago so if you look today at the american stock markets, they move up and down to what is happening in greece and whether they will be able to pay back the bonds has a direct and immediate impact. that's something that probably wouldn't have happened but we would be the first to admit it isn't an unrelated thread. it also makes bad as possible so for example, vonage works, drug smuggling, pollution, terrorism. a lot of these problems cross to move around the world as goods and capital and people do. that has sparked the response to try to create regulatory regimes that control these new types of globalization. we call it global governance people refer to it as different things but the basic idea is it is outside of the power of a single nation state to regulate these things anymore it used to be to affect most of the goods, services and capital but today because of the ease of transportation and communication and globalization, it lies outside of the power of most to regulate so you had the new kind of governance. one is the international agreements now try to regulate worldwide that to effectively regulate something they have to have a scope that it didn't usually have sued to regulate chemical weapons worldwide, the convention regulates the production and existence of every kind of chemical in the world no matter who possesses it even thos those polled by reseah laboratories, research, private persons fall under this convention so one thing you see as broad a scope. the second is the new rise of international institutionsthat are natural. in order to regulate and force, the institutions have to be seen as outside of the control of any country so you have the rise of things like not just the united nations and security council and the court of justice which i just mentioned, but things like the chemical weapons convention has a sticker. or the world trade organization has a those outside of the control of any one country but because of that independence and that kind of power it used to be fair to say they were under the control of some nations but now they are seen as being independent if they were to reach an agreement that global warminwith globalwarming they wf these characteristics in ways that the federal government doesn't here at home even to the extent of regulating domestic energy usage and at the same time an institution to determine how much each country was allowed to produce in terms of energy, how much pollution it was allowed to make and also to measure whether people in violation and is

. >>> after the break, it's become something of a norm for the trump white house, apparent corruption in plain sight. what he's up to and the institutional worry it's causing, next. institutional it's causing, nex t. >>> with each subsequent development the questions get ho louder, is donald trump dlib rally slowing down the post office in order to help his chances in the election. the post master general is a mega donor who 85 days from the election decided the time was right for a chaotic and sweeping overhall. on friday the post master general restructured the executive structure, displacing people with decades of experience, moving some to new positions, others out of leadership roles entirely. that announcement also included a hiring freeze and a request for early retirement authority for nonunion employees. critics of the president say he's trying to sabotage the postal service ahead of the election. it was only a month and a half ago trump identified mail-in voting as the biggest threat to his second term. all that sounding fishy enough for democrats in both chambers of congress that many of them are urging the usps inspector general to investigate. joining our conversa

institution that inflicts violence and trauma with taxpayer money. i'm disappointed after countless hours of public comment our demands are fallen on deaf ears. we're not challenge the institutionf white supremacy. our city should fund a culture of care not harm. if this budget is passed, response to our community's demands it's a continue structural violence on our families. we need to be bold and stand up to the poa. we will not forget how you move forward. we want 26 million cut from the academy and overtime but no less of 50% be put in order to fund the priorities by the budget justice coalition. police make us feel less safe and it's the only responsible decision to make given their history of misconduct, lack of accountability and justice for all the people and all the victims of police violence and across the country. black lives matter. connect us to the next speaker, please. >> >> good morning, supervisors, my name is jackson and i'm a member of local 21. i'm a coordinator with the city and county of san francisco. my job is staff at the medical branch and i coordinate on boarding of medical staff and ac6 sites. i'm in shock we are choosing between our jobs and our abi

institution. next, historian neil ferguson discusses his authorized biography of former secretary of state henry kissinger who is also a fellow at the hoover institution. mr. ferguson appearedded on booktv's weekly author interview program "after words" in 2015. >> host: so this is the first of a two-book authorized biography, and in your preface you say that, quote: not only has this book been written with henry kissinger's cooperation, it was written with his suggest. howld that happen? >> guest: well, this -- [inaudible] i suppose authors ought to be nervous of it because it implies that he a had some control over it. but when he suggested this to me,s which is now more than ten yearsing ago, i said, yes, i would be willing to do this, but on condition i have a completely free hand. you have to kind of accept that if you ask me to do this, you give me access to your private papers, i will write what i think is the truth. finish which was, incidentally, the basis on which i'd written the previous book on the rothschild family. so he agreed to that. >> host: oh, good. >> guest: and i think i wouldn't have taken it on on any other bay us. >> host: how does it happen? ty you know him beforehand? -- did you know him beforehand in. >> host: he knew of you? >> guest: he had read my stuff. we met at a party in london, full disclosure, and we were talking about one of the books that i had win are about the first world war -- written about the first world war. we were having a conversation about that. so we met on that basis, and i forget exactly when, but sometime after that this subject came up. i think he was attracted to the idea of a scholarly biography being written. i wasn't the first person that had been considered for this job. look, when he put the question to me, i initially said no, and he then wrote me a very henry kissinger letter -- >> host: a letter or e-mail? >> guest: it was a letter. >> host: wow. >> guest: he didn't do e-mail. and the letter said, what a great shame. just when id had decided you were the ideal man to do this and just the right -- to go through 150 boxes of my private papers that had lost. i i'm afraid just a week or two days was looking at those boxes of papers. when i started looking at this stuff, i decided i should do it. i've been a bit daunted before because it is an extremely difficult life to write for a whole range of reasons. it's controversial, it's just a difficult thing to do. these papers, particularly the early correspondence and dire ily extracts within a few hours i thought, well, i really have to take this on. >> host: so this is not a man who has been up documented. i mean -- undocumented. he's written his own memoirs extensively, even longer than your book. >> guest: three volumes. >> host: so why do you think he wanted -- and he's also shared some information. he spoke with walter isakson for his biography. why do you think he wanted this book written? >> guest: he is, by training, a historian. and a historian knows that the memoirs are different from the histories, from the biographies. his three volumes, after all, cover mostly his time in government, really next to nothing about the period before 1969. and so there was half of his life, in effect, that he hadn't written about and said very little about walterize act soften's book, which is very good, is essentially a journal's book based mostly on interviews. and i think the idea was somebody should write a scholarly biography based on the document, on the archival sources because that simply didn't exist. and although there are a whole bunch of books that you can find in library that are thought to be biographies of kissinger, most of them are not really based on terribly much more than hearsay. so i think the argument for a scholarly biography was a compelling one, and as it comes out too, it was very good, are rich. and i was lucky because that whole period really from his earliest days growing up in germany right down to the moment richard nixon offer him the job of national security adviser in late 1968 had largely been neglect by previous writers. >> host: you are often described as a conservative historian. do you think he chose you in part for that reason in was the other unnamed person also a conservative historian? >> guest: yes, he was. i think it's more important that i'm british though because -- [laughter] i think there's an advantage to being an outsider in writing a, who of american history, oddly enough. one characteristic feature of henry kissingier's life of has been the extraordinary political controversy that can be, dates back to the early 1970s and has ranged on more or less incessantly ever since. and in some ways it is of the generation that came of age during the vietnam war. >> host: my generation. >> guest: now, i'm somebody who can come at this history. i don't have memorabilia from woodstock in my attic -- >> host: nor do i. [laughter] >> guest: that's important. on the question of conservativism, i think it's worthy of maybe adding a footnote because conservative meaning something different if you have grown up in the u.k. is it's not republicanism, the u.s. version, and i am not by any means a republican in my, in my politics now that i live in the united states. i'm a conservative in rather the withdraw that henry kissinger was a conservative. i'm a sort of european conservative. and you often feel like a liberal if you're a european conservative in the united states because things that american conservatives say are so completely jocular to you. but in the same kind of way that kissinger's -- [inaudible] really a european variant, so's mine. and that may be one reason that he thought it would work. >> host: when you say a european conservative and things that you find shocking, are they in the national security or realm, or is out social issues? >> no, it's the social issues. those things not being in the domain of politics that are in the domain of politics in the. national security issues, it's often the case that people get confused into thinking there is some kind of straight punch and judy show argument going on about national security. i've been critical in recent years of president obama. i was also very critical of his pred's sor in the book colossus published in 2004. i was extremely critical of the invasion of iraq and the way that the occupation was handled. so part of the reason for doing this, i suppose, i have been drawn into it by u.s. policy from the moment i set foot in the x. i probably approached it rather naively thinking that i'd criticized both republicans and democrats. of it's hard to be in that position. you inevitably are expected to be on one side or the other. but i think on national security issues and on much else i've proven more independent. >> host: i'm not sure what finish there's no question that there's been a convergence since the end of the cold war, and if you look at issues such as bosnia or iraq itself that there were people on the left who saw the humanitarian challenges, there were people on the right who were isolationists, a i'm not sure what an dependent. is other than perhaps somebody who chooses it case by case? >> host: right are, or at least somebody that recognizes there can't be a simple party line on these national security issues. and somebody who doesn't want to be divided by party line on social and cultural issues. interestlyingly, i find -- interestingly, kissinger found himself in the same position. he certainly didn't self-identify as a lib rat in the 1950s or 1960s harvard. but when he encounters barry goldwater's supporters at the 1964 republican convention, he was appalled. and he alwaysed had a very uneasy relationship with the right of the republican party. it may explain why he's a controversial figure. he had enmaines on the left -- enemies on the. left, christopher hitchens who really attacked him, but he also had enemies on the right, the debates in the 1970s about whether detente with the receive crete union concern. [inaudible] >> so the book is called the idealist, which is a rather contrarian take on kissinger who was even the most timely description is described as the ultimate realist,s if not a direct descendant of machiavelli. your choice of words or is not a notion of idealism, it's more of a conti notion of ideal. can you explain what you mean to the people at home? our notion is, of course, communism, but that's really not the description you're using. >> guest: i was really struck by the fact that they were critical of the book about the congress, the essay is highly critical. the maestro of 19th century real politic. so i started to think there's something funny here. and then i delved deeper, and three things are really striking. one, his inexperience growing up in the '20s and '4030s and driven to free germany in 1938 made him, not surprisingly, highly critical of appeasement of foreign policy, the appeasement of dictators. he appears as a realist in a very interesting essay because they thought they were pursuing a rather narrow, self-interested approach to foreign policy and disregarded the human rights abuses of the dictatorships. number one, his own experience in the 1930s makes him suspicious of what he saw as the realist appeasers. number two, he come to harvard and to try and get rid of this rather pushy undergraduate graduate says go away and read -- underestimating him. put it into his, often he put it into his senior thesis. he was deeply influenced. marley in the problem that on the one hand there is free, freedom of choice, but on the other hand he argues that there is some kind of plan for the world, for humanity leading ultimately to perpetual peace. and the central discussion kissinger rejected materialism. he rejected materialist theories of history like marxism and leninism. but also he rejected capitalist materialist theories of the sort that said if our growth rate is higher than their growth rate, then we'll one the cold war. i think on those three counts, kissinger i americans -- emerges as a rarity. but i think it made his contribution fundamentally distinctive and made him stand out from the pack of people who thought you could solve the cold war with system analysis or something of that sort. >> you're watching booktv on c-span2. and we're looking at authors' programs with fellows from stanford university's hoover institution. a public policy think tank founded in 1919 by stanford alumnus, president herbert hoover. up next, john yu who worked at the justice department during the george w. bush administration, spoke at the commonwealth club in san francisco in 2012 about his co-authored book "taming globalization." >> so let me just briefly describe the case of med e year v. texas and explain how that, to me, encapps lates a lot of the issues in "taming globalization." medellin v. texas is the case of a mexican national who crossed the border and committed murder, capital murder, and was sentenced to death by the state courts of texas. he was not, however, given his warnings under the vienna conventions which require that when an alien is arrested in the united states, he be given warnings that he can seek access to his consulate, that he can get assistance from translators and so on. texas refused even though it had not provided the warnings required by treaty. the cup of mexico went to -- the country of m

after i was commissioned in 1970, i learned russian and graduated from the u.s. army russian institute in germany as an officer. it was through the russian institute had the first opportunity to visit soviet ukraine in 1980. i will never forget the experience of meeting ukrainians and recognizing the deep pride they have in the history and culture while recognizing the incredible suffering inflicted on ukraine by powers throughout history. as a soviet russia military specialist, i have had various assignments. general, inant served as the u.s. security coordinator for israel and the palestinian authority in 2010.lem from 2005 to i reported directly to the secretary of state. i let a multinational team working with the israeli government and the palestinians. i operated at the most senior levels in jordan, egypt, saudi arabia, uae and qatar. with london. i was a diplomat and a soldier. after retiring from the army in 2010, i served my country as a director of the marshall center. inspired by the fierce commitment to democracy and freedom by the protesters, i directed the marshall center to create a comprehensive program of seminars and assistants d

after an all american highly approved by the public institution. as we would say before you were born, motherhood, apple pile, the postal service, an all-american institution terms of connecting family. we're talking here about how it delivers medicine and, again, at the time of a pandemic, how necessary it is for us to have the mail so that the people do not have to choose between their health and their vote. they can vote absentee. and by the way, the president's family was all out in california urging absentee ballot during the special election in the spring, so this is nonetheless yet again another, shall we say, contradiction. >> so you're telling us that donald trump's own appointed board of governors, the united states post office, is asking for $25 billion so you're actually just trying to deliver what the board of governors donald trump appointed is saying the united states post office needs, right? >> that's right. actually, they asked for more they asked for another $25 billion for infrastructure logistics, trucks and all that, but we put that in our moving forward infrastructure bill which we hoped the president would support, but not in this b