the lawyers are - arguing today about status. today is the first of a — arguing today about status. of a five-day _ arguing today about status. today is the first of a five-day hearing - arguing today about status. today is the first of a five-day hearing in - the first of a five—day hearing in court were her lawyers are expected to make the argument that when the then home secretary took away her citizenship, he failed to consider that she was a victim of traffic —— trafficking and child exploitation. they said that the government should reconsider its position and overturn it. the british government takes a different view and say that while she was 15 when she left the uk, for much of her time within isis and up to the point when she lost her citizenship she was an adult. i have asked about the idea of her being a victim of trafficking and she gave her to me. your legal team argue that you were trafficked to isis. can you explain how you were trafficked?— can you explain how you were trafficked? ~ ., �* ., trafficked? well i wouldn't have been able to — trafficked? well i wouldn't

so, essentially what russia's arguing here, and what many women's rights advocates will argue is that women's perceived intellectual inferiority is not a result of some kind of natural or biological force, but inside because they've been prohibited to have the same kind of education as men. and this is what is attempted to be rectified here. this is still quite limited in scope. they are not arguing for universal women's education. instead the so-called young ladies academies, female economies that are going to be formed, or really targeted at relatively elite young white women. those who are pretty well off, but there is also a kind of political purpose to this to which i will get to in a minute. what is notable to about these female academies is that, they are not only going to include in the curriculum these traditional so-called feminine arts like dance, music, sewing, and those kinds of things. but also curriculum that had generally been geared towards young men or gendered as masculine. only appropriate for young men such as history, science, geography, and arithmetic to name a

essentially what rush's arguing and what what many women's rights advocates will argue is that women's perceived intellectual inferiority is not a result of some kind of natural or biological force, but instead, because they have been prohibited to have the same kind of as men. right. and is what is attempted to be rectified. okay. and this is still quite limited in scope, right they're not arguing for universal women's education. instead these so-called ladies, young ladies, female academies that are going to be are really targeted at, relatively elite young white women. right. those who are pretty well-off. but there's also a kind political purpose to this, too, which i'll get to in a minute. what's notable about these female academies is that they're not only to include in the curriculum these traditional so-called feminine arts like dance and music and sewing, those kinds of things. but also curriculum that had generally been towards young men or gendered masculine rite, only appropriate young men such as history science, geography and arithmetic to name a few, right were what we m

so some argued that she should be released from guardianship. so i have one example from amos worthington. i'm just going to read it to you her conduct and conversation has been much the same as any other person in the ordinary walks of life so much so that if he this is amos had not heard that she was once of unsound mind. he should not have supposed that she ever was. other residents were a little bit less favorable, right? so they suggested that lydia's mind still continued to be weak or not, right? mary canard for instance explain that lydia's whole conversation appeared light and trivial totally different from what it was when i first knew her her conversation was not that of a rational person. canard concluding so after this detailed investigation the court decided that lydia was still of unsound mind and they decided that she was unfit for independence. and so she petitioned again. two years later she writes a second letter to the court of common pleas. and this letter is quite amazing. she describes herself as grievously vexed and disqui

but even larry summers and people argued against the tax cuts even though they argued for the under obama. it's kind of a strange, it's like the rest of society. he gets divided among economists on the ground and that gets in the way from doing the science, which ca or council of economic advisers what i was at can we put out the report led by a large part by some of kevin's research. we basically just used the literatures to say here's what the literature says what happen. it wasn't necessarily what we thought would happen. here's what the scientific literature says. and it was just completely dismissed. can you talk a little bit about how you see that from a journalistic point of view? because it's been a big change with trumpet that occurs. >> guest: again, it's part of what i was getting at early when i said that journalists should put aside their traditional standards when it comes to covering and administration and went into this for resistance mode and thought that the job was to stand up at press briefings every day and burn rate the president, or berate the press secretary. not s

it was tower who i argue the same thing. he he argues early on that we need to abandon our position. the party that is the party's position as party of thaddeus stevens the heroic pennsylvanian who led the radical republican who led the republican effort in during reconstruction. so it was he's arguing for a more for a more racial or a more specifically racial. promotion of the party. that's what tower is doing. following in the footsteps of of alger, when one southern senator greeted tower and when tower was won his seat and into the senate. he was greeted in the he was greeted on one of his committees by a democrat republican senator excuse me, a conservative senator. when that democratic senator said, we want to welcome them, we want to you welcome the south back to the confederacy. so it was a tower towers moment. towers moment was was key after tower. you see incidents. it was goldwater who would pursue a southern strategy. he first demonized the civil rights act, which became law in the summer 1964. he also his team pr

even larry summers and people argued against the tax cuts even though they argued for them under obama. >> right. >> it is kind of a strange -- it's like the rest of society. it gets divided among economists on political grounds. that gets in the way from doing the science, which ca or council of economic advisors where i was at, we put out that report led by a large part of some research, and we basically used the literature to say here's what the literature says will happen. it wasn't necessarily what we thought it would happen. it is what the literature said would happen. it was completely dismissed. can you talk about that in a journalistic point of view because it's been a big change that with trump that occurred? >> that's part of what i got at early saying journalists put aside their traditional standards when it comes to covering an administration and went into the full resistance mode and thought their job was to, you know, stand up at press briefings every day and berate the president or berate the press secretary, not simply cover the administration, but to resist it, and yo

argue the best way to look at it is_ you could argue the best way to look at it is in_ you could argueability for us to integrate asylum seekers in _ and the ability for us to integrate asylum seekers in a _ and the ability for us to integrate asylum seekers in a diverse - asylum seekers in a diverse multicultural— asylum seekers in a diverse multicultural population - asylum seekers in a diverse . multicultural population which asylum seekers in a diverse - multicultural population which might not be _ multicultural population which might not be the _ multicultural population which might not be the case _ multicultural population which might not be the case in _ multicultural population which might not be the case in other— multicultural population which might not be the case in other parts- multicultural population which might not be the case in other parts of- not be the case in other parts of europe — not be the case in other parts of euroe. t, u, , not be the case in other parts of euroe. t, h, , , not be the case in other parts of euroe. t, , , l, not be the case in other parts o

i argue at an earlier book. universal voting would reverse that simply because of americans had to vote the senate would prevail and you wouldn't get a lot of these characters from the left to the right. that's probably not going to happen. so people have got to inform themselves understand the nature of the danger and then do what they can either to let their elected representatives know right there newspapers and fun and join networks in which americans are demanding better government. it's almost that simple and it's a very very difficult task obviously because the visions are so great and quite frankly. given the nature of today's society people do not have a lot of free time on their hands, especially in a in a covid environment. but this is the nature of a democracy in a democracies and experiment and unless americans are prepared to fight for that democracy as ben franklin said you have a republic as long as you can keep it and we're not at the stage of losing it, but we're losing a significant part and t

so i think those who want to argue that secession was somehow legitimate can argue that it was legitimate in that it was an act of revolution that was anticipated by the political the political theory of the declaration those on the other side who want to insist that it was definitively not legitimate also something to rely on. and that's why there was a war, you know, that's why we fought a war over this. that leaves the question of whether the outcome of the war. it tells you that one side was right or wrong. that's the might makes right theory of history it may or may not be true descriptively. it's probably not true morally and normatively. i guess my concluding thought on all of this is that it's amazing to me how much we as americans still care about these questions and i think this is why we have a national constitution center. it's why we struggle to try to get constitutional questions right today. it's because these issues are central to who we are as a people and that's the best thing you can say about our constitution gives us a mechanism for arguing about who we are that is be

what you are arguing is performance and what pompeo is arguing. 70 countries, american students ranke argues all of this is on weingarten's watch. >> it did happen during her watch. the sense of urgency has absolutely not been there. you know, one of the problems is i dare to say that even the teachers, younger teachers, are the victims themselves of an education system in this country that has sold them short, right? so now you have people who are in their 20s and 30s who are part of this system that has failed us over the prior decades i would argue. so we need better teacher training, we need teachers to be paid an merit and give them incentive for people who might choose other careers to choose teaching. the teach for america program to be ramped up to solve the problem. a lot of smart college kids out there spend a summer, a year post college working in this program to catch american students up. it is a dire need. it must be addressed and mike pompeo is 100% right on that. >> dana: governor doug ducey. he is saying all the ymcas will be focused on this for two years. in arizona

what are the schoolchildren arguing about, you said for money, what are the first graders arguing forld you do? so what the schoolchildren are arguing for money answered like that. how much is one student? keep an eye on the kids, who's working in the mask, you said builder yeah well, who else answered as well? few builders they're wearing a mask. consistently well, konstantin please, return to yourself. we are waiting for konstantin, of course, we are filming. great, konstantin yes, you know, sometimes the glass is half full and half empty, i would say the number of points that your teammate has earned. e gives you the opportunity to prove yourself, because we give the prize for 200 points, and now there are 35 on the scoreboard, so you have 200 - 35 left. well, somewhere like 165, so the same 5 questions that i asked konstantin at 5 seconds more, because if you give such the same answer, as konstantin gave, it sounds like this signal, which means that you must immediately give another version of an unpleasant answer to an unpleasant question. you are ready in principle, but everythi

you have the spectre _ argue he is divisive. you have the spectre of— argue he is divisive.publicans having a — saying, "if i see the republicans having a good show tonight, i might throw— having a good show tonight, i might throw my— having a good show tonight, i might throw my head in the ring for campaign." that will divide america. whilst _ campaign." that will divide america. whilst america

i i would argue, know in 2015. the economy just the second to last year of the obama presidency the economy grew at 3.1 percent. the next year the last year of the obama presidency 2016 it grew at 1.6 percent. about half as the growth is about half as much and and so that is the economy that donald trump inherited. that is an economy that was slowing down dramatically slowing down to the point where you had leading economists like larry summers the former treasury secretary under president clinton saying there was a 60% chance that we were going into a recession. you had the federal reserve and the congressional budget office saying, you know, we're already at full employment unemployment can't go any lower growth. can't be any stronger. uh, we're at the end of a business cycle they were talking about a soft landing. that was the top. that was the economy that trump inherited and what happened he blew away all those expectations unemployment. didn't that go lower dramatically lower than the congressional budget off

and even argued that roosevelt wanted to help the british, he wanted more, the dictatorship. here is the hearst press. if it passed we may be in our last hours of peace. we may indeed be in our last hours of democracy and freedom, sweeping provision for dictatorship. in his own personal column, that democracy would die, what would happen to democracy than? would die in a disaster, and out of smoldering ruins of social and political system will rise the scarlet woman. the chicago tribune news stories may seem like a moderate. mccormick's reporters did not refer to the proposal but instead to the president's dictator bill or the administration dictatorship bill which is in the news story. in his editorial mccormick said the property would be a bill to destroy the republican. despite these warnings, u.s. congress did pass by a lopsided margin and did aid britain and the soviet union to enter the war in december of 1941. after the us entered the war, some isolationists including hearst started to tone down their rhetoric, no longer anti-roosevelt but that was not true for the hea

so i argued that it was dallas. my book focused on dallas and dallas republicans argue were blazing the trail. the the gop southern strategy making those racial appeals to white democrats as early the 1950 as early as 1956. and i show that it was a bruce al gore who was a dallas republican, elected to congress in 1954, the first dallas republican since rick reconstruction, and it was john tower, the texas republican senator elected in 1961 after lyndon johnson, vice president and john tower would until 1985 and a number of folks from dallas who had used specific racial strategies to capture these white voters. the whole point among them was to make it very clear that the republican was not sympathetic to the interests of african-americans. and i argue that it was algiers. 1956 campaign, which an important precedent. it's important moment for the racialization and the future the southern strategy because it marked the first time that a southern republican, at least by and abandoned this measured stance on desegregati

elizabeth holmes had argued at trial that she had - argued at trial that she had always attempted touine product, and that she never intended to commit fraud. injanuary a never intended to commit fraud. injanuaryajury never intended to commit fraud. injanuary a jury disagreed. in january a jury disagreed. she injanuary a jury disagreed. she had hoped to be given house arrest — elizabeth holmes has a young child and another one on the way. a series of photos were given to court by her partner, showing the happy family life that would be destroyed if she were given a custodial sentence. the judge, though, gave her no reprieve. the world works in certain ways, until a new great idea comes along and changes everything. comes along and changes everything-— comes along and changes eve hina. ., ., , everything. elizabeth holmes has become _ everything. elizabeth holmes has become a _ everything. elizabeth holmes has become a household - everything. elizabeth holmes. has become a household name. documentaries, podcasts, even a hulu series have been made about her and the culture of faking it

moreover, -- argues that separating the disability that arise from the body and those that arise from society is pretty futile. these factors are inextricably linked, so both body limitations and social barriers work together to construct disability. at the same time, we developed this really deep and complex understanding of disability. many of you were quick to realize that a preference for ability, a strong desire for health and capacity, a celebration of able-bodied needs and able minded miss, this pervades our lives. we are constantly encouraged to be as smart, as healthy as we can be. friends and family members are celebrated when they overcome or persevere pass their disability. and in our own university, we see perfection and achievement valorized. the preference for able-bodied miss enable biden's is really -- but in our class, we attempted to question this desire, right? we worked to think in new ways, reading works by authors who claim disability as a positive identity and really a valuable way of living in the world. so, we read authors who pushed back and resisted this im

geri, some would argue the economic mess is being | argue the economic mess is being felt around theou agree with that? i would. more to the point is when we look at pensions the vast majority of tory voters are pensioners. that is where they are, they have to be careful with that. i also think there has to be a recognition that it is younger people that have burnt the brains of the financial crises and over the last few decades. there is a difficult balancing act, is what i am trying to say, between clearance voters in future voters. there is a prosperous landscape there i think for parties to plan in where they are looking at. whether it is the government not committing to the triple lock or whether it is the thresholds. there are places where the government sees they may make savings and there is a £50 billion worth of savings to be made. you can see why they might be looking to was that. . ., , , ., that. another friends paid starring the telegraph _ that. another friends paid starring the telegraph is _ that. another friends paid starring the telegraph is about _ that. another f

i'm not arguing that judges should follow election results. sound and create v constitutional argues must be made to win the day. but how those arguments emerge and triumph depends largely on the composition and relative power of social and political forces. finally what is the place of constitutional argument in our politics today? can we engag ordinary people with those arguments? or is constitutional political economy just a matter for academics, politicians and attorneys to discuss among themselves in forums like this one? alas for me the answer to that question, at least right now is a qualified no. few americans outside the ranks of law schools, offices and courts know much about the constitution. i teach a class on voting and elections at georgetown to very smart, pretty well-informed undergraduates. and every time i teach it i get the question, why the hell can't we abolish the senate? or at least elect senators by population, wouldn't that be reasonable? clearly no one ever told them about the final clause in article 5. they built a l

these they argue is unsustainable. these aren't savings _ they argue is unsustainable.an be found i they argue is unsustainable. these j aren't savings that can be found on the back— aren't savings that can be found on the back of— aren't savings that can be found on the back of the sofa or trimming little _ the back of the sofa or trimming little bits— the back of the sofa or trimming little bits here and there. these are savings that can only be found to making — are savings that can only be found to making drastic cuts to services. effectively. — to making drastic cuts to services. effectively, removing library services _ effectively, removing library services from communities at a time when _ services from communities at a time when they— services from communities at a time when they need them the most. libraries — when they need them the most. libraries is — when they need them the most. libraries is a central government needs to find councils better, and government said and understand the pressures there under, which is why it's made additional funding available t

she could argue politically that she does. _ her. she could argue politically that she does.lly that she does. there's nothing | her. she could argue politically l that she does. there's nothing in law that would require the uk government to negotiate independence such a election. it's also the case such a election. it's also the case such that the referendum would be an entirely separate election event. i referendum is clear because the people vote directly on an issue thatis people vote directly on an issue that is as a single issue. even then the outcome isn't always that clear. if we think back to brexit. even after people voted to leave the european union. there was a big debate about what that meant. so even with the rustic firm in them it isn't always clear. but if you turn an election when your election mps on a range of issues and parties are fighting on a range of issues. it is very difficult to assert that that process is the same time a referendum on such one so the issue. it would be interesting to see what the snb proposes to frame the proposal. the snb proposes

mccormick for instance argued before the war began in europe.oosevelt was engaged in a conspiracy to drive the country into war and gave his independence day speech in which he used the word conspirators for conspiracy four times in one sentence to explain roosevelt school which he said was to quote rap the constitution in terrorism and communism of russia. after the war began in europe the first patterson mccormick press argued against aiding the british and even argued that roosevelt wanted to help the british and the dictatorship that would presumably come with water. here for example is the hearst press on the land lease bill if it passed. we may be in our last hours of peace. we may indeed o be in our very last hours of democracy and freedom. if sweeping provisions for dictatorship are not eliminated. in his own personal column he warned readers that democracy would die if it passed and what will happen to democracy than? it will will die in the disaster enveloped in thehe plains of the holocaust and out of the smoldering ruins of our socia

but even larry summers and people argued against tax cuts. it is kind of a strange -- it's like the rest of society got divided among a calmness on political grounds. that gets in the way from doing the science concert economic devices we put out that report led by in large part of reserve. we basically use the literature to say here's what the literature says will happen. is not necessarily what we thought would happen here's what the scientific literatureus say. and it was just completely dismissed it. can you talk aie little bit abot how you see that from a journalistic point of view? it is been a big change with trump that occurred. >> again part of what i was getting at t earlier when i said journalist put aside their traditional standards when it covering in administration and when into the full resistancewa mode. rate the press secretary and not just simply cover but to resist it. you saw this and people major news networks they would this president differently and they did. and as a result stories like the ones i'm trying to tell in t

montesquieu arguing. it is most argued in his most important work, the spirit of laws published 1748 that rulers and governments must strive to balance the higher principles guiding a decent, non barbaric politics with the practical of military defense against despotic or illiberal aggressors. this approach to international as developed by and channeled through montesquieu, explains the opening statement of principle on, international affairs and foreign policy in george washington's 1796 farewell address. i should pause to ask why is the farewell address so important? you might ask or you ought to be asking why, is it cited throughout american history, even the 21st century? why did madison and jefferson place the farewell address on the required curriculum of their new university, virginia? and this was even after the apparent split between washington as seemingly a federalist and the new democratic republican approach of the jefferson madison. we invoke the farewell address to this day because it's the

and i would argue that historians of conservatism have often listened to the respectable voices of the elite media or intellectuals. instead of the voices of the enraged populace despite the greater reach of the latter. and the more highbrow quality newspapers may have influenced opinion leaders, but hurst mccormick in the patterson's shape the views of millions of ordinary americans. this was a very dangerous moment in world history as hitler built up as military invaded as neighbors and started a world war. yet at this dangerous moment these press barons work together to minimize the fascist threat. their divisive politics and sometimes hateful messages have entering appeal the last of the press lords died more than a half century ago, but there are errors in the right-wing media. still continue this crusade for america first. so that is where i will end it and i'm happy to take your questions. and if you have questions step up to the microphone, yeah. thank you. john harbath the retired from university of pittsburgh. i have a question with what's going on now with. right-wing media

i am not arguing. i am not arguing that the criminal justice system is perfect. i am not arguing that there isn't a subset of america's prison and jail populations constituted by people whose incarceration does serve a legitimate genealogical end. i am not arguing that don't make mistakes or abuse their. and i am not arguing that cops do mess up that mechanisms meant to ensure accountable city are batting a thousand. however, the fact that the institute has traditionally relied upon to play a major roles in the provision of public safety aren't perfect, does not the sorts of radical re-organise stations or reimaginings being proposed today in the name of equity? calls for mass decarceration and policing must be force resisted not out of antipathy for criminal offenders, but out of a deep and sincere empathy for the communities that those harm. such resistance begins with understanding precisely what it is that the advocates of this misguided program get wrong and who they'll hurt most if they get their way. only then can we bring true justice to the communities s

a deputy solicitor general had argued it when it was going to be a smaller case. the court decided to make it a bigger case. it was no secret the court had done this, because they get to the end of the term and the y issue an order and it says, this case will be re-argued and in re-arguing it, we will consider whether to overrule two cases, and they named the two cases and they were two cases that were the foundation stones of the court's doctrine about campaign finance regulation and it was clear that the relatively small case had become a large case. it was pretty clear that the government was about to lose this large case because the court just doesn't do things. it was clear the court was doing this because they were much in the way to deciding that they were going to overrule these cases but they didn't want to do it without argument. you should have argument about things like that before you do them. so it was my case here they call a special session. the court usually convenes the first monday of october. they called a special session in september to argue

so i've been very much arguing the green agenda.and. but coming back to your question, it's very much about changing the growth agenda. the growth model in the uk, for instance, where we've reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 42% between 1990 and 2019, that can become more pro—growth and green at the same time. there is an inherent challenge that many people... does it require you notjust... that's a nice mantra, it's a good slogan, but does it require you to rethink your view of what capitalism does? rebecca henderson, an economist at harvard, says this, part of the problem is "a failure to imagine "that capitalism can be done fundamentally differently, "that it can operate without," as she puts it, "toasting the planet. we now need," she says, "self—aware growth, not growth at any cost." well, what comes out is very much incentives really do matter. and it's about incentivising notjust people and companies, but people's behaviour will change. look across parts of the uk — we've started to see, in response to people's behaviour, i

i'm arguing, to make clear at least, i'm arguing, it is a communication deployment. if you are telling -- here's the thing, i hear democrats say this all the time, we've left the working-class behind. in terms of culture, yes. assuming the working-class which i think is a wrong assumption is socially conservative christians. cultures need some segment -- leave some segment of the population behind. it's an exploitable aspect. what democrats are doing within that voter file is trying to argue the facts. it's no true there is no crt. what they don't realize is they have to match hyperbolic propaganda, motive, grievance politics into that voter. . pilot the same time when we think about erosion. it's true. all of these groups have eroded. the reason the line is education, my friends, is because the people who don't have strong educational backgrounds to inoculate themselves from propaganda are the ones that are going to be most susceptible to the effects of it. >> wire democrats -- >> because they are the end party are the opposite. that's what their challenges always b

i would argue securities laws are fairly clear. one of the things i think we have seen is a deliberate i would argue indifference until very recently from the financial regulators who have authority. i think in part because this is a new thing, we do not want to squash it, that is a nice way to think of it. this is developing the technology, developing businesses, but let's let it grow. another way would say hey, there were folks who thought maybe this all collapses and we all go away and there's nothing to see here and it's not our problem. we do not want to legitimize these things. that is another perspective i recall hearing a lot of 10 years ago. but we have to think about now where we are, as we have a whole industry that has come prickly out of nowhere in over a decade -- frankly out of nowhere in over a decade and regulators who say i have a lot of rules that probably apply here. we have done anti-money laundering before from people who move money from here to here. you should know you are moving money for. we have done this

thatat book he argued for something called mutual sympathy. and today you probably use words like empathy. put the two together i could see two meanings all in for me as an individual. i should be able to apply my skills open competitive market. we are all in. this is the goal. thanks smith a lot to say to us. so to understand arguments about the invisible hand requires a belief markets are competitive. capitol markets i think what he might say today is you might be concerned about the ability to compete. i cannot really say i am with american history he argued for spending public education as well as infrastructure i think post 1776 in view of those ideas would definitely capture today's. hear more about it that way. don't you come out and say this in the book the queue almost just said it now. adam smith would set you economists are supposed to bring them together. one was incomplete without the other. is that really what you are saying in the book? >> quick line on that would be it's time to put the liberal don't mean liberal elites use in