to put that into perspective, they have failed twice, over more than twice as often as the clinton administrationnd more than three times as often as the bush administration. this is a record that, frankly, does not put them in good stead with the legal community, and i believe in the next couple of weeks we may see a couple of more unanimous decisions, perhaps even on the recess appointment question, that will come down and further tarnish the justice department's record. now, even liberals are starting to wake to this. jonathan turley who is a very distinguished professor of law at george washington university has said he is very concerned that there's a shifting of gravity

that is something that happened during the clinton administration.'m sure most of you have heard about the mark rich part in which he helped engineer a pardon for someone who was an international fugitive which is -- i'm not sure that had ever happened before, you know? the president has the authority, and there's a pardons office at the justice department that veterans are familiar with, and, yeah, we know about this pardon that was given to someone who had not been arrested, had not stood trial, had not been convicted and who was in court, but somebody who had fled the united states abroad after rich's wife gave a lot of money for building the new clinton library. but that's not actually one of the worst things that eric holder engineered. one of, one of the worst things that he engineered was another series of pardons for 16 terrorists. there were 16 terrorists of the faln, this was a puerto rican independence group. they had been involved in 130 bombings, armed robberies, six killings and hundreds of injuries in new york, chicago and elsewhere. t

those set the stage for the successor clinton administration. they did not do it all, of course. there was a lot of things happening, including things that administration did. they helped greatly in the four years of black ink that the clinton administration showed in the last four years. it was really an important event. the much doubted graham ruddman holings didn't accomplish much. it was a threat but the congress is resistent to threats and can sidestep them very well. here you have them putting together this important budget bill, which saved the country a good deal of money and as bill points out often honored in the breach, in use and is a threat for what is going on today. every kind of budget process includes those two key highlights. when the director had to sit down with the chairman of the appropriations committee to hash out the limitations on the discretionary spending. i'm glad i did not have to sit through those meetings. nevertheless, even though it was the second best shot, i think the b.e.a. 90 is a landmark and the most important thing we've done in budgeting s

those set the stage for the clinton administration. there were lots of other things happening including things that that administration did. they help to greatly in the four years of black ink that the clinton administration showed in its last four years. it was really an important event. gramm-rudman hollings never did accomplish it. congress is very resistant to threats and can seem to be able to sidestep them very well. here you have an environment with bush putting together, i think, an important budget bill to save the country a good deal of money. as bill points out, although often honored in the breach, it was a threat for what is going on today. every kind of budget process, change or improvement that is suggested always includes those two key points. i think probably the highlight of negotiations was when director darman had to sit down with the chairman of the senate appropriations committee, to hash out the limitations on the discretionary spending. i am glad that i didn't have to sit through any of those meetings. neverthele

. >> the clinton administration determined they wanted to move the operation of the domain system out of the federal government and privatize it. what we announced in march was simply the completion of something started in 1998. eight p.m.ight at eastern on "the communicators" on c-span2. >> with live coverage of the house on c-span and the senate wec-span2, here on c-span3 complement that by showing you relevant public affairs programs at of the weekends, c-span3 is the home to american history tv including six unique series. the civil war, american artifacts -- discovering what artifacts or they'll about america's past. history bookshelf, with the best-known history writers. at the presidency, looking at the policies and legacy of our nation's commanders in chief. at and our new series -- "reel america," featuring archival programs. c-span tv, created by the cable industry and hunted by your satellite tvr provider. like us on facebook and follow us on twitter. now you can keep in touch with current events from the nation's capitol using any phone any time with c-span audio. simply c

>> i don't recall the clinton administration being that helpful. >> why not? >> i was usually covering things they didn't want covered. so, i don't necessarily blame them for not providing a lot of information. i had too many people actually out and out lie to me in that administration even about whether the white house had just received a subpoena for the president to testify by the special prosecutor or the independent counsel. but it was a very combative -- anyone who covered the clinton administration will remember it was a very combative period with the press. initially not so much but you had the rotc issue early in his campaign, then you had the jennifer flowers issue early in his campaign, which he denied any relationship but the minute you heard her on the tape you knew that was not necessarily truth. >> how did he survive it? >> isn't it amazing. it is amazing. you look now and bill clinton is the most popular political figure in the country. he has amazing personal skills. when you look back particularly with the economy the way it is now, the econo

back in the clinton administration, would not have imagined in the same room, is the same chair as a few years later, people would be sitting around with long lists and folders with pictures and names of people and voting on who would live and who would die. i think we might never have authorized the first use of lethal force against bin laden. richard clarke, the nation's former counterterrorism czar under bill clinton and george w. bush. 15 years ago, he pushed for the arming of u.s. drones. yes now become a critic and is accuse the of -- has accused the obama ministration of covering up the number of civilian casualties in drone strikes. a john brennan, who replaced couple removed in the white house, at one point said there were none, which i found laughable, no program has none. >> and richard clarke on whether his former boss president bush should be tried for war crimes. >> it is clear that things the bush administration did, in my mind at least it is clear, some of the things they did were war crimes. >> all of that and more coming up. this is democracy now!, democracynow.org,

the londonor administration -- worked for the clinton administration. the senate foreign relations committee. he began the deputy assistant to vice president biden when he moved to the white house. do being an to advisor for president obama. he has a good record of advising people. we should pay attention to things he has to say today. to tell us about transatlantic relations. thank you so much. [applause] thank you very much. it is always great to be at brookings. so many good friends and colleagues here. so many people we have stolen from here on including ohphil and others. also administrations of both past and future rely on us. it is a was wonderful to be here. .t is good to be involved i appreciate you all hosting me very much. i thought i would try to trace where we are with ukraine by going back and sort of tracing how we got to where we are. i will offer thoughts on the way toward. this is a very good issue. there is much going on in your with the president and his european counterparts. is very much in the headlines. protest that the began at

this is why it was so important to bring the europeans along, which actually started in the clinton administration, to bring the europeans along to see around the way we did, because we were sanctioned out, in many respects, at least initially on iran. now the administration's -- two administrations moved that goalpost further. so one is the question, you got to look at who's got the leverage. and if you're really going to make these things work, then the folks with the leverage have to be at the table, and have to be willing to sanction. because otherwise, they're not going to be effective. secondly, you know, it is tools can are cumulative in their effect. and if you can have a military element in addition to your diplomatic and all the rest, if you can have the threat of a military element, it is going to make sanctions more effective. this is the argument that we made on iran. we cannot make -- bring the table with the sanctions we'll have to contemplate military force and nobody really likes that. it is true, nobody when russia went into georgia, when russia went into ukraine, no one suggeste

. >> the clinton administration determined that they wanted to move the operation of the main system out of the federal government and privatize it. what we announced in march was simply the completion of what started in 1998, it was the complete privatization. >> monday night at 8:00 eastern on "the communicators" on c-span 2. >> now you can keep in touch with current events from the nation's capital using any phone anytime. 262-888.all 202- recapweekday, listen to a of the days events at 5:00 p.m. eastern on "washington today." you can hear audio of the five public affairs programs beginning at noon eastern. long distance phone charges may apply. >> next, a look at the history of iraq and the sunnis, shias, and kurds. from "washington journal," this is about 40 minutes. host: we continue on this sunday morning with shibley telhami, a professor, and the author of the world through arab eyes. we appreciate you being with us. . back,t to take a step because we have been hearing so much about the sunnis and the shias. we thought it would the interesting to give our audience a lesson in

. >> the clinton administration determined that they wanted to move the operation that names a system out of the federal government and privatize it. what we announced in march recently the completion of what started in 1990 eight, which was to complete that privatization. >> monday night at 8:00 eastern on the communicators on c-span2. >> next, look at the history of iraq and the sunnis, shiites and kurds. from washington journal, this is about 40 minutes. we continue on this sunday , aning with shibley telhami professor, and the author of the world through arab eyes. we appreciate you being with us. back,t to take a step because we have been hearing so much about the sunnis and the shias. we thought it would the interesting to give our audience a lesson into this conflict that that dates back to the seventh century. guest: as a cautionary note, to understand that a lot of these divisions are the logical, and the principal political -- theological, and in principle, political. when the prophet mohammed died, there was a battle over succession. the majority selected the successor, the

legislation and amendments that -- these rules and there was one rule in the waning days of the clinton administration that was a workplace safety rule. clinton finalized the role and then left office and republicans overturned it. that is the only role that congress has been able to overturn. could it happen again? potentially yes. it is a winning issue for republicans because they can get democrats on their side. one thing that was interesting was that he said was its effect on climate change, human activity, that is unclear. >> something he said that offers a preview of how they might run the chamber in the fall if they take over is he alluded that there are some senators, democratic senators, where legislation still need 60 votes to pass. it would be difficult for some democratic senators to oppose that kind of legislation. >> will be fecund moving up the -- will we see him moving up the leadership ranks in the years to come? >> we could. he is a rising star, no doubt about it. senator brasso has been out front -- barrasso has been out front, he is one to watch. >> thank you for being with us. >>

many of you came back to washington at the beginning of the clinton administration with the nationalurity council staff. he became the deputy assistant adviser when he moved to the white house and so tony has a very long record of advising people and so i think we should all pay particular attention to some things that he has to say today. and now we are asked to go back to his deep trans-atlantic routes and talk about the effect of this crisis. so tony, thank you so much. [applause] >> thank you all so much. it is always great to be back at brookings. so many good friends and colleagues here, so many people including phil and others. also an institution and the previous administration and future administration relies upon this on a daily basis for intellectual capital, which we don't have an apparent anomaly on. so it's wonderful to be here, particularly good to be involved with the senator from kings college and i appreciate you all hosting ever so much. i thought that i would try to trace where we are with ukraine by going back and tracing how we got to where we are. and obviously

clinton. lindsey graham said he would do. >> under no circumstancesiran. i agree with benjamin netanyahu that the current deal the u.s. administration is negotiating with iran is a very bad deal. the reason they're making the mistake, the person leading the negotiationses is a negotiator named wendy sherman, an old clinton hand. she was the lead negotiator for the clinton administration with north korea, and we're making the same mistakes we made in if 1990s. in the 1990s in the clinton administration they relaxed sanctions against north korea. billions of dollars flowed in and north korea used those billions to develop nuclear weapons. we literally brought the same negotiator back who had failed in the prior deal to negotiate the same lousy deal. and now with what's happening in iraq, the danger is, i think, even greater that we'll see an extension of the obama/clinton foreign policy to cut a deal with iran that only accelerating their progress towards nuclear weapons capability. >> i will note i'm not saying you're defending george bush at all. george bush also contributed to relaxing some of those sanctions against the north kore

back in the clinton administration, would not have imagined in the same room, is the same chair as a few years later, people would be sitting around with long lists and folders with pictures and names of people and voting on who would live and who would die. i think we might never have authorized the first use of leth

the two of them go back together to the early days of the clinton administration and lissa has since served with hillary in gary's roles as white house and state department speechwriter, communications director to the first lady campaign adviser and collaborator on hillary's white house memoir living history. these days when hillary and lissa talk i think they spend most of their time discussing the latest great novel, mystery or biography that they are reading. ladies and gentlemen please join me in welcoming hillary rodham clinton and lissa muscatine. [applause] >> thank you. [laughter] [applause] thank you so much. [applause] >> well that was very nice. it is great to have you. thank you so much. >> thank you and thanks to you and brad for running such a great bookstore politics and prose. [applause] speaking of books you have had it out for four days now. >> that's right. >> you probably lost count visit was probably one of these paces more like when you were secretary. you are traveling all over the place and doing all these interviews. you are keeping a pretty frenetic pace but

, you should be in favor of the bipartisan light tough regulation that started during the clinton administration. what we are laying out is that regulation. we long felt no rules are needed because the market takes care of it but the light touch regulatory approach is the right way to go. the alternative is reclassify broadbrand internet as a telecom 2 service. and we will apply 80-year-old rotary regulations on to this rapidly moving eco system. that is untried, risky, radical, reglortory suggestion. >> host: this is the first stop we pay tension to and once an npr comes out is there always a policy? >> guest: you can have proceedings where the fcc will propose rules and say we will not do anything but most of time yes. the fcc accepts comments, look at the record, folks meet with them and they will come out with an order. sometimes you have a proceeding that is hard and they will ask more questions saying here things brought up. we would expect rules it from this. >> host: there is always reference to title two. and that is applying the common carrier status to the internet. would you explain

back in the clinton administration, would not have imagined in the same room, is the same chair as a few years later, people would be sitting around with long lists and folders with pictures and names of people and voting on who would live and who would die. i think we might never have authorized the first use of al

legislation and amendments that -- these rules and there was one rule in the waning days of the clinton administration that was a workplace safety rule. role andinalized the then left office and republicans overturned it. that is the only role that congress has been able to overturn. could it happen again? potentially yes. winning issue for republicans because they can get democrats on their side. one thing that was interesting was that he said was its effect climate change, human activity, that is unclear. >> something he said that offers a preview of how they might run the chamber in the fall if they take over is he alluded that there are some senators, whereatic senators, legislation still need 60 votes to pass. it would be difficult for some democratic senators to oppose that kind of legislation. >> will be fecund moving up the -- will we see him moving up the leadership ranks in the years to come? >> we could. he is a rising star, no doubt about it. senator brasso has been out has been outasso front, he is one to watch. >> thank you for being with us. , sundays atnew book eight. >> if you want to

so, in 2011, hillary clinton criticized, probably one of the most vocal people in the administration,riticizing putin for human rights violations, for crushing democratic activists, he attacked her, then she laid out for the president that they should, you know, have a different course, a stronger stance with russia. i know this is not easy to do and understand in the twitter age, but these are important discussions and the hard choices that people face, and i think it really lays out how she -- >> it does. >> how she took a strong stance. >> i think -- >> i think you should listen to vladimir putin. >> here's my question -- >> you just asked a question. david, newt just basically proved my point, there is a right-wing obsession with hillary clinton. just listen to his questions. as we've discussed, you've dedicated your life to tearing down the clintons, yet her approval ratings are going strong, just look at these numbers. in a recent poll, secretary of state approval, 59%, strong leader, 67%, honest and trustworthy, 60%. i hope you're not waiting for a bonus. >> i can't wait for he

administrations. it's been enlarged through clinton, bush, and the obama administration. it's served our country well, and it served europe well. >> the already -- i think that's foreign policy. >> if you're at treasury and you're negotiating and working with the allies on sanctions, how much is your leverage undercut by the snowden leaks and the post-snow dp area and it alect not personally on enj law mu angela merkel, she can get over it, but about the political sentiment of the united states? steve? >> it's difficult. i want to make a bug here for my colleague, juan zarate, who has written a wonderful book that tells the story. it's a great tale about how pressury got into this book and really developed this new tools. and ones of the things that is important and talk will talk about it is the source of treasury as intelligence and information about what the bad guys are doing and how they're moving their muddy around in addition to trying to disrupt them. but the snowden leaks, the dicushes of u.s. social media in helping the government on areas of dealing with terror

legislation and amendments that -- these rules and there was one rule in the waning days of the clinton administration that was a workplace safety rule. clinton finalized the role and then left office and republicans overturned it. that is the only role that congress has been able to overturn. could it happen again? potentially yes. it is a winning issue for republicans because they can get democrats on their side. one thing that was interesting was that he said was its effect on climate change, human activity, that is unclear. >>

legislation and amendments that -- these rules and there was one rule in the waning days of the clinton administrationhat was a workplace safety rule. role andinalized the then left office and republicans overturned it. that is the only role that congress has been able to overturn. could it happen again? potentially yes. it is

well as the alliances that bankers together thought would be ok, and that, native during the clinton administration it was ok to have less restraint and more risk coming from these very concentrated, powerful institutions. what do you make of the fact that these alliances have remained in place regardless of the party affiliation of those in the oval office? >> money does not care about party, and relationships do not care either. fdr was a democrat, and his was a republican. over these particular hundreds or so years, i examine the relationship with the democrats and republicans, but it was pretty much 50/50. it was all about this alignment of a philosophy, and almost a club mentality that goes back over centuries that says this is what we need to do. for america to be a superpower, we need to have unconstrained financial institutions, and bankers feel in order for them to expand american interests abroad, they also need to have less constraints, and bankers and presidents are on the same page. at is where we are at today, but it is more dangerous today. there used to be accountability. when banks

hand you spoke out and compared the situation in iraq to what happened in rwanda during the clinton administration, that we didn't move too quickly, and, of course, that was one of the greatest humanitarian crisis of modern times. >> it's true. it was a humanitarian crisis that was almost without an opposing force. in this case you had the collapse of an army that re had resourced, led by a government that - although i don't know nouri al-maliki personally, i had been to iraq, i had sensed it, and there's a lot of arrogance in the government. and there was a disinclination to take u.s. advice. so it wasn't possible to go in there and be the lone ranger the first day that something happened with i.s.i.s. he had to come to the realise agency that he needed help on a strategic level, not just a couple of airplanes, but he had to fundamentally revamp his approach to leadership. not sure that he's done that. >> you mentioned that it's important for the u.s. to send a message to iran, that we are still a power broker in that region. so hutch of whatever we do in the united states has to be a projection

at that time the clinton administration determined that they wanted to move the operation of the name system out of the federal government and privatize it. so what we announced in march was the completion of what started in 1998, which was to complete that privatization of management of the do main name system into ican. i can has been operating at a multistakeholder organization since 1998 and all we were saying was the time had come for us to step aside and eliminate the remaining role we had with ican in terms of these specific technical functions and in that part of it, we're saying that the united states no longer has to have the role it's played in terms of having this contract to designate ican to perform this work. they've been doing it well for the last 16 years and it's now time for the united states to step aside from that. i think where the issue has been with some members of congress has been the question of the extent to which through this role the united states was able to exercise control over the internet and in fact, we don't control the internet. the internet is a

at that time the administration, the clinton administration determined that they wanted to move the operation, the domain name system out of the federal government and privatize it. so what we announced in march was simply the completion of what started in 1998 which was to complete that privatization of management of the domain name system into icann. in fact, icann has been performing and has been operating as a multistakeholder organization since 1998, and all we were saying was the time had come for us to step aside and eliminate the remaining role that we have with icann in terms of these very specific technical functions: they're called the iana functions. and in that part of it we're saying that the united states no longer has to have the role it's played in terms of having this contract to designate icann to perform this work. they've been doing it well for the last 16 years, and it's now time for the united states to step aside from that. i think where the issue has been with some members of congress has been the question of the extent to which through this role the united states was

>> the one that stands out in my mind was during the clinton administration. house had asked me to do a small dinner tacked onto the delegates cocktail party which was at the museum of the american indian. there was a collector's office. this is done in this amazing lewis comfort tiffany wood. they said make it beautiful. we cannot tell you why. when they walked in, it was madeleine albright hosting the other female heads of state and it was the most powerful, moving experience i have had in my career. >> looking forward to more in the future. from illuminating the world to illuminating the ocean's depths. he is looking to spend 31 days in the deep joining us now. 63 feet below sea level where he is researching aquatic environments. fabian, good to have you with us. when you first went down, tell us what has been going on in these past 24 hour days. everybody getting along? >> every buddy is getting along just fine. what is interesting is now we are starting a panic that we do not have enough time to do all the research and the filmmaking we need to do. there

>> the fundamental view of the fcc ever since i was there in the clinton administration has been theernet really ought to be open to all users and that include people who put content out and just want to see the content. and it all to be neutral that anybody can put content out and anybody can access it. i am on the board of issa and we are launching this friday a particular application which anybody can download for free. on aoad for free issa smart phone. you will be able to measure in your house, your wi-fi speed. you will be able to find out if you are getting the internet that you paid for. -- if order from, past you are from comcast, you will be able to find out if they deliver. the point of the fcc is you ought to be able to go as fast as you purchased. you should bid to go and the fast lane you chose to any website and any content. ,> i think it's a fundamental it gets at fundamental beliefs about government responsibility. fundamentally, if comcast has to deliver everything at a high speed, they take on a greater cost for the burden of a what? for the benefit of home? >> for

when you were trying to -- >> the fundamental view of the fcc, ever since i was there in the clinton administration, has been that the internet really ought to be open to all users, and that includes people who put content out and people who just want to see the content. it it ought to be neutral in the sense that anybody can put content out and anybody can access it. assia, andboard of we are launching a particular application that anybody can download for free on a smart phone. if you download that, you will be able to measure your wi-fi speed in your house and you will be able to find out if you actually are getting the internet that you paid for. >> interesting. >> you will be able to measure or and find out whether they are delivering. the key point of the fcc is, you ought to be able to go as fast and go into the fast lane that you chose to any website and get any content. >> i think this is a fundamental -- it gets to fundamental beliefs about business and government responsibility. if comcast has to deliver everything at the same speed, a greater cost for the burden of what? for the benefit

with the group people citi group with robert rubin who he had been working for under the clinton administration big corps he came the head of the new york fed while robert rubin was a vice chairman at citi group trying to solve the citigroup problem before everyone knew about it back in two thousand and seven so his books interesting because the indicates he had no knowledge of anything that could possibly have been happening and that somehow he was this hero because at the darkest hour he and sort of all the other. people who were in the elite forces who were able to get together and buy and trade and get cheap money and sort out assets which is still going on today he was someone who had to do what he had to do so positions himself as sort of this like super hero who had no choice and we the little people including apparently you and i and anyone else who noticed this going through along the way don't have the understanding the comfort henschel to know how difficult it is now particular position to make a decision and he did the best he had to do and he wouldn't do anything different but the

. >> well, the ambassador is right of course about the clinton administration but the important thing to remember is that all those actions were taken by clinton before iraq and before afghanistan and before the exhaustion that the people feel about these wars now. >> strongly about the president and how he is projecting weakness rather than strength. senator bob corker says when you see putin doing the things he's doing when you see china stepping out and doing the things they're doing, is it because they see a president that they don't believe will back up statements with actions. chris. >> the republicans never saw a tax they didn't hate, and a war they didn't like. i think that's just more of the same. they don't even say how are you going opay for it? i mean are they going to back a $5 billion fund to fight terrorism? i doubt it. even though war in iraq cost $2.5 billion a week. no, i don't think these kinds of political sniping is going to help. but the problem lies with obama. he needs to find a way to inspire the american people and a narrative that people believe in not just

they were in the situation room in the administration. hillary clinton was a part of it and it was about bin laden. let's listen. >> you really didn't tell president clinton about osama bin laden? >> no. no. i take very seriously the obligations of secrecy. >> didn't he say, you could have told me? >> no. he understood. and when president obama called to tell him. and he started by saying i assume that hillary has told you -- >> she has been seen wiin the pictures with her hand over her mouth and she has said that is when the tail of the airplane -- there is a concern she might share too much with the former president of the united states. >> it was a settle way for her to show her independence from bill clinton. one of the things during his campaign is the joke of do you get two for the price of one, right? and i think this in a way, when you bring up the clintons, is it going to be the '90s all over again? this is her way of saying, i've got my own thing going and you talk to people close to hillary clinton and they will say there are really boundaries

. >> bill clinton, he got a purple heart in the clinton administration. it was in the bush administration he received the distinguished service cross. many felt that was a way of undermining his ability to receive a medal of honor, that would take the wind out of the sails of the moment to do it. >> go ahead. >> the difference in treatment of the soldiers experienced in france as compared to the united states. >> well, first of all, let me say this. this is something that gets lo lost. and dr. green said it very well. one of the things that gets lost, the benefits of going to the french, guess what, they knew how to fight a moderate w war. the americans did not know -- they were terrible, at least prepared, for a modern war. in fact, pershing was still an advocate of a marksman, of the rifleman, entrenched warfare. what good is that? this is a highly mechanized operation which, you know, a foot of ground means something. so the french were able to train these men much better than they could be trained by their american counterparts. they were told by thei

got eaten by the predator on wall street you had a really good example of that under the clinton administration after his failed healthcare reforms never got throw and robert rubin who was one of the sharks on wall street to show them the population back in the markets they got rid of glass steagall they brought about the commodity futures modernization act which decriminalized gambling on a lot of these derivative contracts and they brought back a whole new group of folks to set them up for another slaughter and this right now you've got a big set up for another massive slaughter and you know this charming process goes on i think bernie madoff mean bernie made off was really a keen student of chumming in that he would constantly deliver one percent a month returns the genius of bernie made up was that his returns were great they weren't but they weren't super spectacular they were just very good levon twelve percent a year consistently markets up markets down that was his chum that chum line without telling anybody there was a huge ponzi scheme similarly in the u.k. in the u.s. and around the

in favor of is continuing the bipartisan, light touch regulation that started back in the clinton administration and as i read it, what chairman wheeler and the rest of the fcc are laying out in the nprm, is exactly that sort of light touch regulation. we've all felt that new rules are needed because we think the market already takes care of it, but we think that light touch regulatory approach is the right way to go. the alternative that's being suggested is to reclassify broadband internet as a title ii telecom service. that would actually constitute a significant change to the way this is worked. for the first time, applying 80-year-old legacy, rotary-era telephone era regulation onto this incredibly rapidly-moving ecosystem. that is an untried, risky, radical regulatory experiment. we don't know how that would turn out. >> host: i want to do a couple of things for our nonpolicy audience. nprm is a notice of proposed rulemaking, the first stop that says we're about to pay attention to this issue. >> guest: right. >> host: and then also, once this happens, when an nprm comes out, is there alwa

well you had a really good example of that under the clinton administration after his failed health care reforms never got throw and robert rubin his one of the sharks on wall street to charm the population back into the markets they got rid of glass steagall they brought about the commodity futures modernization act which decriminalize gambling on a lot of these derivatives contracts and they brought back a whole new group of folks to set them up for another slaughter and this so right now you've got a big set up for another massive slaughter and you know this charming process goes on i think bernie madoff mean bernie made off was really a keen student of chumming in that he would constantly deliver one percent a month returns the genius of bernie made up was that his returns were great they weren't but they weren't super spectacular they were just very good levon twelve percent a year consistently markets up markets down that was his chum that chum line without selling anybody that was a huge ponzi scheme similarly in the u.k. in the u.s. and around the world around europe it is an eno

eaten by the predator on wall street but you have a really good example of that under the clinton administration after his failed healthcare reforms never got throw and robert rubin who was one of the sharks on wall street to show them the population back in the markets they got rid of glass steagall they brought about the commodity futures modernization act which decriminalize gambling on a lot of these derivative contracts and they brought back a whole new group of folks to set them up for another slaughter and this so right now you've got a big set up for another massive slaughter and you know this charming process goes on i think bernie madoff mean bernie madoff was really a keen student of chumming in that he would constantly deliver one percent a month returns the genius of bernie made up was that his returns were great they weren't but they weren't super spectacular they were just very good levon twelve percent a year consistently markets up markets down that was his chum the chum line without telling anybody there was a huge ponzi scheme similarly in the u.k. in the u.s. and around the w