supporting isenhour forbade republican nomination and they relied on people like clark gable or helen hayes to come out and speak on his the house and support him as a candidate. one of the interesting things about the 1952 campaign is that the democrats have been in power for 20 years. roosevelt had taken them through the depression and taken them through most of world war ii. truman had his own term and now many people in the country felt there needed to be a change in government. the republican front-runner was a man named senator robert taft and taft was from an old republican family in ohio. his father had been president and he was known in party circles as mr. republican. isenhour came in and the taft people were immediately concerned about the emergence of a celebrity candidate. they called him a glamour candidate. it's hard for us to imagine isenhour being labeled as the glamour candidate but to the die-hard taft people that's exactly what he representative. isenhour came in and there was a big struggle between traditional republicans and many of these people were not internationali

helene cooper exploder the life of liberian president, ellen johnson, the first democratically elected fee enemy gov. and history gov john kashich reflecting on this 2016 presidential campaign. in the coming weeks chris hayes will look at racial inequality in the united states. rachel snyder will report on our low and moderate income families manage money. nebraska senator ben sass will argue that america's youth are not prepared for adulthood and this weekend on "after words," stewart taylor will explore sexual assault on college campuses. >> they have sewn, the universes have sewn and the obama administration has shown, i think, resoundingly that they are incompetent at doing this, and that they are terribly biased. the incompetence is they don't know how to investigate. don't have subpoena power. don't do good scientific evidence. don't dig up evidence. they train their so-called adjudicators by telling them, almost all guys who do this are guilty. if the guy is persuasive and logical when he says he is innocent that's a sign of guilt. if he is not persuasive, that is a sign of guilt. that's it stanford's process. the question is, is there any way this system can be reformed? so that it's not so guilt p