machiavelli.thinking it's machiavelli. it doesn't sound like sun tzu. ♪ i'm going with--take a chance. machiavelli. final answer. >> took a shot, "50/50" chance, and you got it right. >> oh. >> you got it. way to go, pauline. good job. [cheers and applause] your gut led you in the right direction, and led you to $10,000. you still have two lifelines, and now a chance to double your money with a $20,000 question. [dramatic musical flourish] ♪ according to the "fog test," which of these is fake if you blow on it and the "fog" of your breath doesn't immediately disappear? [dramatic music] ♪ >> well, it would have to be a pretty big diamond for you to even see your breath on it. don't think it's wedgewood, and i don't think it's mahogany because i don't think there'd be any difference between that and any other wood, so i'm going with c, sterling silver. final answer. ♪ >> unfortunately, it is a diamond. >> oh. >> it's b, but, pauline, you took a shot... >> i did. >> and you're walking out of here wit

one clear element of machiavelli's influence, machiavelli thought that executives always have to choose whether to ally with the few or ally with the many. and it's not-- and machiavelli recommends that executives ought to ally with the many because the people will be there, the most stable basis of support. and adams seemed to believe that as well, but it doesn't seem like there's a clear mechanism that would force or compel the executive to be the defender of the people. and i don't see that-- if anything, i see the development of the imperial presidency from world war ii to now. perhaps only, only making that problem more and more velt because in some ways the president amasses more and more pow power, but it doesn't seem like there is a mechanism in place to determine on whose behalf that power will be wielded. >> host: did you talk a little about the conventional wisdom about john adams both in his own day and among historians, when he left for europe he came as a true republican and came back as a true and could you talk about that? >> i can i'd like to speak about the issue of ex

perhaps richard mentioned the influence of machiavelli. one clear element of the book is that machiavelli thought the executives always have to choose whether to ally with the few or the many. and machiavelli recommends executives ought to ally with the many because the people woulpeoplewould be there with ss of support and adams needs to believe that as well but it doesn't seem like there is a mechanism that would force or compel the executives to be at the center for the people and i don't see that. if anything i see the development of the presidency from world war ii until now. perhaps only making the problem more and more difficult because the president announces more and more power. but it doesn't seem like there is a mechanism in place to determine on whose behalf the power would be wielded. >> did you talk a little bit about the conventional wisdom in his own day as this sort of idea when he left from europe he was a true republican and came back as a monarchist, can you talk about where that comes from and the degree to which those

but first, to the machiavelli and day in d.c.n important reminder about the full picture of the story. nsa director, retired general michael flynn lost a battle that began last november right after the election. democrat said intel officials believed the russian lakes of clinton crony emails were to blame for their election loss, , president obama level distinctions and expelled russian diplomats. president-elect and team pushed back. they argue that, no, they won my heart campaigning and winning over democrats. now, we know, intelligence operatives taped sensitive conversations between general flynn, then, the incoming nsa had to, and the russians, talking about the sanctions. we don't know what was said because no one has seen the transcripts. but we do know that they were revealed to the white house by then acting ag sally yates, remember her? she has recently been fired by the trump white house over these budding orders. the doj at the time was concerned that flynn could be blackmailed by the transcripts and their content, wh

he has compared himself to thomas cromwell, to henry viii's machiavelli.n's style. he regards him as a court intriguer and it tells us something about trump. he is is a president who thinks and will behave like a monarch. one of the striking things, i think, about trump is, if you think of a liberal position, he will always take the opposite. so a liberal position on migration, he is against it. a liberal position in the middle east. he sides with the regimes which are defiantly illiberal, with egypt and saudi arabia. saudi arabia sees in him a potential ally, because he's pro—fossil fuels and hostile to iran, so you can see that there is an ideology at work there. it is not the sophisticated ideology of previous holders of his office but it speaks, as we have heard, to particular constituencies in america. but, if he is a monarch, he is a 15th century henry viii rather than queen elizabeth ii. we have had a reading from a judge in washington state saying his actions are unconstitutional. in some respects, to try to understand him, even though he has delib

but first, to the machiavelli and day in d.c.minder about the full picture of the story. nsa director, retired general

but first, to the machiavelli and day in d.c. reminder about the full picture of the story. nsa director, retired general

machiavelli said tokyo is the greatest enemy of our republic. >> what is that? >> its indolence. what machiavellian was writing about was how to keep a republic coherent when it is not at war? well, i am a 70 and during the past 70 years we've had the greatest experiment in human history. we've had some bad times, but the prosperity is unparalleled pic with had, we had a scary cold war but none of the words that we actually fought have been existential. and during that time we developed all of these other ways to entertain ourselves. and you know, if this is a golden age of anything it's the golden age of marketing. marketing is fundamentally un-american. because the founding principle of this country is that the things that we have in common as human beings no matter where it came from or look like or belief are more important than the things that divide us to the fundamental principle of marketing is you sell to the niche, and we've not had the thousand channels of nothing and we have 1 million new outlets, most of them are sitting in the pajamas in the basement. and during tha

it is really, truly machiavelli and in terms of these theories.he fact is that all three of these judges, including pryor, are very well respected. i have a personal attachment to pryor because we clerked together on the fifth circuit. he appears now to be not one of the two front runners. but gorsuch and hardiman are extremely intelligent and well-respected judges. it is going to be hard for democrats to go after them. it sounds like gorsuch has the advantage. >> martha: it sounds like that's what they have in mind. >> he is as close as he could to conservative aristocracy. his mother was a very famous epa administrator, the first woman in that position. she was involved in some of the reagan controversies. he has an absolutely impeccable resume. it will be very hard to attack them. but what i think you want to look for is that first 24-hour period of how this will play. with robert bork, kennedy came right to the floor and started painting him as an extremist. and the mistake at the white house made with bork is that they lets at first 24-hour.