mr. buckley has a piece in which he says if i saw this, i'd say so. i saw no indication he had any conversation with the russian ambassador and left it alone. so in other words, i mean this is -- mr. buckley points out that bob woodward were there. this is a very public place. so to have some sort of private conversation in a conspiracy, that would hardly be the place to do it. it makes no sense on the tace of it. >> clearly he does not seemeger to go into a classified briefing to answer more questions. is there anything more the senators can do? >> if i was the democrats on the committee i'd have two things i'd be trying to pursue. number one going to senator burr, the and saying we need to change the process by which we're bringing the administration witnesses to capitol hill. by now these have been voluntary, they've agreed voluntarily to come to the hill and testify. if you have a subpoena issued, you have the possibility of a contempt of congress situation hanging over the heads of witnesses. >> if you're saying -- >> correct. >> absent an invoca

mr. buckley points out that bob woodward was there, there were reporters. this was a very public place, so to have some sort of private conversation in a conspiracy that would hardly be the place to do it. it makes no sense on the face of it. >> brian, after the -- sessions testified today, he clearly does not seem eager to go into a classified briefing to answer more questions about this. is there anything more the senators can do? >> if i were the democrats on this committee, mark warner who is the ranking democrat on the intelligence committee, i'd have two things i'd be following up on. i'd go to my republican counterpart, senator burr, and saying we need to change the process in which we're bringing witnesses to capitol hill. up until now they have been voluntary appearances to come up to the hill and testify. i think they need to think about issuing subpoenas. if you have a subpoena issued you have a possibility of contempt of congress situation hanging over the heads of these witnesses. >> you're saying if executive privilege isn't invoked and yet th

mr. brooks: that depends on what you call a conservative. most conservatives, the buckley-ite conservatives would probably say that he isn't, but my guess is that donald trump would not be bothered by that. his point is that he is practical, living to the exegesis of the time. mark: why are you solidly convinced that populism will go away? isn't it part to -- is it a purely cyclical phenomena? mr. brooks: there is some very interesting research on this. as a big tank president -- think tank president, there is something we are looking at. what the study says is, when you that hasnancial crisis highly uneven growth afterward, which we are seeing today, the bottom 4/5 of the economy has had 0% income growth since barack obama took probably -- took office, that is when you see about a 30% increase in support for populist candidates and economies. when strong growth comes back, populism recedes. particularly in the united states. this is a country that does not hate people who come in from the outside. when there is and the, company -- when there is envy, that is when you see

mr. sean his name was. but the editors of esquire, mainly a man named howard hayes, was a great editor. he hired tom wolf and norman maler and william f buckley, jr. and a slew of people to cover politics or to cover social events or sexual fashion. and the magazine made writers famous. pige pigeon -- picture writers. writing about the steps of the pentagon and gary gill more and a novemblist himself. who is the new tom wolf? or joan gideon? i know. i look at magazines and i don't see anybody who because of the ark of the magazine article has gott gotten attention. i see nicole cruise or tom kidman on the table. the new yorker, i know, the new yorker is the exception. but it is still wonderful writers. non-fiction writers. but it is not what esquire in the '60s showcased for the writer or subject. it was the writer. and i don't see in journalism today, the daily journalism, any style reporters. i know there is a flash in the '70s that started the spirit of investigative journalism we now see. and full flower in the age of trump trumping by the washington post and new york times as rivaling in the field for who is going to do the best damage o