mr. ellsberg today still standing by his principles.what is going on is that we have lost our constitution. we had people in prison with no speedy trial for years. that is pretty much all i've got to say. guest: thank you very much. well, obviously, i agree that the motives of these people deserve to be argued in court and recognized. they deserve a fair trial. the espionage act cannot give them a fair trial. keep in mind that i'm not saying that people with good motives whether me or manning or anyone else or petraeus -- his motives of giving information to a mistress were a more favorable biography are not once he wanted to argue in front of a jury. he still have the right to do it. other people like jeffrey sterling who had very good motives and manning and others -- that doesn't mean that they should automatically get out. the jury can decide that the motives are not good enough. i don't believe you. nevertheless coming in, you should not have done what you did, if the jury has the chance to hear. in my case, i was not allowed to an

mr. ellsberg became consultant to the white house and defense department on matters concerning the vietnam war. giving him access to classified and top secret documents. he photocopied a 7,000-page study that later became known as the pentagon papers. in 1971 he gave those documents to the "new york times." the richard nixon presidential library conducted this interview as part of a project to document the 37th president's administration. mr. ellsberg talks about his motivations in leaking is pentagon papers as well as his opinions on the vietnam war. this portion is about an hour and 20 minutes. >> right from the beginning and until late in '71 when they came out, so for, what is that, two years, a couple of years, i always thought for the pentagon papers to have any effect, they should be the basis for congressional hearings. precisely because i knew they didn't tell the whole story or an adequate story. i knew what was -- a lot of what was excluded from them. and what you needed was oral testimony, preferably under oath of people who really knew the decision-making at the time and could

mr. ellsberg today still standing by his principal's.hat is going on is that we have lost our constitution. we had people in prison with no speedy trial for years. that is pretty much all i've got to say. guest: thank you very much. obviously, i agree that the motives of these people deserve to be argued in court and recognized and they deserve a fair trial. the espionage act cannot give them a fair trial. keep in mind that i'm not saying that people with good motives right knee or manning or anyone else -- his motives of giving information to a mistress were a more favorable biography are not once he wanted to argue in front of a jury. he still have the right to do it. other people like jeffrey sterling who had very good motives and manning and others -- that doesn't mean that they should automatically get out. the jury can decide that the motives are not good enough. i don't believe you. nevertheless coming in --, you should not have done what you did. if the jury has the chance to hear. in my case, i was not a lowered -- allowed to an