what broke the stone walling from the nixon administration. >> well, i don't even -- i don't really think this is much to compare as far as watergate. i do think mike has a point there. that because this -- i can't really see anywhere where this whole vote to contempt -- contempt vote has any practical effect whatsoever and the justice department, again this week said that they're taking their investigation very seriously. so, you know, i mean i assume that we're going to get something out of that. >> well, and again, the contempt charge isn't an issue here. what we're talking about is immunity. by the way, the evidence seems to be mounting, even without the immunity. we have evidence -- remember bill o'reilly was interviewing the president and the president was willing to put this whole business on -- in the laps of that cincinnati office. let's just play that tape. >> you're saying no corruption. >> no. >> none? >> no. there were some bone headed decisions. >> but no mass corruption. >> not even mass corruption. not even corruption. >> bone headed decisions out of a local office. that's

. >> schlosser: ...to the nixon administration. >> stahl: the nixon administration? look at it this way-- if you got a beautiful sports car from the 1960s, it would drive really fast and it would be fun to drive. but a modern car is going to have so many more safety mechanisms that are so much more sophisticated. and the architecture, the command and control architecture is complicated and aging. >> stahl: how would you evaluate the risk of an accident happening, a human error kind of thing? >> weinstein: the probability is as close to zero as you can get. >> stahl: major general jack weistein's first job as a young airman was manning one of those launch control centers. today, he's in charge of all 450 land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles in the u.s. you have said that you sleep well at night. >> weinstein: that's a direct quote. >> stahl: some people would say you shouldn't be sleeping well at night. you should be constantly worried, because you have a very complex system here, and there are a lot of things that could go wrong. >> weinstein: the people th

charlie i think has been around since the nixon administration. >> a long type. >> and he's on the committee. the problem is, if you do a flat tax, they could layer on a value added tax which to d.c. is like giving the keys for a drunk to a liquor store. i say do the flat tax. it's like they have a flat tax and we don't. we have a tax code that is designed to entrap. >> bill baldwin is a flat tax the answer? >> i think the virtues of flatness have been greatly exaggerated. now, steve forbes is right to be harping on that tune. i mean, why, after all, if you have a kid in college should you be filling out a form that asks you for your american exclusion and then domestic activities deduction. that's absurd but i don't think flattening the rate structure and taking 40% down to 20% is going to simplify anything. we still have all of the absurdities and the question is how much do the rich pay and the poor pay. >> if you can get rid of all of the absurdities and all of those things everybody would love the idea of putting your taxes on a postcard. that's a beautiful conception. >> and you would

the clean air acts, the endangered species act, the epa were all passed during the nixon administration. all four of those landmark pieces of legislation happened after the original earth day. if you ask me, in addition there were very important legislations passed under president reagan and the first president bush. if you asked me if i could see supporting a republican on this issue, i could. unfortunately, i've never been confronted with that in the real world. i have to put it right now in the hypothetical range. aght now we're not seeing place where we see a republican strongly pushing him what i think is progressive and sensible energy and climate policies against the democrats who is dragging their feet and feels like the status quo is less important and we should be sticking with the technologies and policies of the past. hypothetically, it is interesting. in the real world we have to grapple with it. >> it seems unlikely that we'll see any significant legislation climate change come out congress. how quickly do you think we could see some action in congress? >> i agree with you

the fcc and getting license renewal, obviously, that is a powerful tool abused during the nixon administration, this administration was a study about bias that was pulled back, a lot of questions i would say about how the newsrooms operate, do you think that is so the of a break on aggressive reporting? >> corporations that own news divisions have approximately ships with advertisers and other corporations. >> they have the relationships outside of the news division and it is hard to imagine they do not in some ways impact what the news decision or news decisions decides do do whether it is explicitly said or understood, i do think that comes into play and there are reporters that if they speak frankly will tell you they have receive seen evidence of that and when they go to reporting conferences some of them feel it is more heavy handed than prior years. >> how about newsroom cutbacks? investigative reporting by definition is time consuming, it is expensive, you might not come up with a story in the end, you have to deal with lawyers. i wonder whether that aspect -- i can remember when the ne

some of this is, the craziness that was the nixon administration.nd if you're to walk the halls of the obama white house, at least, when you're there, you know, you have a the principle in effect, there is a kind of ease. this one went to the same university as that one and this one knows that one and this one is this age, so on. proof is in the pudding though. the proof is in the pudding. and i found, of the many things that talked about with president obama, and he revealing no secrets, he says many of the same thing in potted form in speeches, he has the cultural need, and the political need to express that he knows what your side of the story is. on the one hand, that he gives a great first amendment, written, university of chicago, not the conservative side of the university of chicago, understanding of an editor's and a reporter's cultural understanding of freedom of the press. on the other hand, then he does that kind of prove sort turn -- professorial turn, you leave there and you have mist in your hand. len downey's report you are referring

some of this is the craziness that was the nixon administration. if you walk the halls of the obama white house, at least when you are there, we have a heisenberg sensible in effect, it is a kind of ease. that one is this agency and so on. proof in the pudding. i found many of the things you talked about with president obama. he has the cultural need and political need to express he knows what your side of the story is. on the one hand, he gives a great first amendment written university of chicago, not the conservative side, understanding of an editor and reporter cultural understanding of freedom of press. on the other hand, and he does that professorial turn. -- that's kind of turn. on the other hand it is pretty tough and pretty convincing. it is one thing to be buddy buddy. what are the results? >> before we turn to the audience. >> mayor graham. grim.y are >> before we turned back to the audience, let me turn back to the title of the panel, where do we go from here? we have an adversarial relationship and everyone agrees on that. >> i think w

it was abused during the nixon administration. inistration there was a study about bias that was later pulled back about how intrusive questions i would say about how newsrooms operate. do you think that acts as a break on aggressive reporting? >> it's true to say that corporations that own news divisions have relationships with politicians and advertisers and other corporations. >> is is there lobbying for breaks for the company. >> they have relationships outside of the news division that it's hard to imagine don't in some ways at some time impact what the news division decides to do. whether it's explicitly said or understood, i do think that comes into play and there are reporters, if if they speak frankly, will tell you they've seen evidence of this. when i go to investigative reporting conferences, the last few years, some feel like it's been more heavy-handed in the last couple of years than prior years. >> how about newsroom cut backs? investigative reporting almost by definition is time consuming. it's expensive. you might

back during the nixon administration, the president that, if thesaid president says it's ok, it's legal the leading nsa attorney told me. you don't understand, this program is all legal. it was approved by the white house. as soon as i heard that, the hairs went up on the back of my neck. we are the executive agent for the program. it was a dragnet surveillance program. you cannot understand snowden. you cannot understand any of the disclosures to date without understanding the foundation of those surveillance programs. so i went through all channels. the a material witness for 29/11 investigations. i gave them thousands of pages of material evidence and i wish i had actually kept that evidence. and and i have talked about this, just like he shared with you that he wished he had exposed the pentagon papers years earlier. war,ght have stopped the may have prevented it from occurring. for twoerial witness 9/11, no investigations. all of the evidence was censored and suppressed. the only evidence that i had any contact is theal fact that i was interviewed. there are people right now, for a

the nixon administration tried to get the contributors to the ncaa. he government in the obama administration is trying to get contributors to ron paul groups. neither -- and the court says you can't do that. >> something came down, some news broke, about volkswagen. the unions withdrew their request to go after volkswagen again. >> this is just the union's facing up to reality. this is the chattanooga, tennessee case, where the unions lost a hotly contested, heavily debated effort to unionize that went on for a couple of years. they realized they're not going to get anywhere so they gave up the ghost. this is one they predicted they would win, boasted they would win, and after a fair and square election, they lost. >> any question the nlrb is squarely -- has the unions' on their mind? >> when fdr proposed this he said it will moderate between unions and managements. guess what. republican presidents make it management, the democrats make it unions. this is the most prounion nlrb in years. >> some companies give your phone number and your address to th

regional commission -- due to some sort of mistake in my civil service application under the nixon administration, i got through and i got a job there. they were going to raise up -- they did some good things for appalachia, but the idea that was basically proposed in terms of raising the capital in appalachia and improve the living of the citizens there was to build golf courses. once again. i expected a better laugh. because it's true. i didn't make it up. golf courses. they were going to build 16 golf courses there and make appalachia a place you would take a vacation. my family wouldn't, but others would go and i was stunned by this. it was amazing to me that attempt was made in some fashion or another as opposed to hoping and praying that an entrepreneur shows up on the scene. if i hear another thing about entrepreneurs and the fact that what we really need are more entrepreneurs, how do you think that happens, asshole? how does an entrepreneur happen? it's some schmuck has a learning disorder that's totally focused on something you would never obsess about. it's hard to find them. you don't

back during the nixon administration, the president actually had said that, if the president says it'sok, it's legal. here is what the leading nsa attorney told me. you don't understand, this program is all legal. it was approved by the white house. as soon as i heard that, the hairs went up on the back of my neck. we are the executive agent for the program. it was a dragnet surveillance program. you cannot understand snowden. you cannot understand any of the disclosures to date without understanding the foundation of those surveillance programs. so i went through all channels. i ended of the a material witness for 29/11 investigations. i gave them thousands of pages of material evidence and i wish i had actually kept that evidence. and and i have talked about this, just like he shared with you that he wished he had exposed the pentagon papers years earlier. it might have stopped the war, may have prevented it from occurring. so a material witness for two 9/11, no investigations. all of the evidence was censored and suppressed. the only evidence that i had any contact, material contact

administration. do you know who took us off the gold standard? >> nixon, i assume. >> yes, nixon. after that, it was just print money. if you have a recession, print money. stimulate the economy. have inflation? print money. devalue the dollar. $1 in 1970 was worth $1. today, it's worth 17 cents. >> let me make an observation as a way of moving on to other subjects, which is -- >> i don't want to move on. >> i have a few more we need to cover before we go to the audience. is there a dissonance here? this horrible situation you describe is coexisting with this great period of wealth creation and job creation, and the formation of great new companies like twitter, facebook, linkedin, and google, that are in turn causing the consternation that we've come here to talk about tonight. >> yes, and that gets me -- thank you -- directly to monetary policy. >> you're welcome, but briefly on monetary policy, because it's the evening time and nobody wants to hear about monetary policy. >> all right, let's hear about it for a minute. we've had low interest rates for a couple of decades, a litt

black folk about richard nixon and all that we accomplished for equality during the richard nixon administration. if we do more of that, i think that we will bring more people to our side. thank you. thank you all. [applause] >> next the president of the united negro college fund, michael lomax, on the future of his organization. then president and mrs. obama on newsmakers jason furman chair of the white house council of economic advisors, he will discuss unemployment and the current labor market and debate over the minimum wage, income inequality and the affordable care act. newsmakers sunday at 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> in may, 1918, amid wild celebration, the first american-built planes arrived in france. a british dh-4 design with a power liberty engine. that fall, allied aircraft smashed supplies and communications behind the enemy lines on newest argon front. five weeks later, the armistice was signed. johnny came marching home. and after speeches and returning to the farms, shops and offices. but not the pilots who survived the great adventure of the wild blue yonder.

is the unbelievable part about all of this is we just resolved this 40 years ago with the nixon administration using the i.r.s. in other ways to target individuals and now we're back in the same thing all over again in the loss of trust. lots of people i talked to in oklahoma will bring it up to me. i've never been audited before. last year or the year before was the first time i gave to a conservative group and now i'm audited? even if it's not happening, people have lost complete trust in the impartiality of the i.r.s. because now we know there were individuals in the i.r.s. leaking files out to people to be able to get information out they wanted to get out but also, making decisions based on political beliefs rather than staying neutral to everyone. jenna: we expect the vote to come to hold her ko n contempt of congress in may. jon: the l.a. clippers losing some major sponsors after those racist remarks allegedly made by the team's owner. we'll take a look at the case against donald sterling before the nba commissioner speaks out this afternoon. >> let's check out what's ahead on "in and o

he's the man whose book revealed and showed us the dark underside of the nixon administration book called the price of power kissinger in the nixon white house. he showed us thousands of deaths that took place under the administration of nexus and henry kissinger. he's the man who in 1990s showed us the dark aside yet of the john kennedy white house in a book called ,-com,-com ma a book about the dark side of the white house and i'm blanking on the name. the dark side of camelot. sy hersh's book the dark side of camelot. see me sorted view of the white house we not gotten up to that point. in the year 2004 at the age of 67 he was viciously attacked for his book on john kennedy. in 2004 he revealed that american soldiers were torturing prisoners at a prison in abu ghraib. .. the obama administration after obama was elected called david redd and say call your man off and tell him to stop. hurst -- hersh recently said i think there's something wrong that man he was not invited to the state of the union speech tonight. he is known as flies -- sly sy spooky side terrace side and the one i hear

administration. do you know who took us off the gold standard? >> nixon, i assume. >> yes, nixon. after that, it was just print money. if you have a recession, print money. stimulate the economy. have inflation? print money. devalue the dollar. $1 in 1970 was worth $1. today, it's worth 17 cents. >> let me make an observation as a way of moving on to other subjects, which is -- >> i don't want to move on. >> i have a few more we need to cover before we go to the audience. is there a dissonance here? this horrible situation you describe is coexisting with this great period of wealth creation and job creation, and the formation of great new companies like twitter, facebook, linkedin, and google, that are in turn causing the consternation that we've come here to talk about tonight. >> yes, and that gets me -- thank you -- directly to monetary policy. >> you're welcome, but briefly on monetary policy, because it's the evening time and nobody wants to hear about monetary policy. >> all right, let's hear about it for a minute. we've had low interest rates for a couple of decades, a litt

he's the man whose book revealed and showed us the dark underside of the nixon administration book called the price of power kissinger in the nixon white house. he showed us thousands of deaths that took place under the administration of nexus and henry kissinger. he's the man who in 1990s showed us the dark aside yet of the john kennedy white house in a book called ,-com,-com ma a book about the dark side of the white house and i'm blanking on the name. the dark side of camelot. sy hersh's book the dark side of camelot. see me sorted view of the white house we not gotten up to that point. in the year 2004 at the age of 67 he was viciously attacked for his book on john kennedy. in 2004 he revealed that american soldiers were torturing prisoners at a prison in abu ghraib. .. the obama administration after obama was elected called david redd and say call your man off and tell him to stop. hurst -- hersh recently said i think there's something wrong that man he was not invited to the state of the union speech tonight. he is known as flies -- sly sy spooky side terrace side and the one i hear

black folk about richard nixon and all that we accomplished for equality during the richard nixon administration. if we do more of that, i think that we will bring more people to our side. thank you. thank you all. [applause] >> the u.s. house is about to gavel in. general speeches first. a vote will take place after 630 eastern. now live to the floor of the u.s. house. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's room, washington, d.c., april 7, 2014, i hereby appoint the honorable frank r. wolf to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives.

as it turns out, the judge was offered a bribe by the nixon administration and the head of the fbi, who knows where that case would have acted up? nixon overreached. he fixed the judge. i remember being in the court when that happened. why didn't snowden do that? you are a lawyer. you are presented as a good guy. you were in your house when the fbi broken. you have five kids and you worked at an apple store, trying to support your family. take your medicine. be prepared to go to jail for damn well, knowing ndam that that is not what we teach people. you are snowden's lawyer. what is your view? >> my view is that it speaks volumes that the only safe way to blow the whistle right now if you are a national security or intelligence and have that level of information, the only safe way is to blow the whistle from another country. that is a sorry state of affairs for this country to be in. whistleblowers, right after snowden revealed himself, they had a press conference to say that they understood why he had to go to another country to make those disclosures. of penalties -- >> snowden, i bel

that the johnson administration did put into place, if the johnson administration and the nixon administration instead had focused on deregulation and making government smaller, that we would have less poverty today. >> that's a trap and i'm not going to go into it. i think if money had been spent on improving the educational standards -- let's face it. e are, i don't know, 64th or something among the nations badly educated. we've totally underinvested in education. we've made it very, very hard to get a good education in the united states. if i had to pick a single thing, that's what i would pick that should have been done differently. >> please? >> could you comment on the fact that your own example of fiscal responsibility, norway, is a social democracy? are you advocating social democracy for the united tates? >> i'm a knight of norway. i've got to defend it. there are no tall no tall oppies in norway. we've totally underinvested in education. >> no tall what? >> no tall poppies. well, it's the old adage, the tall poppy gets cut first. everybody is pretty much the same. there's no poverty.

commissioner led the irs from 1969 to 1971 during early years of nixon administration which turned out to be a challenging time for the agency. holed against types to attempt to politicize the agency. white house eventually fired him because of his principled stance. i'm sure commissioner thrower would here today he would say he was doing his job but he was doing much more. his refusal to let politics compromise the irs is a important reminder to all irs commissioners now and in the future what our mission is. i intend to follow his example. i want to reassure everyone listening here today that the irs is an agency of career civil servants who are dedicated to serving the american taxpayer in a fair and impartial manner. that's how it's been and that is how it will always stay on my watch. we have other important challenges to face. one example of this is insuring that the filing season goes smoothly. when i started in december i told employees i wanted to help with the filing season as the new kid on the block perhaps the best thing i could do was stay out of the way. i've been very s

and here is where i looked at dan ellsberg in terms of history because back during the nixon administrationr president actually had said and this is the famous david frost interviews that if the president says it's okay it's legal. here is what the lead attorney at nsa told me. you don't understand. this program is all legal. it was approved by the white house. ever since i heard that the hairs went up on the back of my neck. we are the executive agents for the program and the program was stellar. the secret surveillance program. it was a dragnet surveillance program. he cannot understand snowden, you cannot understand any of the disclosures today without understanding the foundation of the surveillance programs. so i went through all channels. i ended up becoming a material witness for two, 9/11 investigations. i gave them thousands of pages of material evidence and now i wish i had kept that evidence. dan and i have talked about this. just like he shared with you he wished he had disclosed the pentagon papers years earlier. it might have stopped the war and prevented it from occurring. i'

and if it hadn't turned out that the judge was offered a bribe, basically, by the nixon administration to be head of the fbi, who knows where that case would have ended up. nixon overreached and fixed the judge. i remember being in the court when that happened. so why didn't snowden do that? now, you're a lawyer -- and then you're presented as a good guy,? you were there in your house when the fbi broke in, and you have your five kids, you know, and you end up working at apple, at an apple store trying to support your family. that's the good -- take your medicine. be prepared to go to jail for a hundred years knowing damn well that's not what we teach people to do, that's not what we're going to do. now you're snowden's lawyer. what is your view about people saying, hey, you know, he cut and ran? >> my view is that it speaks volumes that the only safe way to blow the whistle right now if you're in national security or intelligence and know that level of information as snowden did, the only safe way is to blow the whistle from another country. and that's a really sorry state of affairs

the wagons and i will disagree on this, i think there's a least transparent, sneakiest administration since nixon. >> wow. >> do you agree? >> since nixon. where is the hhs ig? tuz that person even exist. >> right. >> we have a fraud waste and abuse commission ichl. it's supposed to be congress. we have a record number of czars and executive orders. a record amount of time spent circumventing the constitution. who is watching the watchdog? nobody it seems. >> and steve, the thing is even when they're doing stuff that a lot of people in congress agree with, instead of going through congress, they'll do it by executive action or some other means. >> yes, they have to be called to account. there's a case coming up in the way they abused the law in terms of health care exchanges. ultimately the supreme court is going to rule on that. they're going to rule on the national labor relations board abuse. they're going to get into action and start to pay this back but congress has been on this. >> that's the last word. coming up, the epa chief's first week tour as environmental and the cashing in gang agre

inflation became the national concern during the administration of richard nixon.hout too much managing of the economy, we're going to have some fine tuning of our fiscal and monetary affairs in order to control inflation. but inflation continued. the president and his advisers felt something dramatic had to be done. all the economic officials of the government were summoned to camp david on a weekend, told not to tell anybody where we were going. our wives were not supposed to know where we were going. a lot of speculation was going on about what we were doing. at least the word did not leak out that we were about to impose a wage and price freeze. the time has come for decisive action, action that will break the vicious circle of spiraling prices and costs. i am ordering a freeze on all prices and wages for a period of 90 days. it was august 1971. inflation had reached what was then considered a staggering 4%. president nixon imposed temporary price controls, and they worked temporarily. then, the controls off, prices started upwards again. by 1973, there were bo

been an administration that took seriously prosecution of the sherman antitrust act since the nixon administration started taking a party that ended to under the carter administration jimmy carter usually gets credit for it but it was richard nixon that initiated that process and that was really the last time that we looked at the at the american business landscape and said you know just having one company or. even a small handful of companies dominate an entire industry is not a good thing when we've certainly gone too far in the pendulum that way i'm concerned when the government's going to get involved and take it fair for the other two are so much the government is taking over of these companies they're just sayin no there's a certain size beyond which you can't have competition in the marketplace the marketplace is no longer a marketplace it's a monopoly and but there's that mystery little place i mean there is the mystery of the three more importantly it seems like they're rewarding those people that were high dollar donors that the obama administration now that's a government of a control i

that doesn't even contemplate the possibility that an out of control government a richard nixon administration coming back into power could pair up with one of these companies through you know the private contractors that we have with their intelligence agencies and use that stuff to go after you using the power of government tom if you think about it i obviously we're we should all be concerned about government being able to track as big government is not these days corporations are the new government you understand it's not we used to think of government is a bureaucracy in washington that's no longer the case today companies like pay pal and axiom and goldman sachs they are the government so we have to say we used to have with government we would have some oversight these companies don't have any oversight at all so if they want to know where you are to any time what your political a field filiation what your consumer interest what did you watch on television last night what magazines did you read what your favorite food what's the value of your home what's the equity there they take that t

but with the administration since nixon the way forward is to moderate the plo. ordered the assassination for the first african american ambassador in sudan in 1970 together with the deputy chief of staff in sudan were assassinated by the plo a terrorist. and has sideshow in my book the response was to cut a deal and turned a blind eye as long as they limited the operations that worked out really well. [laughter] the head talions have the same deal but the idea constantly in the back of the minds of u.s. of ministrations on both sides as long as the plo limited itself to the jews they were moderate and somehow distinct that the plo was aligned with whether the i.r.a. or the iranian revolutionary or al qaeda. it does not matter what it was as long as a limited the operations. and then the success of the american administration to a saving its from obliterate long dash from oblivion when divorced the tunisian government in bush number one did it with the madrid peace process after the plo had completely been destroyed with the support for saddam hussein and the goa

so as i show in my book, it has been a bipartisan solution of the administration since nixon that the way forward is to moderate this. the plo that arafat ordered of the first african-american u.s. ambassador in sudan in 1970. together with his deputy chief of staff charged this and was assassinated by the terrorists. and so essential in my book the u.s. response to that was to cut a deal to turn a blind eye so long as they limited their operations to jewish targets. and so that worked out in this way. the italians also had the same deal and the idea constantly in the back of the minds of u.s. administrations on both sides of the partisan divide was that so long as the plo maintained or eliminated its terrorist attack the jews, it was modern and they were somehow distinct from the global web of terrorists but they were aligning with and cultivating, whether it was the ira or the iranian revolution or al qaeda. so it doesn't matter what it was, as long as the plo laments the operation to that. and so then success of american administrations kept saving them from oblivion when it forced

. >> richard nixon in the very beginning of his administration talking about and less committed, less activists role for the united states not trying to solve every problem. >> i think that's what jack kennedy said also. he just did the book. >> it was nixon who was coming in after overcommitment. kennedy thought he was coming in during under commitment and he wanted to reinflate american foreign-policy. >> what did he do to kennedy? >> he said he was much more of a barbarian than i expected. khrushchev was a brutal arguer, rather unpleasant company. kennedy was nervous about what kind of impression he had made. he thought he had come across as weak. there is a need to re-energize the american policy to slow it down. khrushchev have taken away a slightly different impression. he was impressed by kennedy's threats and he did not try to drive the u.s. out of berlin. >> the book is called "maximalist: america in the world from truman to obama." steven sestanovich. back in a minute. ♪ >> reporters jonathan allen and amie parnes are with me. they have written a new book, "hrc: state secret