during the first nixon administration, he was special assistant to the president and executive secretary of the council for urban affairs, the council for rural affairs. he's the author of the last liberal republican an insider's perspective on nixon's surprising social policy. so it's a it's a very distinguished panel that, as i think the archivist said in her introductory remarks. it combines first person experience. archival. archival. knowledge and then academic expertise. so it covers every base and i think it's going to be very exciting. in the mid and late 1960s america experience, the greatest cultural, social and political upheaval since the great depression, since since the civil war, and in justice in 1861, just as in 1933. in 1968, america was at a tipping point, could implode, could explode. but it was certainly ready for radical change. that was the context when richard nixon was sworn in as 37th president on january 20th 1969, although his 1970 249 state landslide victory was, one of the two or three great landslides in our electoral. his 1969 margin was razor thin and he

he soon resigned from that job in the nixon administration. for what it's worth, just in case you're interested. sidebar. howard phillips went on to an illustrious career as a crank perennial, far right third party presidential candidate, for which he's mostly remembered today for his furious denunciations of the term miz. it is miss or mrs. and there is no miz. and we must abolish miz. vote for me for president. he was also known for vehemently demanding that the department of education should be abolished. he said this was something so important that american political leaders should be prepared to give their lives. they should be prepared to die in order to abolish the department of education. that's what became of howard phillips after his stint at the office of economic opportunity. but you know, the right really hated that agency. and this is also an important part of the story. years later, they did succeed in killing that agency off, but they did it legally. they had congress vote to get rid of it, and it was still controversial, and p

secretary of commerce so she she amazing and this all starts in the nixon administration with mrs. nixon behind the scenes pushing to get women in higher levels of government in mid-levels of government it's incredible and to get a woman on the supreme court barbara was the one that identified people like sandra o'connor who ten years later will in 1981 becomes our first female supreme court. but barbara hackman is the one that finds this amazing sandra day o'connor and many others. many other names you would know women in government. so i would say that might she might be favorite and not discovery. she's amazing person. thank you. how did mrs. nixon react when the president did not take advantage of the opportunity? appoint a woman to the supreme? when he had the opportunity to a vacancy? well, as you know, bob, mrs. nixon did very often talk about policy publicly or make super statements. but when she did it was always about women's president nixon, definitely wanted a lot in the book about president in the supreme court and wanting to appoint a woman to the supreme. in fact, she

she was one of the highest ranking women in the nixon administration. and again, these stories we forget or we never knew. i had never heard of her. so i thought that was amazing. so pat was supporting the scenes women of any color. we just want a woman on the court who is qualified as jewel. certainly as mildred lilly, certainly. but what happened with the aba is? the names were leaked and. so that is what happened. and they quashed mildred lilly before that got anywhere. and then with jewel did not progress for other reasons, but he later names her deputy solicitor general. so there's of that and then i can't neglect barbara franklin barbara franklin, who actually had dinner with night, who's an amazing person and later worked president bush, but started under president nixon as a staff assistant to the president. she was a harvard mba. she tasked with getting more women in higher levels of government. and under johnson, you will probably know the exact number of women mid to high levels. i did some research and i think he had several hundred that wer

during the nixon administration. during the nixon administration. you're watching andrea mitch carl: believe me, when it comes to investing, you'll love carl's way. take a left here please. driver: but there's a... carl's way is the best way. client: is it? at schwab, how i choose to invest is up to me. driver: exactly! i can invest and trade on my own... client: yes, and let them manage some investments for me too. let's move on, shall we? no can do. client: i'll get out here. where are you going?? schwab. schwab! schwab. a modern approach to wealth management. when the temperature drops... you've got two choices. close your eyes and think warm thoughts. or open your eyes and get out here. there's only one vehicle lineup that embraces everything the cold has to offer. the official vehicles of winter. jeep, there's only one. right now, during the jeep start something new sales event, get 20% below msrp for an average of $13,000 under msrp on 2024 jeep gladiator rubicon and mojave models. tap into etsy for original an

administration. that understands. >> that the american. >> system depends upon compliance with court orders. >> president nixon and what ultimately led to his. >> impeachment was. >> certainly problematic in many ways. but that administration. >> did understand the primacy of law. >> and the need. >> to respond. >> to court. >> orders. >> passions ran incredibly strongly during. bush v. >> gore. >> but it. >> didn't occur to. >> anybody on either. >> side that once the supreme court. >> decided they were going to comply with the supreme court's decision. so what i'm watching what i hope. your viewers are watching, what i hope responsible officials, whatever their political party in. >> congress, are. >> watching what i. >> hope members of the business. >> community are watching is to make sure that that fundamental tenet of our. system that. courts get to. >> offer definitive interpretations of law. >> is not going to be called into question. and this is important rhetoric and grounds for concern. >> about that. yeah. and this is specific, by the way, to us former treasury secretaries, because you point out in

in the nixon administration, it is not that is not something that is entering into the realm for this justice department leadership. they look at it in the language, in the email. they call danielle sassoon insubordinate. and so they look at it and say, you're just in our way. and now that you're out of our way, we can continue to do what we want. it's a big sea change from the way that we're all used to thinking about this. >> let's get more from the white house and their thinking. aaron, what's the reaction there? and how is the president handling all of this? >> well, i think as you zoom in on this particular case, there hasn't been a ton of reaction from the white house. a lot of what tom just walked through is the reaction that we're seeing from d.o.j. to his point, which is odd, to see this level of sort of public discourse about this case. at the same time, i can tell you that president trump was asked directly about the degree to which he or the white house played a role in the eric adams case. and i want you to hear how president trump answered that question. >> if i could as

he is working in the nixon administration.nd then brings in his friend. >> intern on capitol hill, yes, so that is how he first meets him. >> so your father now is the number two and he's interviewing him. >> yes, dick cheney. so you imagine, i mean, this is kind of the environment that they are getting to know each other is that they are young washingtonians doing the jobs in washington and we know a lot of these names and this is one of -- this is another reason i decided to put this together is that we just did not know -- i don't think anybody had an appreciation for carlucci which is why i brought this about. >> let's continue. ok. frame him. he was responsible for bringing cheney in early on but it was really donald rumsfeld. >> i don't think he was. >> but then you go from there and this is one of my favorites in the story. so he's doing great in that office and then he is recruited to omb. the phone rings and who was on the other end-of-the-line? george shultz. and he says, i would like you to come be my deputy. and th

think this has been under covered by the news media that there are some parallels between the nixon administration and nixon personally and trump. because nixon came in after multiple democratic presidents from kennedy to johnson and he had been vice president and he had a good knowledge of the executive branch but he also believed the executive branch was controlled by democrats, people hostile to him. so he really wanted to run things, run the entire executive branch from inside the white house and he wanted very direct control over what was happening in the executive branch. i am not recalling that he challenged the independent agencies, but the point is he believed that the executive branch was fundamentally hostile to him. and he had a program to combat that are undermined that and part of why -- part of watergate grew out of nixon's desire to run things from inside the white house. there is a parallel here with trump's view that democrats have been in power for four years, but furthermore he is using the civil service as party base and i'm really not sure that's true to the extent you have t

i recall his friend your father's friend don right from princeton right is working in the nixon administration and the office of economic opportunity. and then brings in and in. yeah. intern on capitol hill. yeah. so that's how we first meets him. so so father now is number two in the office taking opportunity and he's interviewing this devil named. yeah, -- cheney. yeah. okay. yeah. so you imagine mean this is the this was the kind of the that they are getting to know each other is that their young wasn't ionians doing these jobs in in washington i mean in washington and and we know a lot of these names. this is why kind of this is one another reason i decided put this together is that we just didn't know or i didn't have a i think anybody had an appreciation for frank carlucci which is why i, i brought let's continue this fun so okay yeah celebrate frank lucy blame frank carlucci. he was responsible -- cheney in early on. it was really don rumsfeld, who i don't think he was. but but then you go from there, and this is one of my favorites in the story. so you ingrain that office, and then he'

white house, mounted the kind of nasty public attacks on liberals and any opponents of the nixon administrationt richard nixon thought were beneath the dignity of the president and therefore the job of his vice president. >> it was. >> vice president james d vance who decided that judges should have no power over a president if the president is named trump, vice president vance said. if a judge tried to tell a general how to conduct a military operation, that would be illegal if a judge tried to command the attorney general in how to use her discretion as a prosecutor, that's also illegal. judges aren't allowed to control the executive's legitimate power. the impeachment cry was taken up by south african turned canadian turned american citizen elon musk, who has never publicly demonstrated the slightest comprehension of jurisprudence in any country. donald trump has not yet used the word impeachment for any of the judges who have ruled against him, but he has said that the judge who vice president vance and elon musk are opposed to and musk wants to impeach donald trump, said no judge should fr

it happened with the nixon administration and certainly when donald trump first came into office for his first term. >> that's true. david: senator, great to see to you. appreciate it. >> david, thanks for having me on. david: absolutely. well, three more israeli hostages released by hamas today including a dual u.s. citizen. where does that ceasefire deal stand as more families are hoping to reunite with their loved ones? many are still left behind. >>> and i.c.e. making more arrests this week as president trump says guantanamo bay is preparing to house tens of thousands of, quote, illegal criminal migrants. details on that straight ahead. weathertech products are designed and manufactured in america using only american raw materials. most competitors make things seven thousand miles away... and then wonder why they don't fit. with weathertech in your vehicle you may hear angels singing as you marvel, how do they do it? simple. american technology and american workers deliver quality... not imported junk for a few bucks less. get the world's best floorliners and support america. fin

to tim's point, when you have a more expansive view of executive authority than any administration, probably since nixon. right. is this all just geared towards getting it to the supreme court? >> and perhaps. >> it is, and certainly ideally, we don't ever reach a point at which an administration is not complying with court orders. and to tim's point, of course, you know, in all likelihood, we don't reach that point. the administration is allowed to zealously, zealously. >> advocate for. >> its positions in court to make the case that that its view of what the presidency and the powers of the presidency are might be more expansive than they've been in the past, but they're still valid views. um, it's up to them to then adhere to court orders when they come down, and we'll see that when the courts do rule and the and the administration does exhaust their appeals, if they do follow those orders, i hope they do. i think they will. and if they don't, then we have a crisis on our hands. >> tim, the scale here, in terms of what's already in court, what we expect will be in court shortly, given some of the act

. >> how does what we're seeing now compare to, say, what henry kissinger did in the nixon administrationr would go and talk to another side in the middle east, and in the hope that that would that that could come together into something it never did come together into something lasting in the middle east. but there was a that did look that that was a version of talking to one side at a time. yeah, yeah. >> i mean. >> there's a. >> there's no coherence to what the united states is doing. formally. we've got a special envoy to ukraine, we've got a special envoy to russia. the special envoy in ukraine wasn't at the talks in saudi arabia, just as the ukrainians weren't at the talks in saudi arabia. the americans speak publicly about what they're doing in ways that are totally contradictory, with some american officials saying that we will, yes, will strengthen ukraine all the way to donald trump, saying ukraine might not even exist at the end of this. so there's no coherence to this except the underlying formal problem that we've left the ukrainians out of it entirely. and the other thing wh

. >> night massacre in the nixon administration, it was. >> the. >> most inspiring. turn because when it. >> happened. >> it seemed very dark. it didn't seem like it was going to have an effect. it seemed like that's the end of the investigation. it also seemed brave for attorney general elliot richardson to make the choice he made. >> but another. >> prosecutor was appointed and that prosecutor went. >> all the way. >> richard nixon was driven out. and so, in the totality. >> of. >> the experience. >> you know. >> kids in. >> high school at the time. >> just thought they lived. >> in a country where, yes, the. >> rule of law. >> prevails and no one is above. >> the law. >> and we had a right to feel that way for the rest. >> of the 20th century. >> it had. >> a really it was a good feeling for what we thought was forever. >> turned out to be. >> a. >> long time, but not. >> quite forever. >> although we remember the saturday night massacre because of what nixon tried to do. but mostly what we remember it for was the heroism of elliot richardson and the right and of

as we said, the biggest mass resignation since the saturday night massacre in the nixon administration. outfront now is congressman jamie raskin, top democrat on the judiciary committee. congressman saw bweh say finally got what he wanted. he got someone to file the dismissal of the case. one of the people was himself, and the other was someone who was nearing retirement. and there was a third. but, you know, i'm sure you read the resignation by mr. scott in today saying, only a fool or a coward would do such a thing. and as i mentioned, he had clerked for roberts. he had clerked for kavanaugh. what do you make about how all this went down? >> well, the whole episode is saturated with corruption. the case itself is about the corruption of the mayor and not only the u.s. attorney's office in new york, but a grand jury in new york found that there was probable cause to bring multiple counts of criminal corruption against the mayor. so that was proceeding apace until donald trump made a deal with him, a corrupt bargain. essentially. if you come on to my political team, we will drop these

that what happened in the nixon administration only involved. >> just, you. >> know, the firing of oneindividual and the resignation. >> of two people. >> at what, one was the attorney general, the other was the deputy. attorney general. but this is much worse because this. is going to the functioning. of us attorney's offices nationwide. and it really is. i mean. we we're seeing a. justice department, including the. >> fbi. >> that is on the. >> edge of a full scale revolt. >> because they're being asked to do things that are just contrary. >> to what. >> they are. obligations to. >> the nation are and their ethical. obligations as lawyers. and those. >> letters that we saw, written. >> by danielle sassoon and the chief assistant us attorney that was on the adams case. >> were. >> really. really extraordinary. i mean, they're basically just saying, like, you are asking us to make. >> a. >> baseless motion to dismiss. this case for. reasons that have nothing to do with its merits, but everything to do with. >> with. >> with politics. and that is just not, you know, that is just not the

nixon. >> administration. >> which abused this. >> information the most. >> personal financial data of you and me and everybody. >> who's worse than who's. >> watching it is because it's everyone. nixon was looking for just a few of his enemies. since that time, it has been illegal. >> for people to have. >> broad access to this data. this is the latest concerning element. and we've gone. >> to court. >> again and again at state democracy defenders fund filing. >> the very. >> first lawsuit saying. doge was illegal. >> getting an. >> order from the court. >> blocking mr. musk and doge. >> out of the treasury's bureau. >> of financial systems. those very. extensive databases. >> with payments. >> made across. >> the country, and now they're trying to get a hold of irs and social security data. >> there's no. >> purpose to it. >> we're not going to allow it. we're going to go to. >> court and stop it. >> well, when are we going to court? not me. you? >> yes, we're going to court every day. tomorrow will be in court because mr. musk's operations across all. >> of the federal. >> government, h

of the person under or are one of the nicest constitution in the wake of overreach by the nixon administration congress passed the impoundment act of 1974. that said the president may only propose pulling back funding with specific notice to congress. and with the approval of congress within 45 days. again none of that has happened in any of these cases i would encourage colleagues to say i want to be part of his conversations but let's do it through the legal and a well-established process. for those who do not know my background, k before as a state rep and account executive was a schoolteacher. i really believe in the power of education both domestically and internationally. one of the things that worries me is a new member on the subcommittee of africa we know there are tens of millions of individuals on that continent who cannot read. there tens of millions of children now not in school. they were programs being afforded 44 million learners. young people under usaid supported programs were taking place or addition to the democracy program being defined and we talked about my understanding

as i said, it's the nixon administration, the prior trump administration.to this administration, you are seeing that people being really up in arms in an apolitical way because of essentially you have somebody who is a convicted criminal in the white house, an adjudicated convicted criminal in the white house, who is dismantling the department of justice. >> there's also something. >> just so preposterously disingenuous, even about. >> the cover story. >> of the quid pro. >> quo, which is that it's. >> about immigration enforcement cooperation, which itself, i think. >> is not actually that plausible. >> i mean, we have reporting that that there. >> is reporting. >> that adams brought together. >> his senior leadership. >> including his commissioners, the day before. >> or two days before. >> the bovÉ letter comes out and tells them, i don't want to hear. anyone say one bad word about donald trump. like it's clearly a corrupt political deal. from the jump, they're barely, barely. hiding it. >> and i think. >> that fundamentally. >> the position. >> of trump

think this has been under covered by the news media that there are some parallels between the nixon administration nixon personally and trump. because nixon came in after multiple democratic presidents from kennedy to johnson and he had been vice president and he had a good knowledge of the executive branch but he also believed the executive branch was controlled by democrats, people hostile to him. so he really wanted to run things, run the entire executive branch from inside the white house and he wanted very direct control over what was happening in the executive branch. i am not recalling that he challenged the independent agencies, but the point is he believed that the executive branch was fundamentally hostile to him. and he had a program to combat that are undermined that and part of why -- part of watergate grew out of nixon's desire to run things from inside the white house. there is a parallel here with trump's view that democrats have been in power for four years, but furthermore he is using the civil service as party base and i'm really not sure that's true to the extent you have that

think this has been under covered by the news media that there are some parallels between the nixon administration nixon personally and trump. because nixon came in after multiple democratic presidents from kennedy to johnson and he had been vice president and he had a good knowledge of the executive branch but he also believed the executive branch was controlled by democrats, people hostile to him. so he really wanted to run things, run the entire executive branch from inside the white house and he wanted very direct control over what was happening in the executive branch. i am not recalling that he challenged the independent agencies, but the point is he believed that the executive branch was fundamentally hostile to him. and he had a program to combat that are undermined that and part of why -- part of watergate grew out of nixon's desire to run things from inside the white house. there is a parallel here with trump's view that democrats have been in power for four years, but furthermore he is using the civil service as party base and i'm really not sure that's true to the extent you have that

almost two dozen conservatives, every presidential administration from nixon to trump's first administration, saying, of course, this offer to force federal employees out without the permission of congress illegal. so and that case will be heard today. we've been involved in many of these cases, and they're going to lose. >> well, let me pick up on that last one. you just mentioned the case in massachusetts that will be heard today. and you write in the amicus brief that you filed with a group of 22 republicans. quote, this case comes at a critical moment in our nation's history, when a new presidential administration seeks to expand its powers in relation to congress. at the same time, it invites the federal courts to remove long standing checks and balances under the law. do you have confidence the courts will be that check? >> anna, i do, we've seen already the courage of the men and women of the federal judiciary standing up to donald trump, the vice president and others may speculate about defying court orders, but if they do, they're going to find an american political leadership. and

i does have a documented history of spying on people that the administration of richard nixon considered political opponents. okay, thank you for that. rosalind jordan that for us in washington, a prominent us senate says announced a stepping down next year. republican senator, mitch mcconnell says he won't seek re election in 2026. the 83 year old has recently been critical president trump, who said mcconnell was mentally incompetent and to do his job. mcconnell is the longest southern senate policy and data in history remaining in congress with 35 years now the us trump administration has designated 8 lashan american drunk hotels as foreign terrorist organizations move classifies games like m. s the teen and i'll follow the door and mix goes, send a low, a condo, as threats to us, national security be on that posed by all the organized crime organizations. that designation, opens the door to possible american ministry action against the cartels, including drugs strikes. so even boots on the ground in some countries next sco said it will not tolerate an invasion or any violation of its

front row seat that had to nixon's administration as it was unwinding in the first place, and that'sin the other people that are relevant to that moment in time. so that episode is based on his main interviews with jane fonda. but that's also where that ellsberg clip comes up. and again, we've picked themes where we feel like they'll resonate today and. people will feel it's relevant. it's not just a look back. >> the six episode. series david frost versus runs sunday nights at 9 p.m. eastern right here on msnbc, beginning on april 27th. executive producer wilfred frost. thank you very much for coming on this morning. >> it's my pleasure, guys. >> thanks for having. >> me and elizabeth. >> and jane. >> i just sort. of want. >> to wrap up this hour with some final. >> thoughts on. >> the two big stories we're covering. obviously, donald trump's words on ukraine. incorrect. factually challenged, to say the least. and also the doge cuts, the ongoing doge cuts. i thought frank four was fascinating, making a. parallel to russia in a way, and anne applebaum. >> talking about. >> what we're

during the nixon administration, an administration that routinely stretched the law to strengthen presidentialers, the president also attempted to use impoundment. in 1970, president nixon began making deep cuts to programs that communities all across america depended upon to keep families healthy, to keep them fed and educated and safe. in moments throughout our history congress gave the president specific and limited ability to not spend the full amount of that appropriation. president nixon, however, took the idea of refusing to spend appropriations to a whole new and disastrous level. nixon sought to reshape domestic spending and undermine lawful congressional appropriations by broadly withholding federal funding for a wide variety of programs that communities all across america depended upon, programs like food assistance, safe drinking water, child care funding, and programs to promote economic opportunity. president nixon just didn't curtail select projects or limited additional funds to larger projects. his administration tried to use the impoundment to terminate whole programs that he

a prosecution would hamper adams' ability to assist the trump administration with its immigration policies. >> it's reminiscent of the nixonu saw the president basically try to find someone who would carry out hissed orrers in the justice department. had to go through several officials. >> reporter: saturday afternoon the president wrote without any context, quote, he who saves his country does not violate any law. >>> southern california now. storm cleanup continues? sierra madre after it was hit hard. we had rain, they had rain. some of the areas in knee-deep mud. city workers and calfire hand crews came to the hillside neighborhood to help. city said that its first priority is clearing out the main roads. >> thought we knew what to expect. we put the mud fence up. we tried to be prepared. but this was just way too much. >> a similar situation near the pacific palisades burn scar. crews were cleaning up muddy roads in malibu. a woman whose business survived the fire and mudslides said that she is grateful that it's just standing. >> it feels pretty amazing, i must tell you, very amazing. i do, i do, i feel very honored.

a reagan administration move to sign an arms deal with the soviets was criticized today by former president nixoner secretary of state henry kissinger. the two men said it would be "a profound mistake" to eliminate all medium-range missiles in europe. many conservatives thought that reagan had been charmed by gorbachev, and reagan actually had more problem dealing with his hard right than he did the left. so reagan had to constantly let the right know, "i know what i'm doing." reagan was being accused already of getting soft on communism, but he hadn't forgotten the problems we still had. europe is still divided, there was still a berlin wall. [ crowd cheering ] there is one sign the soviets can make that would be unmistakable, that would advance dramatically the cause of freedom and peace. mr. gorbachev, open this gate. [ crowd cheering ] mr. gorbachev, tear down this wall. [ crowd cheering ] baker: it was perfect. it was beautiful. and he had to insist on keeping it in the speech. and he did it. don't let anybody tell you it was a staffer or anybody else that did that. [ crowd cheering ] zelize

recognize the harm that a president could do to the country and to tell president nixon that enough was enough. the trump administration is hoping to force out thousands of experienced career federal workers who have served both democratic and republican administrations so that he can replace them with people whose only qualification is blind loyalty. you heard about the loyalty tests that he required of folks who wanted to be considered for appoi appointments. president trump is attempting to twist the united states code to redefine what nonpolitical career workers are to get him even more power to fire and torment our federal government workforce. one of the ways he's initiated this effort is by trying to offer a buyout or a severance to nearly all federal workers, hoping that nonloyalists would choose to leave rather than stay and be tormented. he's doing this, by the way, with absolutely no authority to do so. i focus on this point because it truly hits home for us in cali california. for federal firefighters who have spent the first month of this year working 24-hour shifts battling life-threatening fires in los a

administration resists. you could say that the last notable occurrence was when nixon initially refused to comply with a subpoena issued by the supreme court. eventually he capitulated. but history is full of these near crises examples. the question is, what do we do going forward? >> and the funding freeze is just one case of the courts pushing back. we have a long. list in front of us. this morning, the buyout. pause was extended by a federal judge. >> the birthright. >> citizenship contesting that was blocked again. funding of nih. that was cut by the administration. that's been blocked again by a judge. so you're seeing the courts stepping in here. we'll see what happens next. >> meanwhile, the department. >> of justice is ordering federal prosecutors to. >> drop corruption. >> charges against. >> new york. >> city mayor. eric adams. >> the order from. >> acting deputy attorney general emil bove would dismiss. all charges. >> against mayor adams without. >> prejudice, meaning they could be refiled in the future. adams was charged with one count of conspiracy to receive campaign contributions from. foreign na

supreme court told richard nixon in 1974 to turn over the white house tapes, he didn't want to do it, but he did it because the supreme court told him to. the trump administration is appealing this order, which is certainly they have every right to do. but if the order stands and they defy it, we're in an area that we have literally never been in before. >> is there an enforcement mechanism in that case? >> you know, i'm going to give you a ringing answer of, i don't know, because, yes, in theory, the answer is, you know, there is a contempt power that is enforceable by the united states marshals, where the united states marshals could go out and their usual job is to enforce contempt, whether it means making someone show up to court. that's how it usually runs. >> the u.s. marshals. >> the department of justice. you think pam bondi is going to tell the marshals service to enforce an order against donald trump? and how does a court tell the president of the united states to, you know, to honor a, a, a judicial decision? i don't know how that would work. could could he impose fines? he's certainly not going to lock up the president. i mean, but it just shows wha

of nixon, he famously compared himself to lincoln in the sense he justified actions that others saw abuse of power under general heading of watergate with the wartime setting in which his administrationhink just about every president particularly presidents who have military actions during their term of office, do tend to get very close to lincoln's. ladies and gentlemen the president of the united states of america. and mrs. nixon, mr. and mrs. david eisenhower, mr. and mrs. edward cox. and so we leave with high hopes. and good spirit and with deep humility. always remember others may hate you, but those who hate you don't win unless you hate them. and then you destroy yourself. nixon's farewell was many things. it was a wrenching personal experience. it was a farewell to his staff. but it was also a farewell to white house family. and it illustrated just how many roles the house plays. this isn't the biggest house many are. and most and even smaller countries are much bigger. this isn't the finest house, but this is the best house. it's interesting that richard nixon talked the house and i think by that he meant the house, both on the personal level. you know, the king is dead. lon

nixon, he famously compared himself to lincoln in the sense that he justified actions that others saw as abuse of power under the general heading of watergate with the wartime setting in which his administrationout every president in particular, presidents with military actions build their term on office. they tend to get very close to lincoln's ghost. >> ladies and gentlemen, the president of the united states of america,, mrs. nixon, mr. and mrs. stephen eisenhauer, Ã ¦ >> until we leave, with high hopes in good spirit, and with deep humility, always remember others may hate you, those who hate you don't win unless you hate them. and then you destroy yourself. >> nixon's farewell was many things, it was a wrenching personal experience obviously. it was a farewell to his staff but it was also a farewell to the white house family and illustrated how many roles the house played. >> this is the biggest house many and most and even smaller countries are much bigger. this is the finest house but this is the best house. >> it's interesting richard nixon talked about the house and by that i think you meant the house both on a personal level, the king is dead, along with the king, and as a historic

administration. there's no end run anymore available to the israeli government, almost like only richard nixon could thinking, yeah. >> donald trump has an opportunity, given how he's perceived in israel, to have an honest conversation with israel and say, hey, we have your back. we want you always to be a secure, prosperous jewish democracy. but here's what you have to do, and that that's his opportunity. it's not to be found in resettling gazans and jordan. it's to be found in making the west bank and ultimately gaza a place of opportunity for palestinians if they if they're willing to live peacefully with israel. >> so let's talk about china, since you brought it up, the issue with china and tariffs maybe not going to go away as quickly and easily as the situation with both canada and mexico seem to it. >> well, in part, there's structural reasons to have tariffs against china, as you and everyone watching this knows, given their massive subsidies, their export led growth and so forth. that said, china's gotten smarter about how to retaliate, and we've seen signs of it already. but no, i think ta

administrating the law. article 3 have the courts saying what the law is. that has been the bipartisan consensus that even richard nixon understood. it is dangerous, dangerous for you to call on the president to defy the supreme court. the speaker pro tempore: members are reminded to direct their remarks to the chair. and refrain from engaging in personalities of the vice president. for what purpose does the gentleman from california, mr. mcclintock, seek recognition? mr. mcclintock: mr. speaker, pursuant to house resolution 5, i call up h.r. 35, and ask for its immediate consideration in the house. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 35. a bill to impose criminal and immigration penalties for intentionally fleeing a pursuing federal officer while operating a motor vehicle. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 5, the bill is considered read. the bill shall be debated for one hour, equally divided and controlled by the majority leader and minority leader of the respective designees -- or their respective designees. the gentleman from california, mr. mccl

1970's, president nixon did exactly this action, impoundment, to stop funds for the environmental protection agency for individual programs that he didn't like. he told his epa administrator, russell train, to withhold the funding. a recipient of those funds was the city of new york and the city sued, and in that case, train v. the city of new york, the supreme court ruled that the white house did not have the power to impound funds and refuse to do what the law says they're supposed to do. and, furthermore, the supreme court said this is inherent in the constitution. the executive is to execute the laws, not to make the laws. not to remake the laws, not to ignore the laws, not to treat the laws has a suggestion. the executive must faithfully implement the laws of the united states of america. that is the responsibility. congress, in the 1974 budget and impoundment control act, did create a way for the president to say, i am neat just waiting for the budget next year. i'm not just weighing in on the programs i want for next year, i want to change the ones this year, and we gave him -- congress did -- a tool to do so. that's the tool of rescission that i mentioned before.