there are actually some norms. as in the wild west there norms, where when you went beyond a certain trouble, you got into rustled orttle you whatever so there is a category which states will obey out of self interest and i've this.n a paper on the interesting aspect of it, we do states, why sometimes agree by norms and become bound by them and it of prudence, it comes out of reputation, it comes out internallization of norms in howerent publics, which is we have seen a number of norms. there will be gradual developed norms. right now, the major problem is the chinese are fixing on sovereignty as the basic norm. think what you're going to wind up with is that there will internet likee russia, china, and other authoritarian states, where they control things. the key question is will they be use their systems to interfere in ours. mentioned earlier about a veilian treaty. i don't think we'll get a treaty but you can imagine the development of certain norms and theirent states will run internal internet in different w

think about norms of ceo pay. the idea that being paid 1000 times the rate of the average wage in his company would be regarded with absolute horror and amazement but all too often we see astonishing amounts of ceo pay in corporations completely unrelated to stock market performance or shareholder returns. the norm has changed. it has somehow become okay to do these things. many opponents told themselves a story about how we live in a meritocracy and it is a dog eat dog world and global talent and it is the inevitable result, it is all nonsense, most people operating in their companies, trying to cut out competition. you can't explain what is going on, it is rationally inexplicable and the same is true when you look at the uk. the norm transferred to uk. you can run the same argument with the economy as well. the benefit you get from seeing it in a smithian way. when you see these groups connected in that way it becomes possible to understand the true force of the political economy because political economy is not

it is a reference to that aspect of our politics in an euro of norm shredding and so forth. crudecond is the tenor, bloodsport entertainment tone that trump has dragged us all down to her thunder dome politics puts those two things together in an effort to encapsulate pre-much how everything feels now. host: how much is donald trump to blame for thunder dome pommel -- politics? guest: i think it is pretty clear that he is a major culprit. in many ways, he is -- he has taken a definite approach to political warfare that i think a lot of people on both sides of the aisle have decided is pretty distasteful. on the norm shredding, when i argue in the book is in many ways, there is a fundamental disconnect at the core of everything right now. and that is, it took a figure , so menacingrump and openly hostile to democratic values, to focus everyone on the health of our planet system. but a lot of our problems, especially from the perspective of norms, predate trump and will outlast him. back biggera step picture look at some larger deterioration's that were underway before trump c

i generally agree with norm. sequence is this, plenty of things for democrats to now, that would keep them happy and engaged and be like o be impeachment without impeachment. it will be tricky to think when to the next election, i think some presidential candidates will be typically t issue as happens, the party moves to left or right and the people running primaries will not shy away from the issue. on the other hand, very close to think bad timing to do it then. he pressure of conflicts will be on whether they do it second year or not. >> agree, probably hold off for interesting to see what happens when the mueller report comes out. democratic partisans will read what is in the report uch differently than other people. they will read what -- as long tangibly ng is connected to the president, i expect you will see urge to move on that. that may not be convincing to the middle, that plus the atural competition from presidential candidates, catering to base 80% of whom see trump impeached before the mueller report

in front of you now are two career intelligence officers violating their norms by being here and the fact they are both under contract with cnn as you suggested earlier, john brennan, they are all out there because they deeply fear what is going on in the country. but the unified though thoughtsi think we share is this is a moment we shouldn't pretend it's normal. we should keep emphasizing that it's not normal but how do we do that without violating our own norms? donald trump is the commander in chief in a real example now how does the north, commander talk about these fears in operational order with some 5,000 troops to the southern border? look at the moral and professional dilemma that officer is in it is clearly done for political rather than a tactical effect. and it's something you won't s see. what does he tell his troops? >> very good question. why don't we take one here and then go back there. >> from the bottom of my heart, thank you for all of you do. [applause] what you are talking about is so fundamental to the survival of our democracy and the world. it's so fundament

we realize that fixing a norm busting policy by busting your own norms adds to the damage being done to institutions and processes. so you've really got to be careful. this is probably not going to help him since we've got tv cameras rolling here, but i think that dan coates has been masterful the past six to eight months. he doesn't pick a fight, he doesn't beat his chest. he answers questions about issues in a fairly straight forward way and seems to be indifferent whether he's on the same hymnal or not of the folks downtown. the joint chiefs and secretary, i think their response to the transgender ban tweet by the president was about as close to the edge as you can get. and there, the issue was-- describe that for one-- >> sure, the president tweeted from the residence one morning when he was scheduled to get a long briefing on his options with regard to transgender troops, all right, and tweeted it's over, they're done, we're-- they're not going to be in the military and the problem for the chiefs was that they may or may not have a different view three, four, five years ago abou

i do agree with norm. infrastructure something we talked about. every week has been infrastructure we for the past 52 weeks. donald something that trump is a little different than his typical republican. he is more willing to spend money on that. prescription drug pricing is also something that the president embrace away from traditional republican policies. like anytime we have divided government, we should not expect that we are agreeing on everything. the parties are far apart. there will be some discrete things and annual things that they will have to work on. >> the republicans did a pretty good job in the last congress of passing appropriation bill, at republican andan democratic congresses have done for quite a while. i agree with norm and john about infrastructure being a serious situation. i would disagree on one point that norm brought up at the end, which is that popular will is declining. i went back and did the percentages of the total population, the largest state had and every census going back to the 1790's census and the disparity

maire norm coleman the mayor of st paul who they always i found it very interesting. that humphrey was always referred to by his political title of attorney general humphrey coleman was always referred to as mayor norm coleman and even though coleman had no more mayor than i did i was always former. jesse ventura so why was the only candidate that had his private sector job put in front of his name where the public and i have been a mayor so should shouldn't be former mayor jesse ventura because we're talking politics here but that's the body or so that i face but in hindsight that was probably good but if they did name the other two private sector jobs i don't want a landslide because then it would have been former warrior skip pomfrey and former lawyer norm coleman or some of the substance of those debates was really surprising to people and all those things that happened in the debates had never happened i mean they would ask. a question and skipped as the family disease of luxury is so he starts talking immediately and you can see him trying to formulate an actual

the institutions have to try to observe their norms. they may realize that fixing a does damage policy to the institutions and process. you have to be careful. not going tobly help him with tv cameras rolling but i think dan coats has been quite masterful and the last pe eight months. 6-8oes not pick a fight -- months. he does not pick a fight or eat his chest. fairlys to be indifferent to whether he is on the same page of the hymnal or not of the folks downtown. secretary -- is think his response to the the isnder message from and it is about as close to the edges you can get. have au are scheduled to long briefing on his options with regards to transgender troops he tweeted, it is over we are done. they are not going to be in the military. the cheese may have had a different view a few years ago and now they are with their troops. commitmentd a moral to these people because they were on the team. their ethic would not allow them to abandon them. studysue is still under in the department of defense. you do have institutions in the exec

so to answer the question where do the social norms come from? and those are natural.and how did that happen? and the exchange that they are not only to love but to be lovely? or to be worthy of love? and that you are aware they are aware that you want the esteem to be extraordinarily powerful idea. and that other idea as a spectator. so that is part of the conventional wisdom but it is not that. with those passions or desires or situations and that is a moral thing to do. and those two ideas in the closest spectator was a great influence. he is thinking about what in human behavior could be considered as universal life with that sense of duty. and with social psychology with those norms and conventions and with that idea in that way it is influential so that could be justly regarded but with the social psychology with that most influential work of social science ever created and somehow the suggestion that these two books. the first of moral goodness so the defense of self-interest. and there are several reasons thinking about these ideas before he published these and

i do agree with norm. infrastructure something we talked about. every week has been infrastructure we for the past 52 weeks. donald something that trump is a little different than his typical republican. he is more willing to spend money on that. prescription drug pricing is also something that the president embrace away from traditional republican policies. like anytime we have divided government, we should not expect that we are agreeing on everything. the parties are far apart. there will be some discrete things and annual things that they will have to work on. >> the republicans did a pretty good job in the last congress of passing appropriation bill, at republican andan democratic congresses have done for quite a while. i agree with norm and john about infrastructure being a serious situation. i would disagree on one point that norm brought up at the end, which is that popular will is declining. i went back and did the percentages of the total population, the largest state had and every census going back to the 1790's census and the disparity

he says it is a cultural norm. we may have a lot of agreement there that we will explore later but there are a lot of people in this legal culture who profess critically the position that the supreme court expresses. also the myth of judicial supremacy pervades our legal culture. so there is a legal obligation it is nearly a question of what the supreme court has had to say or a difference of the usual rule or even a rule of prudence. it treats the adjective supreme which is not necessarily the supreme institute of the federal judiciary but the supreme overall government. likewise the proposition we are debating refers not to judgments or rulings of the court that is the respect that they are owed but interpretations of the constitution as one the court has said that the commerce clause, for example, should be interpreted as is and everybody else would have to embrace that. i am not surprised that roger does not accept this position. there's a lot of folks that do and i would like to run through why i think it is c

that is what we don't want to have happen and i just want to point out you know democratic norms are respected in order to function as a safety valve for social conflict so while i'm not hoping for and or predicting great violence i think. for rajapaksa to come in this way is to produce a lot of resentment a lot of anger among supporters of the u.n. pay run of the commits in this party as well as more generally you know not not necessarily politically aligned citizens who feel that the people in power are not there legitimately and that is a very dangerous thing in any country to learn play let me bring you in the hey is there any upside of all of this it seems that certainly the key politicians involved think this is a great idea for the country but is it. i don't think that the way how they describe days in a people are worried about the main concern when these things happen then there's a guy if the we how this change happened if that happened some other country people who come to st are on the order but here nothing like that happened the un p. after three four days of the change

again this is not a position is embracing her he sang no, it's a cultural norm.we may have a lot of agreement we can explore later but there are a lot of people in this legal culture who profess i think uncritically the position that the supreme court expressed in cooper v aaron burr meaning teaching law school faculties. the myth of judicial supremacy pervades our legal culture pics of this required to obey just there's a legal obligation that is a question of respectful consideration of supreme court has had to say or deference as a user rule or even a rule of prudence it treats the supreme court and so it is our government supreme leader, treats as though it doesn't modify court, not merely a separate entity in the federal judiciary but if somehow supreme over all of government. likewise against the proposition we are debating refers not to judgments or rulings of the court, the respect they are owed but interpretations of the constitution. as once the court has said that the commerce clause, for example, should be interpreted, everyone else, congress, preside

it's one thing to live with judicial supremacy as a social norm. but what if the underlying decision is legally problematic or not widely accepted? will others still be bound by it? in president lincoln's hands, dred scott stood alone with no progeny or further mischief. more recently, by contrast, we have the court's 2015 decision, the same-sex marriage decision, writing in its immediate aftermath, matthew frank seemed to hold that it would go the way of dred scott. but after some initial resistance in alabama and a few other places, and the still unresolved difficulties with a masterpiece cake shop kinds of cases, the issue seems to be settled and the assault on traditional marriage feared in some quarters hasn't materialized and isn't likely to. but what about roe v. wade? in the matter of public acceptance, does that decision stand between dred scott and oberkaville? we'll see. let me sharpen approximathe dif between ed and me in a different way. cooper v. aaron rose when conservatives were developing their arguments in opposition to what they

perhaps it's best to treat them not as legal objects but as cultural norms. in the article on cooper v. aaron that's forthcoming in the law school, bradley goes on to cite our own general meese in 1987, and here i'm quoting blackman with quotes added in. in his judgment officials in arkansas and other states with segregated school systems should have changed their systems to conform with brown. not based on a constitutional myth but on a social norm that was supported by arguments on prudence, the need for stability in the law and the respect for the judiciary. on these bases, blackmon continues, government should abide by the decision of the court, for it would have been highly ir reresponsible. before moving on, let me add just one point. it's one thing to live with judicial supremacist as a social norm, but what if the underlying decision is legally problematic or not widely accepted? will others still be bound by it? in president lincoln, scott stood by with no pretense. we have the court's 2015 decision with the same-sex marriage decision. right in the m

this is a norm. at lease for part of our time. and i do think that there are some incentives to work together. there are things we have to do. it is not going to be pretty to get the budget appropriations process done every year, but it will be something we are forced to come to and we will probably not like what happens around the deadline, but that is an area where there is forced cooperation. infrastructure is something we have talked about, i think every week has been infrastructure week for the last 52 weeks. but that is something that donald trump is a little different than his to go republican. he is more willing to spend money on that. taht is a possibility. prescription drug pricing is also something the president breaks away from traditional republican policies on. and like anytime we have a divided government, we should not expected that we are agreeing on everything. the parties are pretty far apart, but there will be some discreet things and annual things they have to work on. karlyn: michael? republicans actually did

which is it, norm eisen? is this a man that the president hardly knows, or is this a man who is important enough and significant enough that he would be at a meeting where the president says, where are we on going after comey and clinton? >> yeah. whitaker is not a stranger to the president. he's been described reportedly as the eyes and ears of the white house in the justice department. this is not a cabinet agency that the president doesn't care about. perhaps his most significant grievance is that the previous a.g., jeff sessions, recused himself. let's make no mistake about it, chris. matt whitaker was put there because the president knew full well that he would be a compliant a.g. now, i think when you put that together with the news that the president was tiptoeing up to this abuse of power and you no longer have the resistance that jeff sessions represented, indeed you have whitaker, who says he won't recuse himself. the opposite of sessions despite powerful legal reasons to recuse. we can never take t

what he's setting out to do is destroy norms. and people twist themselves into prits he wills trying to find some sliver of light that they can defend the president of the united states when there is either one of two reasons he's doing it. one, he is very abusive of the tenets of democracy, or two, he's ignorant of how government works. i think those are the only two choices. >> bakari, should we chiron you a john roberts fan at this point? >> i think john roberts is a united states justice who doesn't wear a red or blue vest when he goes to bed. i don't think he chants "lock her up" and i don't think he says hope change, praise god for barack obama. i don't see him as being either one of those things. i think he's happy we could have the affordable care act and it stayed intact. and he took away the fact that public unions, the right for public entitle its unionized, you hate john roberts. i think he's a justice who believes in what he believes on but he's not a partisan figure. i don't give any of them that. and i think that's

biased as knowledge i want to reach out to those women back home where bones by their duties and social norms and inform them about dead basic rights my name is the about of people homes and i work i just need to. cut. the. need summer in finland as a cue to make the most of the short run intense summer enjoyed in these latitudes it's a time. i'm of weddings and festivities the weddings in particular are for an occasion to celebrate the regional traditions as in the good old days friends rome the bride and groom to church to the old church of. the means the big pine tree by the water and the phrase suggests the essential features of one of central finland's loveliest lake districts. when the old churches had to have a z. was placed on the unesco world heritage list its appeal was enhanced to new couples who wish to marry here in the brief summer months after applying plenty of time in addition to services and christenings concerts were held here to. for england carry to architects from home cindy there were personal reasons for deciding to marry and petty of a.z. church in those great grandmo

he was elected to bust norms. that's what he's doing, good or bad. >> well -- >> to the bad, most of the time. >> norms -- but was he really elected to bust these norms? to take down institutions because he perceives them to be against him? and people don't side with him? >> he shouldn't. but divide and conquer. that is the tool the president is using and using it very effectively. but to the ultimate detriment of our country. >> and his base hasn't gone anywhere. >> we'll see. not exactly a sweeping win in the mid terms. we're going to have to leave it there. we do have time. we're going to come back to this in a moment. because there's lots of news to cover here. chief justice john roberts not the only person president trump tweeting about today. then nancy pelosi's great week just got even better. the behind the scenes maneuvers she made to change some democrats' minds. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ comfort. what we deliver by delivering. the doctor just for a shot. with neulasta onpro patients get their day back... to be with fam

norms of behavior are critical. we have norms of behavior in every domain that are well-known, whether they are written in law or not. we have norms of behavior on the use of certain kinds of weapons in every domain, whether they are written in law or not. we would like that in space for many reasons, most of which because for decades space was classified. we didn't want to go talk about elements in outer space capability. a lot of that traces back to the fact that we don't know what our space doctrine is. if we don't know that, we are not sure what should tell and shouldn't tell. i believe a huge part this force, space force, is to develop doctrine that can shape the norms that advantage the united states and our allies in space. i have written several things on this. i think debris-causing weapons in space is a terrible thing. the international outcry when the clinz shot down their weather satellite was enough to make them stop doing it ever again. but we haven't promulgated norms about that in the same way we hav

when you start corroding constitutional norms over time and switching our over time, it's not okay. >> john meachum is going to likely ask you to -- what supreme court decision under the tyler administration had the most far-reaching impact on us today. >> i hope no one asks me that question. >> i thought we would throw a little edmund burke around because it's that kind of morning. >> ooh, burke. >> but i do have to what you just said that rings to true to ears for a layman, it is why 40% or so, 45% of the country has suspended, really, the whole jef fersonian capacity in public affairs. you pick a team and then you're for that team no matter what. you're actually arguing, it seems to me, that americans have a role to be umpires in politics and in life. you call balls and strike as you see them. >> a lot of people are in the administration. and at least in d.c., a lot of my friends. it's not in their interest to speak up against it. a lot of people are also, i think, afraid because the president has showed himself as capable, more than capable of tweeting against individuals and i th

and, norm, it did look impressive. and still, i have to say still does look impressive because without the republican gerrymandering and the creating of those so-called super districts for them, we will be talking about a lot more than 40 seats won by democrats. >> and, you know what? one of the things we're seeing here is, of course, highly educated college educated white women were a major force in this. in districts that had alma of those suburban areas. and if the republicans from trump on down don't begin to change some of the policies, the approaches that they've used with child separation, some of the thuggery going on, republicans could lose that group for a generation or more to come. with the problems they already have with millennial, that's going to be a real challenge down the road. >>> i would make one point here just of caution, lawrence. we're seeing at least a number of democrats -- i see led by seth moulton of massachusetts -- trying to find a way to unseat nancy pelosi. and if democrats take the mome

i do think we need some kind of a change in cultural norms. idol mark had a jewish upbringing -- i know mark had a jewish upbringing, and do we have a cultural norm that makes multimillionaires feel like your jerk if you give less than that? >> i think a huge part we have stood up and said we want to do that is that we want to put our name out there and say we are willing to try this, and we are willing to share the lessons that we have learned through the process so that others can benefit from that as well. but i think the other thing that is missing is like, what is the impact that we are going to make? if i said, give us 10% of your income, the way you would evaluate that is different based on how sure you are that you are going to be able to make an investment an impact, and we are spending a lot of time and energy building a data and research team to help us learn and quantify so that we can better learn and understand the impact we will have through philanthropy, and we are hoping that those resources actually encourage others to say th

preferred to continue hosting white house press conferences and relies on a set of understood professional norms and we believe the overwhelming majority of journalists covering the white house share that preference. but given the position taken by cnn, we now feel obligated to

volatility becoming the norm, that is something we are seeing quite often. record $30.7 billion in sales during yesterday's 24—hour online retailfrenzy singles' day. let's go to our asia business hub where rico hizon is following the story. i bought your christmas gift on singles day, it is on its way. i bought your christmas gift on singles day, it is on its waylj hope singles day, it is on its way.|j hope you got a bargain, i look forward to receiving it. $30.7 billion sales in one day yet growth is slowing? it was a shopping bonanza nevertheless. some 180,000 brands available. the e—commerce giant hita brands available. the e—commerce giant hit a record $1 billion in sales injust 85 giant hit a record $1 billion in sales in just 85 seconds and $10 billion in the first power of this 24- billion in the first power of this 2a— hour shopping spree. shoppers from china and across the world snapped up hot items like iphones, furniture is, milk powder, cosmetics but despite the record haul, the annual sales growth rate fell from 39% to 27% at below and have esti

first, a remark about norms. for the last -- since about the summer of 2015, we have been hearing that norms are under threat in the united states because of the utterances and actions of donald trump. and i think the actions and utterances of donald trump should be inspected very carefully. no doubt he has disrupted politics, governance, and campaigning. but trump's overturning our undermining of norms, it seems to me, is very little compared to what has been taken place in our universities for now going on -- actually going on about 80 years. it seems to me identity politics represents the latest, the most recent of these assaults. what is identity politics? i had a few propositions to what john has very ably said. first, it's the idea what's most important about you is your group identity. usually the most relevant groups, it seems, are race, class, and gender. individual rights come second. we'll say second. group rights come first and group rights are sdwribted on the basis of the discrimination or oppressio

a set of norms that the member states have accepted. so we can't change new norms. which are the basis of the european union for the sake of the uk. so we have also uk, free trade agreement, but nothing else. considering your red b lines. the second problem is of course the british aren't negotiating with themselves because a lot of disagreements between them. you know really, it reminds me as a poor french diplomat, i was negotiating with the americans. who you call the interagency process. so you have to process, usually, you're waiting to reserve to the process during three months and at the end, the americans are arriving with the reserve and they say, please don't touch it. it was too tough to negotiate. the way they are doing it to be the same. really, they are spending weeks and months, fighting and fighting, negotiating and after that, they came to us with a -- saying please don't, of course, we are not going to accept it. so it's a complicated negotiation because of the british political situation because the complexity of the issue. you know in 40 years, a

shocking and explicit violations of the norms in particular. so in the case of the united states, we count racial politics alive with both parties with coded language but then when people are skeptical about the system that leaves it open for a politician to say i will tell it like it is to break that norm we will just be very exposed - - explicit and then they will be seen as authentic. a nice paper out of m.i.t. called the authentic appeals of the demagogue coming out in february. [laughter] it shows if you present a game as corrupt, people will think who was openly cheated and breaking the rules of the game that is the breaking of the racial norms even brazil is doing this that is the way it signals authenticity. >> i promise it really is a remarkable book with a bunch of arguments but the reason is liberal politics that they all come together to write a constitution that fascism says so those smartest faster thinkers so in the username - - so then it is african-american so that is very likely to be african-americans. so it could be somethin

the european union is a set of norms. you know, you take off the norms, there is nothing, really, left of the european union. it's not a territory. it's not a nation. it's a set of norms that the member states have accepted. so, we can't change the norms which are the basis of the european union for the sake of the -- of the uk. so, we have always repeated to the uk, free trade agreement, free trade agreement, but nothing else considering your red lines. the second problem is, of course, the british are negotiating with themselves because there is a lot of disagreements between them. you know, really, it reminds me when, as a poor french diplomat, i was negotiating with the americans. the americans are first, what you call the intra-agency process, so you have this process, interagency, usually you are waiting the result of the process during three months and at the end, the americans are arriving with the result and they say, oh, please, don't touch it. don't negotiate it. you know, it was too tough to negotiate. the bri

and the norm is a pretty hard—hitting norm.ur politics pretty hard in australia... archive: for the information of the house, i have determined that there will be a ballot for the leadership and deputy leadership of the labour party at 4:30 today. in the meantime, take your best shot. but i was wrong, you know, actually the gendered stuff grew over time, it didn't dissipate. has that been addressed now do you think? i do think some things have changed for the positive and one of the things i think has changed is, when i was prime minister, the most received wisdom in the media was that gender did not in any way explain anything about my prime ministership. it was just wholly irrelevant. and that got written very expressly in the press. particularly after i spoke about misogyny in the parliament. many of the press gallery writers were, "no, this has nothing to do with gender". now, in australia, amongst the very same journalists who are still in the press gallery, there's a lively debate about sexism in politics and what role it

and the norm is a pretty hard—hitting norm.ay our politics pretty hard in australia... archive: for the information of the house, i have determined that there will be a ballot for the leadership and deputy leadership of the labor party at 4:30 today. in the meantime, take your best shot. but i was wrong, you know, actually the gendered stuff grew over time, it didn't dissipate. has that been addressed now do you think? i do think some things have changed for the positive and one of the things i think has changed is, when i was prime minister, the most received wisdom in the media was that gender did not in any way explain anything about my prime ministership. it was just wholly irrelevant. and that got written very expressly in the press. particularly after i spoke about misogyny in the parliament. many of the press gallery writers were, "no, this has nothing to do with gender". now, in australia, amongst the very same journalists who are still in the press gallery, there's a lively debate about sexism in politics and what role

notion of attacking communities water system or power system we have to have enough international norms to say we will have roller -- lower rules of attribution. in the ways to make sure that there is some doctrine of deterrence. and we all need to be thinking through that in a way in a much higher level of what it will look like going forward. frankly our technological advantages in many ways makes us more vulnerable. shutting down moscow with no power for 24 hours would be problematic. with all of our financial systems connected. it could be a disaster. and we need that movement in cyber. but we also need, to make a movement in the space around social media. now, we have celebrated the enormous growth and positive movements that have taken place with her amazons and our amazons and google and facebook and twitter. i really think for too long and frankly people with both political parties in the business press we were so enamored with these companies we were so bought and to this notion of the ability to connect us all with the click of a mouse or now, simply pressing our phones. that

norm? >> well, if this were just one comment to the "new york post," if it were just tweets, if it were just words, if it were just even, erin, that the series of clips you played, but it's actions. he did fire comey. he has, again and again, manifested an intention and actions to interfere with this investigation. he did dictate a false statement for his son, a key witness. and it's that larger pattern. these are more tiles in the mosaic. we'll find out, but i think that the fact that bob mueller has invested so much time and energy in looking at the obstruction question tells you that it's serious. there are a series of cases in the federal court, the sentolo case, many cases where far less interference than this by those who had a legal duty but abused their legal duty for an improper purpose were prosecuted for obstruction, and the -- i think there's very powerful evidence here. >> so, james, let me ask you, because obviously "the new york times" has reported manafort's legal team has b

we need to talk about norms and whether they are important or not.somehow the norms are going to defeat trump for us. >> how did you get to that point where he could stand in the middle of fifth avenue and shoot somebody and not lose any support? >> a lot of americans knew him only from "the apprentice" which had an enormous audience. i never walk watched it that but it had a huge audience tens of millions of people. >> this is where trump is unique in that way but in other ways he's the product of decades of growing polarization and the drift of the republican party in particular in the direction it is and then it's the history and that a nation with that trump was able to build upon and mistrust in american's feel for one another that allowed trump to be the way trump isn't still receive the support he does because the other side for just a quick moment to the polarization and partisanship we have is really negative partisanship. we don't like her own party anymore than we did 40 years ago. we hate the other party now the hatred for the other party

my mother in law the norm now the slime machine is how close. we live. according to mark mershon and it's of a question i have lots of on the side working with as little work i'm so chill not . as. generation i last five matches the colors of them so long a command voice i ask here is there anything much more than i give you more benefit i initiative though i know this is i think the very thing as issue them to share i'm this on the ship it is shooting shoot me softly i leave them with mushroom until the they all seem lovely live in those issues you know you. because i'm not in i'm sure who's not going to gloating i'm sure at least for good programming have and a shot of a lamb she hoped let me know with the harsh venom she hollered. all . this. week. old simple man who got the job at a job is one of the folks there that i did more. as over when it come up the only way i could. to reduce the damage to the knish bucks is up to three and if it's such any shipper who. unlike any watch of time is lives on the. run is holding hostages out. i thought of those

it is making headlines and it is yet another example of the deterioration of norms. this picture. a wisconsin school district is investigating after a photo of what appears to be a group of mostly white male students holding up a nazi salute. this image went viral. this is 2018. eddie, when i saw this for the first time last night, i'm a fool, i'm naive, i didn't want to believe it was true. my husband and i looked at it. i looked at it upside down, backwards, i looked at pictures of my sons dabbing with their friends thinking maybe i'm confused, but i'm not. this is 2018. there were parents of these kids taking that picture. how concerned are you that this is where we are? >> stephanie, there's so much ugliness in our country right now, so much disregard for the humanity of others. it begins at the top but it doesn't start there. he's just an exaggerated indication of the ugliness that's in us. those are children, young men engaging in the nazi salute. >> let's remember those are children who were not born hating. >> exactly. so part of what -- we're standing at the

understanding how we're going to be doing debris removal and get power back up, so we can get back to the new norm. it's time to turn over to the incident commander. >> this is a progression map of the fire. the very first day, we experience the most significant damage, almost 55,000 acres in the first 12 hours. [indiscernible] there are still significant challenges. the weather, the wind. the red fog -- red flag warning is still coming in this weekend. this whole area, the river drainage. other communities outside the burn areas we're concerned about. thank you very much, sir. >> mr. president, do you see the role of climate change in these fires? president trump: i think you have a lot of factors. we have the management factors. i know jerry's reading up on it very well. they're going to be working on it together. that's a big problem. we're putting quite a bit of money, $500 million in the money for management and maintenance to forests. the on this area, we're going to manage the $500 million. the farm bill is moving along pretty rapidly. we have great farmers. we have a new category. that's m

first, a remark about norms. about thest -- since summer of 2015, we have been hearing that norms are under threat in the united states anduse of the utterances actions of donald trump. think the actions and utterances of donald trump should be inspected very carefully. overturning or veryminign of norms is little compared to what has been taking place in our universities for now going on about 80 years. it seems to me identity politics represents the latest, most recent of these assaults. what is identity politics? i had a few propositions to which john -- i add a few propositions to what john has already ably said. it's about group identity, usually the most relevant groups are race, class, and gender. individual rights come second. group -- group rights come first, and group rights are distributed on the basis of the discrimination or oh pression that the group -- or oppression that the group to which you belong has suffered. identity politics teaches people to prize their victimhood, to see victimhood as a vi