those principles don't change. they are timeless but we present them in a winsome way to new generations to make them resonate so they understand it did in the heart, not just in the minds but in the part about why this is the best route. >> of course there's a lot of this critical policy. there's ideological polarization that we haven't seen the likes of in a long time. a lot of data that suggest ideological polarization is more extreme in america that has been intense since the civil war i saw interesting data that saw one in six have stopped talking to a close friend or family member because of politics today for the first time 40% of americans say they would be sorry to see their son or daughter mary somebody from opposing political party. you are a uniter as was mark. how are you going to get the country back together in the position of leadership nrc? are you going to make america united begin? >> i believe strongly in the psyche we just have to communicate better, go to places where not expected to go. we do

i want to emphasize, forget my principles, they do not have to be my principles, but i think everybody benefit enormously by being crystal clear about their principles. i want to pass this thing along. if every time you were , atuntering your situation that moment or right after, you write down the criterion for making your decisions in words, that allows you to communicate with others, it allows you to clarify your decision-making, and you can take in from others what the best criteria is for those circumstances in the future. that is invaluable. in all your relationships with people, people will know what your principles are, how you interact with them and why. then you go beyond that to convert those into equations and help them make the decision. i think that is a powerful thing. i want to pass along line, but i also wanted to pass along the importance of other people doing that, there are two things. now i'm working on economic investment principles. >> they'll be the third book in the series? ray: the middle one was sort of an accident. >> we will get to the middle one in a momen

i would consider adopting the chicago principles or something like the chicago principles on a campus bit -- it needs to be done bottom-up. the campus needs to adopt it. two, i would get agreement from the board that governs our campus and the university administration that we vetoed the heckler's veto. if you are a student here, you may exercise -- you may go to anything you want or not go, you may wear a shirt that says you disagree. you may turn your back and you might even hiss occasionally, but if you disrupt his speech and make it impossible for the speaker to speak and the audience to listen, you will be punished, period. so don't come here if you don't want to do that. a third thing to do is to be aggressive in recruiting underrepresented points of view, namely conservative views on campus so that students have that. then to be practical about it, since your biggest funder is the united states government and 58% of the governing party thinks you're not good for the party, i -- not good for the country, i think i would go tell them what you're doing and say come to our campus a

we have a hold of core principles. mr. brooks: you said something of importance, alluded to the fact that something that is a great policy like free trade for some individuals and we shouldn't lack the imagination. to find ways for people to adjust. and lack of imagination. i know you strongly favor voigsal education, educational reform, ways for americans to adjust and r.n.c. continues to support these things? mr. walker: we have to be innovative. mr. johnson: not only with school choice, but with the technical colleges. they are more able tore adapt to the marketplace and they have tremendous results. and the flagship universities are able to adapt. and as you see. that fills up. and they meet the need and this relationship in the economy which is how we think it will work. we need to prioritize those things. mr. walker: if you create a subsidize when you get away from free trade you are on a ham steer wheel. mr. brooks: this is going to set those of you who at r.n.c. are on a collision course who call themselves conserv

it's not political, but principled.l go through some of those measures and your reaction and response to them, measured by measure later on. just to continue with this point of a different spirit, a different soul within the american civil liberties union. it seems to me, was made explicit by your colleague, your executive director anthony romero, when he said, "look, we learned a lot from the nra," the national rifle association, which perhaps is the most successful lobbying organisation in the united states of america, specifically there to defend the rights of gun owners. he said, "look, we looked at the nra and we decided if we could be a little less legalistic, focus less on the brain and more on the heart, and trying to change the culture, we thought we could then have a bigger impact." it seems to me that's a major pivot. you are a lawyerly organisation, based on a reading of the constitution, and suddenly you're talking about emotion, the issues of the heart, of passion. i think there are a couple of things ther

america's first political principle may indeed have been self-government but it's first moral principleand the recent visitor to government at all was individual liberty which the declaration of independence makes playing the constitution preamble articulates and the fourth amendment incorporated at least against the states. that means in wide areas individuals are entitled to be free simply because we are born free with natural rights and thus are so entitled, while in some areas majorities are entitled to rule not because they are inherently so entitled but because we have authorized him to. that gets the order right, individual liberty first, self government second as a means towards securing that liberty. what bickel gave short shrift and was the majority difficulty, potential mature terry tyranny which animated the founders, framers and the civil war amendments framers asked and once it in his opening remarks. they wrote and amended at the constitution to guard against that difficulty but that edifice was lost when progressives grabbed effectively unrestrained political power durin

two principles, two and one. i really don't think that affects the analysis to say that these two principles and present a sort of tension that needs to be resolved. on the question of the 9th amendment, there's a sort of sleight of hand or sleight of word going on here. the essential point is that the rights that are protected by the 9th amendment, the limits on governmental power, are not rights of constitutional stature, scalia did not say otherwise in his dissent. as michael mcconnell has argued, and he did this years ago at cato and i don't think anybody -- he went in the belly of the beast to make this point. i don't think anyone has yet responded to him. >> i have. >> 9th amendment merely provides a clear statement rule for abrogating unenumerated natural rights, unenumerated natural rights not of constitutional stature. but let's get back to what this debate is all about and i just want to remind you that i think i've had a concession at the beginning, that the myth of judicial supremacy is unsound, and i

america's first political principle may indeed be self- government, but his first more principle and the reason we instituted government at all was individual liberty, which the declaration of independence explained and the constitution articulates and the fourth amendment inc.. that means that in white areas, individuals are entitled to be free simply because we are born free with natural rights and thus are entitled, but while in some areas, majorities are entitled to rule not because they are inherently entitled, but because we authorize them.:is the order right as individual liberty first and self governance second as a means toward securing that liberty. what he gave was the majority are in difficulty and the potential tyranny which got the civil war framers. they wrote an amended the constitution to guard against that difficulty, but that edifice was lost when progress is grad power during that new deal following president roosevelt's threat to make the supreme court with six new members. perhaps there, was the systematic start of judicial activism. with the court officiating t

don't run on important principles and proposals. thatof their problem was they have not kept their , somethingom 2016 that you have heard from others, that wean has advocated need to do what we said we would do. the house leadership urged their members to run campaigns away , incrediblyme enough. the results were predictable losses. it now leaves us in a position where we are probably a week out from a leadership context -- contest. until the republicans commit to returning to core issues, we focus on health care, the repeal of obama care is critical. if you heard democrats last night you talked about them being health care is among the top issues. and they tried to make pre-existing conditions and its you but republicans took that off the table by what they had committed to do. so what was left, the failure to repeal obama care. when they look to house , it's a whole thing senate accountable to those promises as well. house that has rolled that didn'tenate want to keep those promises either. we expect to see a new leader who will n

and so, that first principle is perhaps the one we begin with. the second is to encourage sustainable spending growth. i won't bore you with the reasons why healthcare spending needs to be effectively managed. it's a national imperative for all of us, not just for our industry but for all of us as citizens who care about the sustainability of our economy. in effecting change, we think we have a terrific opportunity to foster innovation in ways other countries can't through these things called states. often, we vacillate between giving states more flexibility and control over decision making and then taking it back in favor of large, centralized national programs that over time become very rigid and bureaucratic. we are going to express a preference on behalf of state innovation. we think states are best situated in many respects to deliver the types of reforms and changes that you would want to see. our fourth principle is to support and empower those in need, and so that's something that we'll never forget as well, and it's particularly importan

don't run on important principled proposals. part of the problem was they had not kept their promises from 2016. something that as you heard here from others, jim jordan has advocated strongly, you've all heard him say, we need to do what we said we would do. and the house leadership actually urged their members to run campaigns away from that theme. incredibly enough. and the results were predictable losses. that now leave us in a position where we are probably a week out from a leadership contest. and until the republicans commit to returning to core issues, you've heard others talk about senate conservative, focus on health care, the repeal of obamacare, absolutely critical. if you heard democrat pundits last night they were talking about health care being a top issue for voters that voted democrat. republicans -- and they tried to make pre-existing conditions an issue. but republicans largely took that off the table by what they had committed to do so what was left? the failure to repeal obamacare. and when they looked to ho

. are guiding principle.ining us at our conference, thank you so much. conference, thank you so much. applause —— my personal welcome to boris. —— my personal welcome to boris. philip hammond was speaking at a conference dinner yesterday evening. conference dinner yesterday evening. stage to further the national interest. interest. who have travelled to participate in the conference this weekend. the conference this weekend. is fitting as we launch our friends of gibraltar grouping early on. of gibraltar grouping early on. meeting with the chief minister there, fabian picardo. there, fabian picardo. stand with the people and government of gibraltar at this difficult time. of gibraltar at this difficult time. now, we are fortunate to have mr johnson because this afternoon. johnson because this afternoon. our newly elected representative in carrickfergus! carrickfergus! peter and the east antrim team on that by—election victory. that by—election victory. preference advantage over their nearest rival candidate.

he objected to hereto principles one and two and it should be hereto principles two and one. i don't think that affects the analysis to say these two principle principles presents the tension that needs to be resolved. on the question of ninth amendment there's slight of hand or slight of word going on here. the essential point is that the rights that are protected by the ninth amendment, the correlative are not rights of constitutional stature. scalia did not say otherwise in his dissent in troxle. as michael mcconnell has argued -- i don't think anyone yet -- he went into the belly of the beast to make this point. i don't think anyone has yet responded to him. ninth amendment merely provides a clear statement rule for abrogating unenumerated natural rights not of constitutional stature, obviously. let's get back to what this debate is all about. i want to remind you that i think i had a concession at the beginning that the myth of judicial supremacy is unsound and encourage you to be attentive as you hear people talk about legal issues. you'll see this pop up in all sorts o

so when they unanimously reaffirm these principles, that means it is literally the core bedrock principle as the supreme court has said many times. and we would literally have to be uprooting our entire first amendment jurisprudence for hate speech codes to be upheld. but that stayed, we have won the legal battles. but i agree, we are losing the cultural war. and no fight for civil liberties ever says one. no right in the constitution or supreme court decision is self enforcing. so we do need to keep educating and advocating on campus. i think the most important message, which i really try to purvey in my book is especially for the social justice warriors, there are goals, which i support, diversity, include sievity, dignity, equality, societal harmony, mental well-being for the individuals -- if you accept those goals, then you have to oppose censorship because it is counter to those goals. in my book i quote so many leaders of minority groups from the index, the person i quote more often than any other is barack obama, for whom inside a major, major theme, minority educators have made t

>> well, i'm fighting for those principles. don't necessarily need to be part of a broad movement, because i don't think there's much of a movement to be part of. i mean, you're talking -- you know, you're really talking never-trump conservatives, and, you know, as i like to say, there's enough of us for a dinner party, not a political party. >> is it your view -- and i ask you this because you have a very personal tie to soviet russia. is it possible that it was the unraveling and the fall of the soviet union that actually was the beginning of the end of the modern american conservative movement? >> i think you can certainly make that case. there's no question that anti-communism was the glue that bound disparate factions of the american right together. and then once you took that glue away, they went off in various different directions. and i think it was after the fall of communism that you saw the emergence of this noxious populism. for example, the rise of fox news, which i think is one of the most destructive developments

itself state the intelligible principle. the court addressed this in american trucking v. whitman where there, the agency itself had tried to propose a limiting construction to the delegation and the court rejected that and said that the imposition of that limiting construction would be the exercise of the constitutional, the legislative power itself, so the imposition of that limiting construction would be unconstitutional because it's exercising the legislative power. >> can we go back, in reynolds we said that it would have been strange indeed for anyone to imagine that congress intended the a.g., i'm trying to put it, that congress intended the a.g. to apply the act retroactively. would have been strange for them to imagine that he or she wouldn't, that there might have been limitations because of some feasibility difficulties, but no one imagined the a.g. would exempt everyone. >> the intelligible principle cannot be the court's speculation about what congress thinks the attorney general might do. >> we are speculating

of those principles. consequently, if our founding principles are eroded, these fruits will be eroded as well. over recent decades, our nation has endured a great and ongoing debate that at its heart goes to the continuing relevance of our nation's founding principles. what are those principles? they are in our declaration of independence. we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal. that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights. among them are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. that the to secure these rights governments are instituted among men deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. the consent of the governed. these five words recognize that our nation's sovereignty is in her people. not the government. not the legislative branch. not the judicial branch. not the executive branch or the federal bureaucracy. but in the people. sovereignty in the people was indeed revolutionary in 1776 and it is at the heart of the notio

it is not the intelligible principle that was found by any circuit court to consider this issue. and it was not even the intelligible principle that the attorney general himself said that he was acting pursuant to when he issued his regulation. in his final regulation, he said that congress delegated to him, and i quote, "the discretion to apply sorna's requirements to sex offenders to the extent that he determines that the public benefits of doing so outweigh any adverse costs." so the attorney general believed that his discretion was to essentially undertake the fundamental policy determination as to whether the costs outweigh the benefits. he did not view this as an issue of feasibility or practicality. finally, i'd just like to emphasize the special nature of this delegation. this is not licensing. this is not civil rule-making. this is the retroactive application of criminal law penalties that affect individual liberty interests in the most profound way. this is the area where the constitution specifies that there must be a division between the law-maker and between the exec

this is the moment when some very basic principles of the organisation, principles of cooperation, principleseration, principles of cooperation, principles of non—discrimination are being challenged and put into question. and i think that is very serious. joining me is nina trentmann from the wall streetjournal. quite striking comments. yes but also not surprising given the situation. from a wto perspective expectation was that tensions between the us and china would have come down but we have seen they have not. with the us about to heighten its tariffs on china injanuary, we are ata its tariffs on china injanuary, we are at a crucial point in time. do you think we will see a cessation of hostilities while they meet and then it is business as usual when they leave buenos aires? it depends on the outcomes of donald trump and xi jinping on saturday. mr trump has been making comments both ways of this week, that he was hoping for a deal but that the current deal is not too bad. both underlining that they are interested in resolving the issue but not at all cost. what you think is the likely out

first amendment case law reflects persuasive principled reasons for rejecting censorship. the research i did for my book increased my already high regard for these first amendment principles. they draw sensible distinctions between protect it and punishable hateful speech in ways that promote not only individual liberties and but also democracy, individual well-being, and societal harmony. i will put on my constitutional law professor hat on constitution day, that seems appropriate. in a nutshell, the first amendment bars government from suppressing speech solely because its content or viewpoint is hateful or hated. the answer to speech whose ideas we hate is not suppression but counter speech, and that is a term that we used broadly to encompass a literally infinite ways that we can exercise our free-speech rights to counter the potential adverse impacts of hateful speech, and these include dispelling this information, refuting discriminatory ideas, proactively educating and accurate information and inclusive ideas expressing , support for disparaged individuals and group

we stick to our principles, our goals. you will see this party continue to grow to represent all of america. in gender, faith, reality. will be back. [indiscernible] >> the incoming class of freshmen members of congress posed for a group photo in front of the capital. they won't be sworn in until january 3 but they are in washington for training sessions and to vote for house leadership. the newly elected congress will have a record number of women and combat veterans.

shouldn't put its strategic relationship with saudi arabia ahead of its own principles president trump statement that he made yesterday was a major mistake because he put all of his emphasis on our economic and military relationship with saudi arabia but said nothing about the values that we have the republican chairman of the senate foreign relations committee bob corker of tennessee with a democratic ranking member on that same committee so republican and democrat they propose that that that the united states consider again the possibility of sanctions against saudi arabia for what's happened it's not enough to sanction the seventeen saudi individuals who were in the saudi consulate in istanbul who participated in the murder of jamal khashoggi it's also important to go right to the top of the saudi government. u.s. defense secretary james mattis says saudi arabia and the united arab emirates have ceased an offensive around the yemen's vital port city of. earlier the u.n. special envoy to yemen met hooty leaders in the capital sanaa martin griffiths is expected to travel to her day on

cutting taxes and reducing regulation, those are core republican principles. the big one that trump is having, trump ran more as a blue-collar democrat, trade protectionist than free-trade. , i remember meeting donaldaid, we called him back then, we said we cannot work for free trade in your for protectionism. i never forgot what he did. he got angry with us and said, i believe the importance of iternational trading, but wanted level playing field and make sure these other countries are playing by the rules and not taking advantage of us. so, we kind of agreed to disagree on that issue. trade is a big part of his agenda and we have a major trade fight with china that people asked me, why is it that the market are so ruined by it? in no small part, it is a part of the trade dispute with china. host: are you concerned that is what disrupts the market in the future? guest: sure, it is a risky and dangerous strategy. this is one area where trump means something about economics. when i started looking at the evidence, there are some things to what trump was saying

so britain and france in turn are forced to adjust to the wilson rhetoric and principles and the most famous example of this is with the mandate they eventually decided upon for the former ottoman territories in the middle east and called the league of nations mandates instead of course colonies, which is more or less what they actually was. they wanted wilson to some extent become complicit in their design partly by changing the terminology, but it was also because wilson had come to see all powerful not this early because that u.s. armies was world leaders, and when the u.s. army first arrived in france was seen as inexperienced and in terms of equipment and war material, they was relying largely on the french simply because they hadn't figured out the type of supplies needed in war and you think about warplanes, to some extent, the u.s. was not actually up to speed in 1917 as far as military aviation. the united states without necessarily the decisive factor as far as battlefield experience in helping to turn the tide of war. but in material terms and only in the terms of manpower,

accountability is one of gdp are's core principles and the eu was inspired by some of the principlesstemming from your common law system. it relies heavily on business capacity to self regulate. organizations are responsible for complying with gd pr and must demonstrate their compliance, the market of data security enhancing product is growing. investment in privacy creates new commercial opportunities. data protection, unique selling point. one of the greatest achievements of the gd pr is the 1-stop shop mechanism which means supervisory authority responsible for drafting a decision, cross-border compliance case or data breach case. international or multinational companies operate in different countries have only one to deal with. and any decision taken by the authority. and as european data protections froze up and actively engaged in dialogue with stakeholders. this included adoption of guidelines of many aspects of the gd pr following consultation to which many contributed. this work will continue as new questions keep emerging. how do we ensure it is enforced? the four person nu

our efforts to earn the trust of the american people and let people know why these conservative principles are important to keep a safe and secure america and get the majority back in two years. mr. walker: thank you, mr. leader. it is a privilege to be elected by my peers to vice chair. our goal in working with liz is to continue to build bridges and develop relationships in new places and to new communities. last several years, democratic policies simply have driven more people into poverty. the last two years, the republican people have lifted people out of poverty. i look forward to working with this leadership team. smith smith it is a -- mr. smith: it is a great honor to be part of this team with the leadership of mr. mccarthy and it's important to look at the other leadership team. this team right here, the average age of all of us combined is 52 years old. the average age of the top three leading candidates on the other side is 78 years old. we are all about new ideas and moving this country forward and new progress. i'm happy to be part of this team. mr. palmer: i really appreciat

accountability is one of the gdpr's core principles and the e eu was inspired by some of the principles stemming from your common law system. it relies heavily on business capacity to self-regulate. organizations are responsible for complying with the gdpr and must be able to demonstrate their compliance. the market of new privacy or data security enhancing products is growing. in other words, investing in privacy pays off and creates new commercial opportunities. if and scientists roll up our sleeves and actively engage with the dialogue with stakeholders. how do we ensure the gdpr is enforced? as european data protection authorities we stand ready to share our experience and expertise and further discuss these issues with all interests. let me con clut with one of the greatest u.s. legal experts and one of the founders of privacy law. the right to be left alone is the most comprehensive of rights. 90 years have passed since the justice so eloquently capture what privacy is about. these words have never been truer than they are today in our digital world. thank you for your attention.

decision for before for principle to stand for a pakistan of beef the focus on that is that peace with with this minority communities and about the sun where every citizen is equal regardless of gender regardless of religion regardless of race ethnicity and all the other denominations that divide us these are the principles that our country was created on and these other principles that we live and that we live our life but. what do you think has to happen for both religious tolerance and freedom of speech to be improved in pakistan. well baucus don what we see today the kind of radicalization that you see today is the result of two decades of misguided i'm sorry out there for decades of misguided domestic and geopolitical policies where these extremist elements have been used by the state of pakistan to to do for the its strategic objectives in the region so so what has to happen is a very is a very long radicalization program bought of which would be judicial reform such as rip repealing laws like the blasphemy law another part of the radicalization plan like this would be better gov

defending human rights principles are now indifferent or silent or abuses taking place for example here in turkey or elsewhere i think this is a very. damaging time for human rights principles amnesty is issued a report about how women activists have been tortured and abused in detention in saudi arabia but without the leverage of a powerful country like the us little is likely to change and without u.s. support it will be difficult for turkey to get answers from saudi arabia about who really ordered the killing of jamal khashoggi turkey's position actually stool read to get an answer or let's say a conclusive answer from this saudi arabia say because most probably. united states the european union will learn that there will not push this problem in a further. for turkey this is not just a political economic issue it's also a criminal one a murder has been committed and they want to investigate it and solve it but they say that investigation is being hampered by a lack of saudi cooperation the turks are demanding details about the day mr kosofsky was murdered they have asked the saudis

those principles that have been driven to work and get our economy back on track and help those families who are counting on us. they want to see this economy continue to grow. a lot of those swing districts you never heard democrats talk about obstructing and subpoenas and impeachment. they talked about being pro-life and pro gun and be interesting if they keep the word to their voters. the people in this country don't want an obstructive congress but people who want to work together to keep this great economic success going, working with the president who is focused on getting this country back on track. as we constitute this new leadership team, we will be refocused on our efforts to earn the trust of the american people and let people know why these conservative principles are important to keep a safe and secure america and get the majority back in two years. mr. walker: thank you, mr. leader. it is a privilege to be elected by my peers to vice chair. our goal in working with liz is to continue to build bridges and develop relationships in new places and to new communities. last seve

because people gave up on the founding principles? or will it be enough to have the courage to explore and stand against it with all of the challenges we have in the universes in many other places today? the choice is yours. and so also -- will be the consequences. thank you. [applause] thank you for that all we will have a brief conversation here before turning over to the most dynamic part of our evening conversation which is hearing from the audience. before we do that i wanted to just flush out a few of the points that you made a little bit more. and a i wanted to ask you about solutions you proposed. one of which was yearning for a lincoln-like leader. and, of course, some of the challenges that our leaders have now are -- for structural and technological and different things are rewardn in lincoln day not that politicians no longer give talks about civic education or the better angel of our nature but more likely none of them are ever covered. and what tends to get more attention to get more likes to get more press coverage is t

this is the moment when some very basic principles of the organisation, principles of cooperation, principlesion, are being challenged. the bbc‘s michelle fleury annemarie koori cup me earlier why this meeting is so crucial to america, china and asia as a whole —— and mariko oi. the administration has made a point of saying the relationship with trading with china is unfair. there are unhappy with this. you mix that with the message trump delivered during the election campaign and since he came to office, he promised to revive manufacturing and to stand up to revive manufacturing and to stand upfor to revive manufacturing and to stand up for american businesses —— they are unhappy. he's lucky, the timing comes when the us economy is doing well. 6dp comes when the us economy is doing well. gdp is doing well. he can afford to take on a battle. he has got the support of republicans and many blue—collar workers who see this as part of that providing american good paying jobs for the middle—class. the question is, going forward , middle—class. the question is, going forward, if this is protracted,

principles, compromises seem very clear to me. flag's champions claim, it is a warm morel, then let us respected as a war memorial and let us actively discourage any other use of the flag. those who profess to love the flag should be the ones to enforce this the most, not try to defend it as a living symbol of political causes or is some illiterate reaction. nothing will kill the confederate flag faster than to try to keep it alive as a living symbol today. earlier iterations beginning with father ryan into the 1940's and the reaction to the flags first use in popular culture, earlier generations understood this and so should we. thank you all very much for your attention. >> [applause] >> there are some folks that have questions for john. if you would like to come over to the microphone, any questions . all right, without any questions, let's give him another round of applause. >> [applause] >> away, we have one question. don't turn the dial. >> i have a question, does the national park service allow putting the confederate battl

are good principles into absolute dogma or doctrine. it is important if we are going to do empirical thinking rather than rationalist pseudo-mathematical thing to understand our principles even if true may have limits. even if national independence is a wonderful principle it may have limits, here is a limit. i certainly think and i hope you will agree with me that if america or some other nation has sufficient power to go to rwanda or cambodia, to put a stop to it and get out rather than having to occupy the country for the next 50 or 100 years, if plausible that could happen then there's a serious case to be made, i would definitely defend it, to go in and put a end to the killing. i would like to draw a sharp distinction between that and the kind of moral obligation that today circulates in which if a regime is autocratic, and if it doesn't recognize individual liberties the way we do then quite a few people, surprisingly, will say that those regimes are not legitimate. this is a kind of french revolution, a of stuff. the idea that e

defending human rights principles are now indifferent or silent or abuses taking place for example here in turkey or elsewhere i think this is a very. damaging time for human rights principles amnesty is issued a report about how women activists have been tortured and abused in detention in saudi arabia but without the leverage of a powerful country like the us little is likely to change and without u.s. support it will be difficult for turkey to get answers from saudi arabia about who really ordered the killing of jamal khashoggi turkey's position actually stool we need to get an answer or let's say a conclusive answer from this saudi arabia say because most from really. united states the european union. that there will not push this problem in a further turkey this is not just a political economic issue it's also a criminal one a murder has been committed and they want to investigate it and solve it but they say that investigation is being hampered by a lack of saudi cooperation. the turks are demanding details about the day mr casady was murdered they have asked the saudis who if not

the statutes on naturalization at the time required that applicants be attached to the principles of the constitution and that they take an oath to defend the united states "against all enemies, foreign and domestic." the terms have changed since then. asked if she was willing to take up arms in defense of this country, she said neither yes nor no. she wrote, "i would not take up arms personally." federal officials who were likely being lobbied behind the scenes by the women's auxiliary of the american legion, denied her petition. this launched a series of appeals and cases that brought her before the supreme court in april, 1929. ruling for the court in may, justice pierce butler insisted that her refusal to take up arms disqualified her for citizenship. "that it is the duty of citizens by force of arms to defend our government against all enemies is a fundamental principle of the constitution." he cited for this authority none none other than arver versus united states. butler deemed irrelevant the fact that a 52-year-old woman was unlikely to be included in any military force, eve

he is also the author of a " conscience of a conservative" and return to principle. please join me in welcoming arizona senator, jeff flake. [applause] senator flake: congratulations to the award winners tonight. i have so much appreciate the invitation to speak tonight. if i'm a bit winded i have developed an aversion to elevators. [laughter] senator flake: i saw susan and to an camera next elevator this morning. chris coons suggested there surely has got to be room for a television show that goes along seinfeld's jerry getting coffee. senators in elevators with advocates. there is an old joke that says when you are serving in the house of representatives, you run toward the press at every opportunity. when you are in the senate, you run away from the press as fast as you can. my experience has been that's not a joke but an ax inch om. let me get serious for a couple of minutes here. i would like to say a few words tonight about the search for truth, which is what all of you here tonight are all about, it's what defines your profession. near the beginning of the doc

without truth and principled fidelity to truth and shared facts, our democracy will not last. over the past few years, we've seen the truth, objective, empirical, evidence-based truth more battered and abused than at any time in our history. the term alternative facts has been enshrined into the american lexicon. we've seen an unrelenting daily assault on the constitutionally protected free press, an assault that is as unprecedented as it is unwarranted. i would say that the truth has well been accosted -- [laughter] -- but my kid would call that a dad joke. it seems that some of you agree with my kids. it is said that if you serve long enough in washington, you'll see just about everything. my 18 years in this town hasn't been all that long. especially compared to politician like orrin hatch, whose retirement party i left arly to be here tonight. but i can tell you i thought i would have to serve a lot longer than orrin hatch and still would never hear the president of the united states refer to our free press as the enemy of the eople. of course as those in this room know we