he was in the department which plans and overseas soviet -- active measures for the soviet union. was chief of accident measures -- of active measures at the kgb office in tokyo. in 1979, he defected the ninth date. -- to the united states. >> the soviets are involved in active measures in any country in the world. the number of operations they are running can be comparable to the thousands. we are talking about many thousands of people, at least a few thousand people who in the soviet union and outside of the soviet union are involved in this kind of action on a daily basis. at the very top of the pyramid -- they prove the mess to germanic and large-scale global and regional active measures. but daily the business is being run by the international department. the international department is responsible for planning coordination and implementation of the soviet active measures abroad. the main difference is when soviets are running an active measure operation, for instance planting a major story in the newspaper in france, west germany, japan, elsewhere --that kind of article woul

tactics useds at to avoid conflict with the soviet union. about in topic written his book. talks about an experience from >> monday night on the communicators, u.s. telecom president and ceo jonathan the landscapebout as congress takes up to roll back privacy rules adopted by the fcc. voted 15-205 to reverse the real -- rules. they had never gone into effect. what are the protections consumers have in the wake of that vote? >> already and were consumers yesterday and today have strong privacy protections that ensure the integrity of their data. our companies are aligned to ensure that sensitive data and deeply sensitive aspects of our lives need not be transacted or shared on our networks. we are committed to that. it is good news that the chairman of the fcc and interim chairman of the fcc have joined together in a common voice to say that as we move forward to evolving the frameworks for future, they were be acting together and in partnership to ensure our consumers receive the kinds of privacy protections they require. >> watch "the communicators" monday night at 8:00 on

it was driving egypt and the arabs into the saarc -- into the arms of the soviet union.t we had to do with the legitimize the u.s.-israeli relationship and build up the nasa relationship. there is a great relationship with can have between the west and egypt if the west will just do x and y for me, sitting right off camera is common roosevelt telling him what to say. exploited the transistor extent. an incredible he had broadcasting capability unlike anyone else in the middle east, paid for by the cia. we entered into a catholic marriage with nasser before we gave him. death before we dated him. --ple like roosevelt were so before we dated him. were soike roosevelt enthralled with him that they believe everything he set about wanting a good relationship with us. we were certain that once we got the british out of egypt for him that he was going to help us organize the middle east. we started getting into capabilities to organize the middle east before he had ever really shown us that that was his true intention. we >> how long did the fighting go on in 66 because of the

wants to thwart all progress in the soviet union. in this july 4 ideas that we had already talked. one other concern was there was a deeply felt idealogical bias. they feel arms control generically hurlgds in dealing with the dod, dealing with the state dmt. clark continued. it would be a while and it would make sense that you are clear and not willing to make agreements with the soviet union. it shows you're at least willing to try. >> he said on the bottom it's not right he didn't see schultz definitely didn't -- through the entire period until june 15 when they have a meeting when these positions opening consulates and kiev, restarting these kind of things that would be moving them. my main argument here is that without schultz, and without coach's discussions with reason a ago, he wanted to have productive negotiations and he thought that his pablt to talk about but without schultz, i'm not sure where we would have ended up. when he comes to the nsc in the fall, schultz definitely gains an ally in the nfc about the soviet union. so, anyway, schultz was a really big catalyst in

he was no fan of the soviet union. he had many terrible anecdotes to tell about the way he was treated there. so he leaned forward and said, i have to tell you something very important. some time in the next eight years, trying to be optimistic -- reagan had not even been sworn in for his first term -- some time in the next eight years, we will bring an end to the soviet union. i thought this was madness because the soviets have communism, it would last forever. so i took my head away and said, how would you do that? it is simple. we will spend them to death. so i did not think much more of it. i passed it off as the ravings of an anti-soviet lunatic. and years later, i began thinking about it. i called them up, and it happened. i said why do you think it happened? he said it was strategic defense initiative. that is what spent them to death. that is what persuaded the soviet union. they could not win. they could not beat the united states at its own game. they could not afford to. let me start with that. so the thing

that was passed on to the soviet union. it was basically a trade the minute it was approved. >> the so-called kgb had to protect their source. you really knew about it they kept it running. they kept iran for 11 months in 11 days. running because they want able to destroy the tunnel. this of the kgb, the people who were using the land lines was that the kgb, it was the military forces. the kgb did not supposedly tell them. they knew. controversy inig this topic whether they were sending in misinformation during this time or whether it was genuine. analysis isfinal that it was genuine. even though it was short, we got a lot about the president. collect at least we learn that they are not going to attack. it always do misinformation. quincy was not the land once that they wanted to share. they wanted to protect the source of the information. at some point they had to discover the tunnel. while protecting the source. it was a rainy day of april 1956. there were leaks in the house. created thetally berlin tunnel because of this

he was working technical operations against the soviet union. there are always copies of the reports heading to the kgb. there was a joint sas news conference about the tunnel. that was passed on to the soviet union. it was basically a trade the minute it was approved. the so-called kgb had to protect their source. you really knew about it they kept it running. they kept it running 11 months in 11 days. so they kept it running because they want able to destroy the tunnel. at some point they could not leave it running forever. at some point, the people who were using the land lines was not the kgb that the military forces. they kgb supposedly did not tell them they knew it had been -- that they had known about it. there is a controversy whether they were sending disinformation or not or whether it was genuine. i think the final analysis is that it was genuine and americas even though it was short we got a lot out of it because at least we learned that the soviet union was not going to attack us and got the order of battle and a lot of interesting

had without having the economy of the soviet union and be in the second superpower. it offers a perspective of fear but it creates a russia today an important option for u.s. interests. this is where the united states mask why should we engage in russia, what can russia bring to the table? the first answer would be i can bring nothing to the table. that be the good news for you. the big question is, how do you know i will not spoil what you are trying to do and use it as a point of leverage. question one is eyes how can we work together on a cooperative agenda. in a period of jupiter -- geopolitical, can they come here and when the car. i'll wrap up by highlighting a few points of how we see this used definitively as an instrument of form policy. in september 2014 at syria we saw how the rapid deployment force a conversation with the united states setting down across the table with a place where it's unequal. it broke russia out of his isolation. another thing they litter to does the military activity in europe is very calculated to introduce risks. create security s

first of all, sphere of i don't believe that vladimir putin wants re-create soviet union. he understands that would have a negative set of economic consequences. they would subsidize the other republics. what they do want is a situation in which the neighbors and the other post-soviet states defer to moscow on key issues that bilateralines as interests. including for example the relationship of a country with ukraine and nato, or the european union. they also use this business interests as ways to increase leverage. you have seen them pursue this pressure,h political energy, and trade embargoes. they have maintained a very good record as a supplier of natural gas to europe. the number of embargoes that have been implied to georgia, ukraine, belarus, it's a regular instrument russian policy. also, the use of frozen or in the case of the dawn conflict, criteria, where either russian forces or russian proxies are occupying territory that in 1991, when the soviet union collapsed, were parts of three other countries. looking in theat post-kremlin space, they seek to avert cover

and national media, the united states condemned the soviet union for atrocities in afghanistan including the controversial allegation that they were employing chemical weapons. this incensed the soviets. they told the u.s. to knock off to no avail. there was a broad and public campaign around the world directed into afghanistan. the early results disappointed the reagan white house. opposition that the vietnam war had gathered around the world as a counterpart that they were trying to reach. can stand -- comparing the afghanistan outrage left them disappointed, making them feel there was yet another double standard in the world. congress took the lead, and the reagan administration began to follow. congress knew the example of the european parliament's in 1982 to be the first of several afghanistan days. the reagan administration responded belatedly but with some vigor. this photo was taken after a signing ceremony on march 10, 1982. reagan is embracing a young afghan refugee. he praised a nation of unsung heroes whose courageous struggles is one of the ethics of ourtime -- epics time. o

had worked for the soviet union. you also had other figures in the venona project, like meredith gardner as was william white, who was another mold. -- another mole. here is arlington hall with a anded on the venona project code breaker projects, it was an old coed school. once the soviets found out the u.s. had wrote in their code they changed everything. that is considered one of the blackest moments for american intelligence. good inet union was human intelligence. they had a variety of moles in the u.k.. he was considered quite a gregarious guy. what are you working on, a lot of information passing on to the soviet union. meanwhile, the british had already established the tunnel in vienna where they tapped soviet land lines. it was a very successful operation. store -- theas the .loor started buckling he was a starsky year. there is a picture of him skiing. he was the brainchild of that and divided it up. here is allied occupied austria. then they wanted to talk the lines in the soviet sector. build as a plan to

in the e the impression arab world that it was nasser and the soviet unions who had and the e britishrench. the american role was all scenes. ut behind the the soviets got all the credit wave of ave a revolutions after the suez risis, kind of like the revolutions we had in 2011 that all benefitted nasser and the soviet union. that's where eisenhower then started to rethink. did you find something in your research that you said, hmm, this is really interesting? i found a number of things surprised me. evidence of as the this rethinking by eisenhower. isenhower is remembered remembered for the position, in regards to his middle east policy, remembered in the position he took suez crisis, and people remember it as -- people who think israel is a liability of the united states, eisenhower as a president really stood up to the israelis. don't like em peer emperialism. the stance was that he was aggressors. so people who like international the tutions, they liked position he took. nd generally, eisenhower, the historians who likes eisenhower, every historian who writes about him. ke he's a

we have fought ghengis khan, tamerlane, alexander the great, the british, the soviet union. so really the idea of accepting the dominance of another country, is not in the gene of the afghans. - afghanistan has been referred to as the graveyard of empires because it's a very rugged, dry generally, typography. neither the russians, nor the british, nor the americans, have been able to, for a significant period of time, subdue afghanistan. and, it's not that you can't do it, it's what costs are you willing to incur. - [narrator] the costs were too high for the soviet union when various ethnic groups united as the mujahideen to drive them out of afghanistan in the 1980's. - the mujahideen, during the afghan war, were generally engaged in a war of liberation against the soviet union. it was a war of liberation that was given religious connotations because that idea of jihad against the soviet union, it made the war legitimate, and it also allowed them to tap into resources across the muslim world in form of money and fighters. - the kingdom, along with the united states, and oth

. >> they're trying to present the soviet union coming in aligning with the nationalists, undermininghe british and taking control of the oil. oilas 100% of european coming from the middle east. we wanted to make sure we had friendly arab regimes that were if not aligned with the united states, at least keeping the soviet union out. >> sunday night on c-span's q&a. next, a house judiciary subcommittee hearing on for security and immigration enforcement. a former immigration judge is among the witnesses. this is just over two hours.

they have a view that following the breakup of the soviet union, they were mistreated in some respects of the transition. . they think they deserve a rightful role because they are nuclear power. they are searching on how to establish that. 20 or more years, since the demise of the soviet union, they were not in a position to assert that. they have been developing the capability of that and what's seeing thewe are results. they are forcing a conversation about what is russia's role. country is more than just numbers. economy, healthy, allows us to take care of our most vulnerable. my mother-in-law relied on social security in her retirement. to helped on medicare her before she died of cancer. pam and i were happy to have that safety net for her. i would like that safety net to be here for her grandchildren. you can see more of those confirmation hearings tonight beginning it 8 p.m. eastern as we profile president trump's cabinet marking the first 100 days of the administration. i will take you back to the discussion and policy conference, next up though, a discussion on republican lea

the russian federation but as the borders of the former soviet space and it considers that any institution particularly nato or the european union that moves any closer to its borders into that post-soviet space is a direct threat to the russian heartland and that goes back many centuries. >> now, before the us elections there were obviously hopes in the kremlin that were donald trump to be elected, relations would improve. and in the conference in october last year, this is before the election obviously but president clinton plays donald trump as a populist who understood the resentments the masses have against the elite and of course president clinton himself presents himself as a populist leader as well and there seem to be some convergence there and it was clear on at least what russia was hoping for it would be a listing of the financial sanctions that were imposed after the beginning of the ukraine crisis or in the middle of the ukraine crisis because that is something russia would like to see listed. whatever the truth of the russian interference during our election campaign and we know there are lots of investigation goi

. >> soviet union coming in a lightning with the nationalists -- lining with the nationalists takingtrol of the middle east. we cared about oil because it looked -- 100% of european oil came from the middle east. we wanted to make sure we had friendly arab regimes, if not align with the united states, keep the soviet union out. >> tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span's q and a. >> senate judiciary committee meets tomorrow to vote on the nomination of neil gorsuch to be an associate justice on the supreme court. live coverage on c-span2 at eastern. the full senate will then take it up. majority leader mcconnell announced he points to hold the final confirmation vote on friday, april 7. watch the senate live on c-span two. case you missed it on c-span, for research institute and the senate intelligence hearing. of 2015,the end started 2016, the russian system began pushing messages seeking to influence the outcome of the u.s. presidential election. russia's covert trolls soft sideline opponents on both sides of the spectrum with adversarial views towards the kremlin. they were in full swi

>> what he is trying to prevent is the soviet union aligning with the nationalists, undermining the british and taking care of the oil in the middle east. the oil was 100% of european oil came from the middle east. we wanted to make sure we had friendly arab regimes if not aligned with the united states, keep the soviet union out. that's the goal. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span's q & a. >>> congress lloyd smucker sat down with c-span for an interview. he represents pennsylvania's 16th congressional district. >> when did you get involved in politics and why? >> i was a small business owner for 25 years. and really didn't anticipate that i would -- at first chose the state senate nor did i anticipate i would be serving in congress. i ran a business for 25 years. we grew a company into several hundred employees and saw over that time what i saw as the overreach of government, the encoachment of government in the decisions we were making and additional resources we had to commit to comply with regulations. and so i really believe that government, that overreach of government is holdi

nixon, carter, no one had delegitimized the soviet union like that, just wasn't done. so that's new, brand new. second was like i say, the overall defense buildup. that i concede was more of a republican view than anything at that time, so i would say out of four that's the closest that somebody else would have done. but a republican president, vast buildup when he got into office. number three, is, of course, sdi. and sdi would not have happened with ronald reagan. people ask all the time, well, at ryka vic were people trying to talk reagan into accepting gore bah chaff's cashiering of sdi? i said, to tell you the truth, the issue never came up? why? because reagan knew what he wanted. he did not want the sdi to be cashiered in any respect. so that -- that was pretty well set with him. so these kind of factors were, you know, from reagan and from his thoughts. the fourth was, of course, the real reduction in nuclear weapons, not the limitations of increases, all right. again, nothing that carter ever thought of or wanted or advocated, nothing that nixon ever thought o

guest: like to be very close that we are not dealing with the soviet union. we are dealing with russia. let's get our countries right before we start screaming. number 2 -- i do not think that the intelligence community intentionally misled donald trump. not just the intelligence ,ommunity but all intelligence we will stick to united states, but it seems to indicate that this was gas used by the regime that the terrorist groups or the rebels do not have. and the russian government the official russian line is that these were terrorist chemical weapons that were attacked and went out into the atmosphere and that rebels will now use chemical weapons in order to get the united states to strike again, but that is not what american evidence suggests. there was another point. i just want to clear another thing up. the issue is not that donald trump was under surveillance. nes situation or the idea that there were names connected to the trump team swept up in surveillance is incidental collection, which means they were surveilling other foreign parties and not donal

and it was a constant source of worrying and even distress for the soviet union, for the communist party during soviet days that the site was a constant source of worry for the communist party that that site in that russian city had become a place of reverence. it wasn't formally a memorial of any kind but it became a pilgrimage site where people would come to remember what happened to lament what happened. as the soviet union and communist party got annoyed by and worried about that, local officials in and around yakatarinburg came under pressure to do something about it. he was reluctant to do it and didn't really want to do it, but in 1977, a local leader in yekaterinburg, a local leader named boris yeltsin did what the party in moscow told him to do. he bulldozed the house. he bulldozed thats now yekaterinburg where the czar and his family and servants were machine gunned in the basement. they ripped it all down. destroyed it as a site. boris yeltsin would later go on to become the first post-soviet leader of the new russia after the collapse of the soviet union. and he had long said

i don't mean then soviet union now russian planes. i mean, they fly soviet-made planes, made bit soviet union when it was the soviet union. that's their air fleet. north korea is trying at least a little to attract international plane geek tourism from people who want to fly the friendly north korea skies in planes that have cockpits that look like this where they serve you ice cold mystery beige burgers that leak thin, red, watery sauce that doesn't seem like blood but no one can quite place it. incidentally my favorite detail about air koyiyo, where they chill the burgers is in refrigerators that look like this that they tuck into the galley on these old soviet planes. north korea is preserved in amber in a lot of way. they're economically and idealogically constrained by their government in a way that makes them unlike anything on earth. we've seen piktsd of the korean peninsula from space where demilitarized zone looks like the sea, maybe the ocean because there are no lights. they have so little electricity. but north korea they d

the soviet union and russia, they're two different countries. do they know it?y know, they know. and from the beginning russia wanted to be a part of it, russia wanted to join nato. i think we've lost the question. the question is about the security of this part of the world under donald trump — here's what worries me... that one of his closest advisers, newt gingrich, talked about their baltics as if they were a suburb of st petersburg. that's what he said of estonia. this part of the world, that's what i suggested. and that is a mentality that is existing in our white house, and when the time comes, this is all nice we've increased our forces, that defence spending is going to grow, and i'm all for that but this is about what happens in a crisis. this is about the fact that people are worried. vladimir putin has already intervened in estonia, by kidnapping people and removing them. he's invaded ukraine and the reason people are worried is what will the united states do in a crisis? if your president doesn't believe that nato is important, no matter what the vi

in line with the united states but at least to keep the soviet union out. q&a.night on c-span's "washington journal" continues. host: welcome back on this sunday morning. -- ivanka trump is now a staff at the white house. you can bidding -- you can begin dialing at (202) 748-8001, republicans. (202) 748-8000, democrats. (202) 748-8002, independent colors. what do you think about the insolence of ivanka trump and the administration? a new tweet by the way, from donald trump. "anybody who thinks the repeal and replace of obamacare is dead does not know the love and strength of the republican party ." that was from just a moment ago from donald trump. again, our phone lines are (202) 748-8000, democrats. (202) 748-8001, republicans. (202) 748-8002, independent colors. there are you calling from? hello? you are on the air. caller: i would like to provide the democratic response to ivanka trump and jared kushner being in the white house? host: please go ahead. caller: i am calling from ohio. have aould like to question answered about how they have not been prope

20 plus years since the demise of the soviet union, they were not in a position to assert that. capability --the all these years is the capability to do that. >> our country is more than just numbers. healthy economy also helps us to take care of the most viable. my mother relied on medicare to help her before she died on cancer. pam and i would also like that for heret to be there grandchildren. >> seymour from the hearings tonight as we proposed all sums cabinet tonight. studentcam. stand this year, students taught us the most urgent issues for president and congress. our high school winter is a 12 greater from royal oak michigan. jared clark is a student. call --mented on, kudo pharmaceutical press gathering is titled enough is enough. >> you don't have to talk to to catch ng enough >> roughly four people today will die if they don't get the epinephrine. of you have a drug that has been on the market for 100 years, cost roughly one dollar, but the price of this has gone from $99 for one to more than $600 for two in a very short amount of time. do you ever feel guilty or pains

when he backed -- along with the soviet union.took two more wars in the middle east but eventually they made peace with israel and today's egyptians are a keystone of american policy in the middle east. i do not see any exiting in lebanon unless you have the state -- with the break up and. [inaudible] i would also like to ask. [inaudible] >> franklin roosevelt was his favorite president.he voted for him. let me just go back to the lebanon and beirut. i never met anyone yet and i just turned 60 years old. who can confidently -- no president has that special talent. i don't know anyone who does. they do the best they can under the circumstances. certain dynamics, they know what happened but you know when it comes to especially like the middle east, with so many factions and so many in the age of hatred, it is almost a fools errand to try and get in there and evolve is what many people see as a problem. another president who was guilty of not peering into the future was franklin was about because he tried to defeat the evil nazi germ

creating 19 million jobs and and ng the cold war defeating the soviet union. obviouslyther reforms took place as well. but his presidency is widely een as a successful one and it showed up in his approval righting and all the polls host: dale is calling from our independent line. i would like to have our guest speak on the 243 -- no that were put in and were killed reagan regretted that until the day he died saying it was the greatest failure of his administration. wrote in his diaries what a failure beirut was. felt terrible about it. he'd been ill advised. in there without sufficient protection, without a sufficient mission. really was kind of an ill efined mission and he outlined actually after beirut that military trine of involvement which was four points including having a call ied mission and the for military action didn't have -- contain these four support of was the the american people, define objective, define date for exiting, things like that. to take asn't going that action again. presidents make mistakes. they all do. others.e more than reagan to

world war ii we're in name at least allies with the soviet union and we've had nuclear weapons sinceused them two in anger. and they had a hydrogen bomb by 1953. the western was unhappy about that. the other bright point in the scary standoff you still have to deliver nuclear weapons by bomber. they don't have missiles yet. you have to put them in the payload pay of your propeller plane or later jet, and russia has to fly theirs here, slow, ponderous, slow, they can be shot down, there are interventions that could take place. what if you drop them from space on an unsuspecting nation below? that became the scary thing. this is the era when i grew up. i was born in 1956 and some of you probably remember this, this is a workplace brochure how to survive nuclear attacks, which was interestingly brought back up by casper weinberger, if we dig a hole four foot inches deep and under the door, and you could survive for a few hours. this is the kind of things. >> we had the duck and cover drills, the issue i had with this, when i was watching film strips, bert had a shell. all i've got is a

i mean they fly soviet-made planes made by the soto union -- soviet union when it was still the soviet union. that's their air fleet. it's interesting. north korea is now trying to attract international airplane geek tourism for people who want to fly the friendly north korean skies in planes with cockpits that look like this where they serve you ice cold burgers. my favorite detail is where they chill the burgers is in refrigerators that look like this. north korea is preserved in amber. we've all seen the pictures of the korean peninsula from space where north of demilitarized zone it looks like it looks like the ocean because there are no lights. they have so little electricity. but north korea, they do have air koryo. they have an internationally well-regarded core of military hackers. remember the sony hack? they do have nuclear weapons, and they do have a mill-man army and they do an increasingly full range of ballistic missiles and they have a immunologymount of powerful artillery they've put along the southern boarder pointing at south korea and seoul where 20 million people li

agreement between nato and former soviet union and russian read them are public, yourself. most relevant document is 1997 act, ussia family establishing partnership with ato and russia and spelled out nato would not space troop, significant number of troops environment ofnt 1997 because it didn't feel time.ary at the however, things have changed, the security environment is more evere, russia invaded two neighbors in the last eight significant concern there -- and that is why currently this spring we have nato, what is called enhance for presidents. four battalions led by four ountries, great britain, canada, germany, and the united states. are hese countries battalion-sized units, not deployment, significant enough five to protect each or most and united states members. how many trips could nato put in the field if it needed to? if member nations decided to take military action? guest: that is a complicated question. depending how much time. what after the russians nvaded ukraine in 2014, at the summit, created the very high unitness joint task force, of three to five thou

a strategy for fighting the soviet union. gerald ford is involved in that. this internationalist congressman from grand rapids gains an important seat on the appropriations committee. he oversees, in time, the army's budget. so, he is involved in the cold war strategy. as he travels from base to base around the globe, looking at american interest and, particularly, u.s. army installations around europe and southeast asia. ford was a republican on capitol hill. key, necessarily, -- he, necessarily is engaged in , partisan struggle. he is interested in republican policies. just as the democrats are interested in democratic policies. but you have to find a way to work together on capitol hill. and ford quickly earned a reputation as somebody who could work with both sides of the aisle. there were times when he challenged his republican leadership, and he worked with democrats. and there were times when he pulled democrats into what were republican issues to further legislation on the hill. so he earned a reputation even as as he pursued partisan politics in a l

warships go, this is not unlike what happened during the cold war where the russia and thend the then-soviet union had pretty well understood ules for how their warships vicinity. n the same i don't think moscow or washington wants to be drawn into a deeper conflict with one and in syria, both countries, the military pretty small. the united states is about 1,000 north training the kurds and the arabs were state. the islamic ussia, mainly, the troops are mainly in the west, doing some stability operations, training and conducting air strikes but i don't think syria an issue where either country wants to be drawn into a shooting war. this change the prospects for peace in syria? >> the prospects in syria have been great. strikes were taken without a statement of strategy or syria. ition on it doesn't move the needle does throw another question a into an already confusing situation. there are several distinct sites in syria. there's united states coalition, russia under assad against islamic state. the united states coalition and a separate way against l-qaeda or the newest response and the civil wa

they had lived in the soviet union for two or three generations, spoke russian better than they did korean. they rejected bureaucrats and people who had come in with the occupation. these were many of the members of the red army. also, the south korean labour party, which had been reformed, had been wiped out six times by the japanese. but it reformed again under unattractive, honest, -- an attractive, honest, revolutionary name and they had set up liaisons with the group in pyongyang, looking for a unification of korea under a domestic group of communists. then there were very large numbers of koreans who had early members of the communist party in china. they had risen to important positions within the party and in the peopled liberation army. -- people's liberation army. there was a political, spiritual leader, and another that was a general in the people's liberation army. one was very legendary, he led the advanced guard on the long so legendary, they forgot his march. family name was kim. we have accounts of when he appeared, he is not in this picture. i will explain who they are. an

, the collapse of the soviet union. and there were such great hope at that time, the cold war was over, things were about to move in a new direction. there would be good relations between the united states and russia own the other former republics of the soviet union. it hasn't exactly worked out all that great. some of the republics, obviously, much better, but are the u.s. and russia now in a new cold war? >> well, look, wolf, you were there, we were all there, actually, relations were much, much better for a long, long time. they started going south when president putin succeeded president boris yeltsin. and they started going south, most notably, over the iraq war. when putin got very angry with president bush about the iraq war and things startsed to get rocky then. and then in the obama administration they went south over the nato strikes on libya. so that is kind of the background. then putin blames the united states, particularly hillary clinton, for the demonstrations and protests against his third election bac

it was just after the soviet union came down. certainly, they want to let him out that easily. he had a suitcase full of information and one piece of the information was jack barsky was an illegal. they didn't have much more. that came to the fbi and they started looking for jack barsky. there are not too many jack barsky and pretty soon they zeroed in on the fellow who lived in a village in pennsylvania and started investigating me. they were very, very careful. at the time, there were a couple of really bad cases of espionage , mold in the cia and fbi. alldredge james in the cia. they were concerned that i may be running somebody in the government. it took them three-four years to investigate me very, very carefully. mostly, at that time i was the number one case on their list of counterintelligence cases. one day, eventually, they decided to go for the kill, so to speak, and they said hello. that was a tense moment, trust me. [laughter] the man who said hello was an fbi agent named joe riley, now retired. your close friends with him now? >> yes, i am. i spent four days at hi

they're all provided by russia and the soviet union. so the bad guys, who are not democratic, are backed by russia, and armed by russia. and when we go to knock out dictators that bring democracy, the russians are always there to trip up the freedom loving people of the world, the democracy seeking people of the world. >> melissa: mary anne, president trump was not tough with 59 tomahawk missiles? >> no. as i said monday morning on this network, the fact is that airport was up and running faster than delta. that's the problem here. you add to the fact that russia had soldiers on that base and they're either unwilling or also unable to say what they saw there and knew what was going on there. that's just impossible to believe. so at every turn russia is somehow involved. yet nobody, seemingly, in the united states government, including the people in the white house and the secretary of state, are willing to call them out on it. >> russia having troops in the air base doesn't mean they're involved, other than the fact that we all know the

so just to finish setting up this era, end of world war ii name at least allies with the soviet unionnuclear weapons since 1945 we used them in anger twice at that point and japan, ussr new clear weapons since late 40s and in 1953 western government aren't happy about this. one bright point in this otherwise very scary standoff is that you still have to deliver u nuclear weapons by bomber at this point hay don't have missiles yet so you have to load them in the bay of your big lumbering plane or large jet or fighter bomber fly them all the way to russia and they have to fly theirs all the way over here and slow and shot down all kinds of interventions to take place but what if you can drop them on unsuspecting nation below that became a very scary thing so this was the era that i grew up i was born in 1956 and none of you probably remember this a brochure to survive a nuclear attack and in the reagan years byline burger who famously reminded us all if we dig a hole four feet deep and under the kitchen door and put 18 heaps of dirt on top of it you could last for three hours. it is not

for most of the past 20 plus years since the demise of the soviet union, they were not in a positiono assert that. they have spent all of these years developing the capability to do that and i think that's now what we are witnessing is an assertion on their part in order to force a conversation about what is russia's role in the global world order. spec it doesn't mean taking a green eyeshadow efforts to the budget for our country is more than just numbers. based on how they can't also allows us to take care of our most vulnerable. my mother-in-law relied on social security in her retirement. she relied on medicare to help her before she died of cancer. pam and i were happy to have that safety net there for her. we would also like that safety net to be there for her grandchildren. our triplets. >> a brief portion of part two of our special program looking at the trump cabinet. you can see the entire broker starting at eight eastern tonight on c-span. >> c-span, where history unfolds daily. in 1979, c-span was created as a

in line with the united states but at least to keep the soviet union out.&a.night on c-span's "washington journal" continues. host: welcome back on thi

the nominee for the ambassador to the soviet union was confirmed 74-13. he had been fiercely opposed by joe mccarthy. eisenhower crumbled that the only thing joe mccarthy wanted was headlines. mccarthy ran for the presidency in 1956 and the president declared the only reason i would consider running again is to run against him. knowing eisenhower, he probably punctuated that with a theologically incorrect expletives. you can think about that. fast forward to december 2, 1954. on that day, joe mccarthy had a vote of 67-22. after mccarthy stood up to speak on the senate floor, the chamber was empty. when he sat down with other senators in the dining room, his colleagues would make lame excuses and leave a. of the reporters who had one sononcehung on his every word we gone. late 1955 the army council visited mccarthy and his home in 1955. they sat down with 6 ounces of jim. he looked awful, he recalled. he lost about 40 pounds in his hands shook. jane trickled from the corners of his mouth when he took a sip. adams describes the man he left at the door as he