while hitler planned the soviet invasion, stalin was forming a cult around his own penalty. >> stalin was paranoid as most dictators are and allows no resistance to surface in the nation, real or imagined. >> born to a cobbler in 1879, joseph trained to be an orthodox priest but at age 20 he joined the then illegal communist party and changed his last name to stalin meaning man of steel. when they were slaughtered in the 1917 october revolution, vladimir lenin took control of russia. stalin began a rise to power by means of a reign of terror. in 1933, he forced the starvation of 7 million ukrainians and four years later began a series of ruthless purges. he would kill millions and oversee the creation of gulags, the slave labor camps in the country. >> we didn't know the truth of what was happening in the country. >> she was born in 1920 just after the revolution and grew up in moscow. >> it was a very quiet city, very seldom you would see cars passing along. mostly they were horses driving a carriage or tram was wonderful city. i loved it. >> her childhood friend -- >> she spoke so m

stalin. young stalin. jerusalem, the bible. say "roromanoff," you manov."imon: the russians say romano. but we english say romanov. it doesn't matter. brian: you mentioned the rothchild's. this is a 2008 "vanity fair" article that undoubtedly you remember in which a friend of yours the honorable hannah rothchild, who is she. simon: she's a novelist and writer. she's head of the british museum. the very important woman in england and she's a daughter of lord rothchild. he is a great person. brian: here is her quote. did you find it to be a compliment? simon: i don't know. what did you think? i'm not sure you found that as a compliment. brian: are you a gossip? simon: i think all human affairs all human business, all politics is about human relationships. you can call that gossip, if you'd like. on the world's face. but if you look at these books for example, in all of them, there are sud dis and how power itself affects on penalty on power. even if you are talking about an imperial court with chamberlains and ladies in waiting or whether you're talking about

think stalin and the courts of the red tsar. from your standpoint, what is the thread through all of these books. simon: the threat of these books is that i have longed to write these books. i wanted to produce what's on the subjects that were based on scholarship, the archives, and were readable by everybody. accessible. in an if we saw you archive, where would that archive be physically? simon: it would be either in a former palace in moscow or in archives, a 1920's building in moscow. or i might be walking around a palace try to work out which or if ity lived in, was jerusalem, i might be walking around the city, going ton the tunnels, trying understand how differently they were built. brian: last time, we were talking about the archives. there are some inference that the archives would be closed. what happened from 2004 until now? brian: there has been a huge tightening of access to the archives. it is much harder to work on them now especially the modern , ones. they don't care so much about archives, but the stalin archive

stalin, the court of the reds tsar. red threat of these books is that i have long to write these books. i wanted to produce what's on the subjects that were based on scholarship, the archives, and were readable by everybody. accessible. >> we saw you in, where would that be? or in thee in moscow archives of the soviet archives which is a special building in moscow. where might be walking around a palace try to work out which rooms they lived in if it was jerusalem, i might be walking around the city code of the howels try to understand different laser bill. >> last time, we were talking about the archives. inference that the archives would be closed. what happened between 2004 until now. ? >> a huge tightening of access to the archives. much harder to work on them now. especially the modern ones. they did not care much about the romanoff archives, but the stone archives and any political archives, if they are not open, they will not open now. the real dark atmosphere and russia at the moment. an anti-western, xenophobic

they deposed -- [inaudible] more in favor of stalin. so the whole thing was just dominated, but stalin had this system of distrusting and fighting among themselves and so forth. and that created such a disarray among the republic military that i think that was probably the most important factor by which they lost the war. [inaudible] >> okay. >> thank you. [applause] >> thank you. i, there certainly was disarray on the republican side, there's no question about that. i guess i would question myself whether that was real reason they lost the war. i think the reason they lost the war is that they were up against an enemy that was receiving a huge stream of arms from hitler's germany, mussolini's italy -- which, as i mentioned, sent 80,000 ground troops as well -- and the western democracies did nothing. initially, the position that it was disarray on the republican side which caused franco and the nationalists to win, george orwell took that position when he wrote "homage to catalonia." five years later he changed his mind x he said the c

here, i think, he did not fully understand ender stalin or toal yaren nature of stalin ice ideology.he difference that is between a run-of-the-mill dictator like say vargas in brazil with whom he had a long and happy relationship. or more than willing to follow american leadership and did not understand that stall isen was no vargas. that something much more difficult and much more sinister. he hoped that a new united nations organization which he may have imagined himself leading could maintain post war peace and stability. from time to time was the war coming to an end, he mentions to people the possibility that he might become the leader of the united nations organization. how serious he was about all of this it had come or at least to have to resign the presidency. i wonder. his death on april 12th, 1945 saved him from would have likely been a fourth term marked by difficulty and disappointment. how do we remember fdr then? cut down like lincoln at the height of his achievements? but facing the difficult future and spite the overall success of his presidency having also had a u f

the president sent him after the invasion of the soviet union to meet with joseph stalin.stalin to many americans was no better than hitler, communism potentially worse than fascism and he and stalin created a relationship that enabled the us to extend lease to the soviets and make what many felt it would be a quick fall of the soviet union into ultimately the pathway to complete destruction of hitler. now, what fdr did to keep the british and russians from losing was vital, but to win would require us entry into the war. fdr was unwilling to buckley isolationists. he was a hamlet when the world needed henry v. he was unable to fire the first shot. he wanted to door hitler into firing the first shot until the american people would push him to war. shockingly, as we know, those shots that finally brought the us into the war, out of the shadows, were not german. and of course, to tell you, spoiler alert, the climax, epilogue, end of my book, the us was attacked at pearl harbor. we went to war. we joined the grand alliance that defeated tierney around the world. with that, th

what would spain have looked like if the republic one, what if an stalin's would've been democratic. if it would've been one what hitler and mussolini not have started a war? >> a question. i think of the spanish republic had won the war, people of spain would have been much better off. there are right wing historians that said if the republic would've won it would've become a soviet satellite. it is true, the soviet state have great influence in the army and security police. i think to effectively turn a country into a satellite you have to have military occupation. the soviet satellites in eastern europe could remain that you eat way for 40 years because the red army was at hand in moscow did not stop and hesitated to play when somebody got out of line. as seen is it six in east germany, 1953 in czechoslovakia. similarly, the u.s. kept most nations in central america and the caribbean doing pretty much what it wanted throughout the 20th century through ceaseless string of military interventions. without a red army occupied the republic of spain i do not think it would've been a sov

it was josef stalin's soviet union. and although it was not widely known at the time, stalin demanded a lot of things in return for selling arms to spain. namely, high positions for spanish and soviet communists in the government's armed forces leadership and in their security forces. but stalin did something more important as well which is that he passed the word to communist parties around the world wanting to take advantage of this enormous groundswell of enthusiastic support for the spanish republic, pass word to the world's communist parties begin recruiting volunteers to fight for the spanish republic. and these volunteers were what became known as the international brigades which i'm sure you're familiar with. eventually, 35-40,000 people from more than 50 countries went to spain to the fight for the spanish republic. they were the shock troops of this war. they were thrown into the very toughest battles, and the men in those international brigades died at three times the rate of other soldiers in the spanish rep

basically, stalin thought this entire operation had been botched almost from the beginning.e was given a guarantee by the north korean dictator that if north korea invaded with chinese help, the americans would intervene. asm that point on, just stalin was like, this is your problem. it is not my problem any longer. but truman had to make a call. did he do the right thing? was it necessary to remove general macarthur? probably add was. was it the right policy to carry through? i guess history might have a different judgment. it might be a necessary blunder. history is dotted by necessary blunders. what i think the acceptance of the final status, the stalemate in korea just might fit into that. came home and we have now been through the first world war, the second world war, the japan experience, the korean war, and i guess we saw him address the republican national convention. i would like to go to the chapter that brings a lot of it together in one chapter. it is called "saving fdr." arthur: no yes. that is an interesting chapter. brian: i want to read what you wrote and ha

brian: i think stalin and the courts of the red tsar. brian: from your standpoint, what is the thread through all of these books. simon: the threat of these books is that i have longed to write these books. i wanted to produce what's on the subjects that were based on scholarship, the archives, and were readable by everybody. ccessible. brian: if we saw you in an archive, where would that archive be physically? simon: it would be either in a former palace in moscow or in the soviet archives, a 1920's uilding in moscow. or i might be walking around a palace try to work out which rooms they lived in, or if it was jerusalem, i might be walking around the city, going down the tunnels, trying to understand how differently they were built. brian: last time, we were talking about the archives. there are some inference that the archives would be closed. what happened from 2004 until now? brian: there has been a huge tightening of access to the archives. it is much harder to work on them now, especially the modern ones. they don't care so much ab

stalin loved show trials. in the '30s he had show trials. they were fake trials.but roosevelt really wanted this principle, and churchill was aware of the danger, the trap of show trials, and he suddenly -- in some recently declassified document withs we found out -- that at one point he was considering a plan to just have summary executions of a few top leaders and some just imprisoned without trial. so this went back and forth. eventually, the trials happened, as we know. nuremberg, dachau and so forth. and it was unprecedented, but every step of the way it's been controversial right up to today's. >> uh-huh. and what did they, i mean, what were the reasons they opted to go for the trials? were there particular goals besides just holding people accountable? >> yeah. aside from just holding people accountable and the obvious one is somebody has to be punished for all the horrors, there was -- the educational element was there very early. and president truman said at one point what these trials are meant to do is to make it impossible for someone to say now or any

stalin thought this entire fromtion had been botched the beginning. he was given a guarantee by the that ifrean dictator north korea invaded with chinese help, the americans would intervene. from that point on stolen was like, this is your problem, not mine. truman had to make a call. did he do the right thing? necessary?e -- probably it was. was it the right policy? history would have to have a different dutch meant. -- judgment. history is adopted by necessary blunders. the acceptance of the final stalemate might fit into that. thee have now been through first world war, the second world war, the japan express, himkorean war, we saw address the republican national convention. i would to go to the chapter that brings a lot of him together in one chapter. it is called saving fdr. >> that is an interesting chapter. >> i want to read what you wrote and have you explain it. this is during the fdr years and macarthur is in the oval office talking to fdr. roosevelt's own assessment was more nuanced despite. what does that tell us about the relationship bet

stalin killed 20 million. stalin is evil. naked evil. but what makes roosevelt and churchill the head of capitalism to sit with the head of communists. simple answer. hitler. the bad hitler. the bad hitler makes the east and the west to be united. to terminate hitler and the nazis, the evil ideology of the nazi who burned 6 million innocent jewish and the world says we cannot keep silent. we cannot keep silent. our roosevelt, a hero. we're proud of roosevelt when he has the courage to stand. he said we have to be united to destroy the nazi and hitler. and they did and they succeeded. we have been inspired by this. today, ladies and gentlemen, we do not have stalin. we do not have stalin. but we have wars on hitler, isis and al qaeda. isis and al qaeda was on hitler. they occupied land for two years. it began in italy. every day pass we are heading towards a disaster. how come? the whole world, they condemn isis and al qaeda and until now we let them stay. how come? that's what makes our organization the birth of our organization has a re

right away, six weeks later at the toronto conference, stalin says to roosevelt and churchill, well i have an idea of justice, let's line up 50000 or 100,000 of the top german commanders and let's shoot them. that will be justice. churchill was horrified and roosevelt said something like, old like let's have a compromise and shoot 49,500. it's not go over well with churchill. but what's interesting, goes back and forth what's interesting, goes back and forth and eventually stalin and roosevelt decide they do want to trial for different reasons. stalin love show trials and in the 30s they had picked trials but roosevelt really wanted this principle and churchill was aware of the danger of a show trial and he suddenly, he recently declassified documents we found out that at one point he was considering a plan to just have summary execution of the few top leaders and some just in prison without trial. so so this back-and-forth, eventually the trials happened as we know. it was unprecedented, but every step of the way has been controversy override up until today's. >> and what were the re

president franklin roosevelt was encouraging hollywood to make pro-soviet, even pro-stalin movies youcan find some of youtube. mission to moscow, for example, is exhibit a. in that regard, which represents stalin as this benevolent leader, takes an antitrust line, at sword's point with stalin at that time, and it's interesting is that after the war, of course, many of these filmmakers were hauled before congressional committeess and grilled about their pro-soviet productions in world war ii and congress did not want to hear that in many ways they had been encouraged and enticed to do so by roosevelt himself. it would be as if silver -- sylvester stallone -- remember the rambo movie that shows the bib bin character as a kind of hero because the united states was in the same trench with the religious zealots, fighting moscow in the 1980s in afghanistan. a rather strange alliance that has given rise to this explosion of religious zealotry which we face on a regular basis throughout the world. it would be as if sylvester stallone was called before congress in 2016 and grilled about making

basically, stalin thought this entire operation had been botched almost from the beginning. he was given a guarantee by the north korean dictator that if north korea invaded with chinese help, the americans would not intervene. they immediately intervened. from that point on, just as stalin was like, this is your problem. it is not my problem any longer. but truman had to make a call. did he do the right thing? was it necessary to remove general macarthur? probably it was. was it the right policy to carry through? i guess history might have a different judgment. it might be a necessary blunder. history is dotted by necessary blunders. what i think the acceptance of the final status, the stalemate in korea just might fit into that. brian: so he came home and we have now been through the first world war, the second world war, the japan experience, the korean war, and i guess we saw him address the republican national convention. i would like to go to the chapter that brings a lot of it together in one chapter. it is called "saving fdr." arthur: oh yes. that is an interesting c

how does it become stalin and genocide as this writer puts forth? >> right, sean.the buy whereas in tias in t. look, donald trump is not the first republican candidate to face this biased media. he certainly won't be the last. study after study, sean, shows us that the media is liberal. and it's not just the op-ped that you mentioned from "the new york times." they also ran a hit piece attacking forward and denounced the piece. the washington post bragged about hiring 20 opposition researchers. >> 24. >> 24. to dig up dirt on donald trump so time after time, we face the bias in the media. >> good point and tucker, we saw this with the "new york times" story, ignored kathleen willey and dolly kyle and paula jones. denied those. didn't go into those stories. >> right. >> didn't go into the smearing of women that spoke up. they don't cover the guantanamo bay detainees in the battlefield or mohammed horsi's part of the islamic brotherhood and what our own intelligence officer said. so, you know, i don't blame mr. trump for being mad about the bias here. >> it's real. t

in five months, god forbid, that list could be in the tiny, tiny hands of bronze stalin.you have to think about it. (applause) no, democrats aren't alone in proposing a law to limit access to guns for people on the terror watch list. the republicans have their own version. except it doesn't ban people on the list from getting a gun. it gives the f.b.i. 72 hours to see if they can find a reason to stop the gun sale. experts say 72 hours is not enough time to find probable cause. both of these, th the terror wah list bills are problematic. in their own way. but the other bill that senator murphy won a vote on is more promises because it would close the loophole that allows people to buy guns from gun shows and over the internet without a background check, and the senate tried to get universal background checks off to sandy hook but republicans blocked it. now thanks to murphy's filibuster and his bullet proof bladder maybe they can have a chance to do some things. congress has been blocked for a long time and maybe these bills aren't the greatest. one of the experts we talk

he calls london a disaster and stalin a successful statesman.t is a great, as it are, because the first as great. nicholas the second as a useless betrayer of the country.

bet for the united states, and he was afraid that israel, being a socialist state, would go over to stalin, and he was looking for a way to contain it, so he supported maybe a little bit of nostalgia from sunday school as a boy. eisenhower took a military look support withanced the growing need for cooperation with the saudis, so he did not see that as part of the response to the holocaust, which becomes part of the narrative much later. in general, in the united states, i do not think holocaust as a cultural field of study or a phenomenon is particularly significant until the late 1960's. there were survivors they had practical problems, but there was nothing like what we have today with special holidays and holocaust study programs, and it was shunned by the american jewish community as well. the culture was not there. it was a war where people got killed, and a was particularly -- and there was particularly nasty stuff going on. this is one of the things that makes celler special, that he was sensitive to the plight of the refugee and of the survivor, and without the context of the holo

today, ladies and gentlemen, we do not have stolen. -- do not have stalin.e have worse than hitler. isis and al qaeda. isis and al qaeda are worse that hitler. they occupied land for two years. the every day path we are heading toward a disaster. how come? they condemn isis and al qaeda, and until now we let them stay? how come? makes ourat organization to have a reason. the tragedy, the catastrophe, we see the miserable has been done by this evil. i don't call them except evil criminals fascists, dirty , people. not islamic. not islamic. that is the biggest mistake. who calls them an islamic state. isis is not islamic. al qaeda is not islamic. if it islamic, it cannot be terrorist. a terrorist cannot be islamic. we are sending the wrong message to isis and al qaeda. they are happy, inspired, happy to call them islamic terrorists. ladies and gentlemen, it is not a military war. it is an ideological war plus military war, plus political war, plus media war, plus psychological war. the war of all aspects. we have to be careful even when we use terminology with

stalin persecuted neerms had a little mere money than the other farmers. prime minister and lennon called them blood-sucking parasites. hitler said similar things about jews. mao said the landlord class was guilty of economic exploitation. today when the castro brothers are criticized for killing political opponents or beating and starving people in labor camps, they say you have no right to criticize us because you live in country where there are millionaires and beggars. it's infuriating that today's democratic socialists industrialify capitalism at a time when there is less of this in the world because of capitalism. in the past 25 years says the world bank, the number of people living in extreme poverty dropped by half. a billion people who once lived lining that no longer do. this is the biggest success stormy. a billion people are no longer poor thanks to the capitalism socialists vilify. and the media are so gullible and clueless. mainstream supporters say we don't take time. listen to this oily question this cbs reporter puts to bernie sanders. >>

he was the equivalent of joseph stalin. you saw his picture everywhere.ion of mussolini, who was half ugly and half attractive. most dictators are unbelievably ugly or plain. franco. hitler. mobutu looked the archetype, the epitome of a closet sadist. sort of guy if you meet him in the bar you think, oh my god, who are the poor women who are associated with this fellow? since mobutu was an extraordinarily practical man for his country, down under the stadium seated 100,000 people were detention pens and rooms and chambers where you could imprison as many as a couple thousand people at once. before the fight came, the criminal rate in zaire began to go up. and a few white foreigners had been killed driving their cars. and mobutu decided this was going to be a disaster in terms of publicity. so on a given day he had 1,000 of the leading criminals in kinshasa rounded up. and put in this stadium down in the detention pens. and then the legend has it, and i suspect the legend may even be true that he had 100 of them taken at random and killed them. and the rea

he was equivalent to joseph stalin.or plain. hitler. mobutu is the epitome of a closet sadist, the sort of guy if you meet him in a bar you think, oh, my god, who are the poor women associated with this fellow. mobutu was extraordinary for his country. down under the stadium, seated 100,000 people, were detention pens and rooms and chambers where you could imprison as many as a couple thousand people at once. before the fight came, the criminal rate in zaire began to go up and a few white foreigners had been killed driving their cars and mobutu decided this was going to be a disaster in terms of publicity. so on a given day, he had a thousand of the leading criminals rounded up and put in this stadium down in the detention pens. and then the legend has it, he had 100 taken at random and killed them and the reason was a simple one from his point of view. criminals who make a life out of it have connections that protect them when they are in trouble. so by making this kill arbitrarily, what mobutu was saying is that your

he was the equivalent of joseph stalin. you saw his picture everywhere.dist. sort of guy if you meet him in the bar you think i my god, who are the poor women associated with this fellow. >> since mobutu was an extraordinarily practical man for his country. down under the stadium. seated 100,000 people where detention pens and rooms and chambers where you could imprison as many as a couple thousand people at once. before the fight came, the criminal rate in zaire began to go up. and a few white foreigners had been killed driving their cars. and mobutu decided this was going to be a disaster in terms of publicity. so on a given day he had 1,000 of the leading criminals in kinshasa rounded up. and put in this stadium down in the detention pens. and then the legend has it, and i suspect the legend may even be true, that he took had 100 of them taken at random and killed them. and the reason was particularly simple one from mobutu's point of view. criminals who make a life out of it have connections that protect them when they're in trouble. by making this ki

stalin voted to remain in the eu and we are reaching out to our friends and colleagues across the europeantinent and wider to make sure scotland's voices heard. today is about opening the doors. do youut what authority have to be talking to the head of the european union? >> with considerably more authority than the u.k. government does given that the prime minister has resigned, the opposition is a shambles, and a wonve campaign has just on on a campaign that was predicated on lie after lie. ryan: you are talking to other countries in the eu. name some that support the idea of scotland seceding from the u.k. >> we are not at that. this isn't about that. we had a referendum about independence in 2014. the people of scotland made a decision about that. predicated insion large part that the only way to save you status was to remain in the u.k. there's a lot of people thinking about that right now. this is to make sure scotland's interests are represented. ryan: it looks as if the u.k. is going to exit the european union. that's what the majority of the people that voted in the referendum wou

that's why sometimes and i shouldn't say this especially on the air, i fantasize that maybe get joe stalin back for five minutes and shoot all the political consultants because they really don't understand how you get a message across in a way that the american people can grasp and say guess this is the way we should go. you

did we say stalin and khrushchev weren't hugged by their daddies as little boys. you are looking to make the perpetrator a victim. it's shameful. melissa: he's trying to say using the label you are enflaming the rest of the muslim community that would help you? >> let me ask you, do we think it makes a difference to isis? do we think they are going to be deadlier? melissa: what about the moderate muslims. >> president sisi went to the equivalent of the vatican two a powerful clerics, you have to help me engender a revolution in islam because the jihadis are winning. if he knows it, if king abdullah says this is a religious war inside islam, we are undermining our muslim allies saying these are not the droids you are looking for, has nothing to do with religion, it's about poverty and closeted homosexuality. we're undermining our muslim allies. melissa: sebastian gorka, thank you very much. connell? connell: a city on high alert, paris. a man investigated for terror ties stabbed a french police chief to death and proceeded to torture the man's wife while streaming

. >>> before putin, before gorbachev, khruschev, stalin and lenin, there was this. imperial russia.ple worked and starved. didn't work out so well for paul, did it? >> not really. >> they choked the dude to death, right? >> actually, he was strangled with a piece of cord. >> the czars of previous centuries were certainly living the good life. money no object when it came to personal comfort or luxurious lodgings. and today's imperial powers seem not far behind. putin allegedly had a billion-dollar palace built for him. we couldn't license the actual smuggled photo, but our artist rendering looks like this. a putin spokesman dismissed all this, telling the "new york times" we have congress halls built for the kremlin but if you call all of them putin's palace, it is nothing but absurd. >> vodka. haven't tasted that before. so what would i be doing on my outing if i were a czar, looking for some kulaks to oppress? >> hunting. enjoying life. >> picking up some good speed here. >> oh, okay. >> some have suggested that russia is, after all this time, coming full circle. a tiny, tiny mino

this picture, today ladies and gentlemen, we did not have stalin. we have worse than hitler, isis and al qaeda. isis and al qaeda are worse than hitler. they occupied land for three years. the everyday path, we are heading toward a disaster. how come? the whole world condemns isis and al qaeda and until now we let them stay. how come? that's what makes our .rganization every organization has a reason. i do not call them accept evil and criminals. they are dirty people, not islamic. not islamic -- that is the biggest mistake. it is not islamic. isis is not islamic. al qaeda is not islamic. terrorists cannot be islamic. we are sending the wrong message to isis and al qaeda. they are happy and inspired to call them islamic. it is not a military war. it is an ideological war plus military war plus media what plus psychological war. the one aspect we have to be careful even when we use terminology with this criminal this to call them islamic terrorists. gentlemen, i came from a city -- i was born in baghdad. there is more than 20,000 city like maybe new

when i was a young boy and joseph stalin who had murdered 40 billion russians who did not get on board for his socialist schemes, the one that bernie sanders seems to like, the communist party was not a dictatorship of america, that's the trustees. it was not calling -- their slogan was not to call for soviet america, it was peace, jobs and democracy. so, people get get fooled. the left is very seductive. people get fooled all the time. that is why social justice is a mirage. it's one of the big reasons why moral progress is a mirage because people lie and they are very good lives. we seen wonderful examples of it in presidential primaries in both parties, just a normal i guess human thing to do, to lie. and politicians have a vested interest in line because i have to put together coalitions of very diverse communities who are normally at each other's throats so they lie and say one thing to this group and another to another. and every politician does it and that doesn't mean they're not people of integrity and politics, but they are rare. >> you talked about genocide and talked about

he was the equivalent of joseph stalin. you saw his picture everywhere. ugly or plain. franco. hitler. mobutu looked the archetype, the epitome of a closet sadist. sort of guy if you meet him in the bar you think, oh my god, who are the poor women who are associated with this fellow? since mobutu was an extraordinarily practical man for his country, down under the stadium seated 100,000 people were detention pens and rooms and chambers where you could imprison as many as a couple thousand people at once. before the fight came, the criminal rate in zaire began to go up. and a few white foreigners had been killed driving their cars. and mobutu decided this was going to be a disaster in terms of publicity. so on a given day he had 1,000 of the leading criminals in kinshasa rounded up. and put in this stadium down in the detention pens. and then the legend has it, and i suspect the legend may even be true that he had 100 of them taken at random and killed them. and the reason was a particularly simple one from mobutu's point of view. criminals who make a life

fell out of favor with stalin. they erased you out of all of the official photographs. memory hole. that's an illusion. winston smith andnd the ministr of truth, who shredded them, in essence, by removing them from the public record. this is reprehensible and they better be serious about finding out who did this and holding them responsible. >> do you think that they will be able to hold this line, well, we're going tod go forward? >> they shouldn't be able to. they should be held to account for this. this is reprehensible, and a destruction of the public record. >> thank you, panel. see you next sunday. >>> up next, some surprising advice for the class of 2016 from our power players of the week. >>> plus, reflections on the life of muhammad ali. everything you're pretty good at now, you were once, well, pretty bad at. but you learned. and got better. at experian, we believe it's the same with managing your credit. you may not be good at it now. but that's okay. because credit isn't just a score. it's a skill. and you can get better. experian. be better at credit. try d

that's why sometimes and i shouldn't say this especially on the air, i fantasize that maybe get joe stalin back for five minutes and shoot all the political consultants because they really don't understand how you get a message across in a way that the american people can grasp and say guess this is the way we should go. you .. tax. >> guest: it takes the current code, get rid of it. a couple years ago the tax-writing committee in they put together after several efforts, a bill to try to rationalize the current code. it tells you all you need to know. you were to put in a single rate. we recommend 17%. generous exemptions so nobody gets a tax increase. for example, a family of four, the first $52800 of salary is free from federal income tax. no tax in your savings. same thing on the corporate side. knock the rate down to 17%. you will have immediate, you would only pay $.17 on the dollar. you could literally do your tax return on us single sheet of paper. by the way, 40 jurisdictions around the world have variations of the flat tax. how has it worked? >> it's worked very well. not only wil

it was made at the outset of the cold war when it was clear that stalin had ambitions to expand the sovietstern europe and further afield. the policy of containment was a huge success. clear,1970's, it became not least because of the split between china and the soviets, that an alternative option was available. and that was detente which involve improving relations with the soviet union. i think that policy still has a lot of relatives. the u.s. policy towards china remained similar to what kissinger embarked upon back in 1971. matt: what would he think about donald trump's policy regarding ripping up trade agreements with china and having a beer with vladimir putin? although to be fair, donald trump does not drink. metl: i note that kissinger donald trump but i know he did not endorse him. matt: would you be shocked if he did endorse him? i would be astonished. everything that donald trump says, especially regarding china is at odds with what kissinger's dance work. matt: it has been a professor having professor ferguson here. the most it -- the most recent author of a biography on kissin

you know, stalin had died in '53.

you know, stalin had died in '53. the soviet union was continuing to support insurgencies all over the world. if you look at eastern europe after world war ii, they would come in and compromise every liberal-thinking social democratic party and crush them and take over the works. it was a terrible economic idea communism and made into an evil force by a totalitarian nature by what we were experiencing. i was sympathetic with what presidential candidate ronald reagan said, but it's a lot easier to say than it actually is to do. i'm not of the school if we were to ramped up our effort in vietnam we would have won it. the most important thing we underestimated was presuming that communism was monolithic and that vietnam was a pep pet of the soviet union and china. yugoslavia was a well-known sort of renegade inside the communist party movement. >> the suggestion you might characterize it is go big or stay home is a little shorter version of what ronald reagan said on that particular occasion. there is a lot of legitimacy

under stalin. work, don't work don't get paid. i do believe that venezuela holds the key and $50 holds the key because guys like howard are so optimistic at all times and open the wells start pumping and drilling and carl, you don't drill in the mississippi which is a not great shale, don't drill in the bakken unless you think oil is going to 60. the optimism is back in the oil patch. i don't like it. >> as you've been consistent on. opening bell in 3:30. don't go anywhere. every year, the amount of data your enterprise uses goes up. smart devices are up. cloud is up. analytics is up. seems like everything is up except your budget. introducing comcast business enterprise solutions. with a different kind of network that delivers the bandwidth you need without the high cost. because you can't build the business of tomorrow on the network of yesterday. [ applause ] >>> you're watching cnbc "squawk on the street." live from the financial capital of the world. opening bell right about now. and a look at the s&p at the bottom of your sc

you know, stalin had died in '53. the soviet union was continuing to support insurgencies all over the world. if you look at eastern europe after world war ii, they would come in and compromise every liberal-thinking social democratic party and crush them and take over the works. it was a terrible economic idea communism and made into an evil force by a totalitarian nature by what we were experiencing. i was sympathetic with what presidential candidate ronald reagan said, but it's a lot easier to say than it actually is to do. i'm not of the school if we were to ramped up our effort in vietnam we would have won it. the most important thing we underestimated was presuming that communism was monolithic and that vietnam was a pep pet of the soviet union and china. yugoslavia was a well-known sort of renegade inside the communist party movement. >> the suggestion you might characterize it is go big or stay home is a little shorter version of what ronald reagan said on that particular occasion. there is a lot of legitimacy

what we should focus on is the best deal for the united kingdom and the best deal for stalin. could there be a referendum or should there be a wreck for referendum. >> one of the most positive things that we could do in the time left him would be to ensure that this house has the opportunity to vote before the summer solstice. >> there are a number of decisions that we are going to have to look at in the light of the new circumstances with which we are faced. i will be doing that over the next coming days. i want to make sure this parliament is still debating and describing important issues. is this not the biggest form policy disaster? [inaudible] if this is back for the scottish people, calls for the referendum for scotland and europe, you must see to the wishes of the scottish people and hear that referendum mac the point i would make is not could there be a second referendum, but should there be a second referendum him. i don't believe there should be. that is the point i would make it if you look at the daily record poll today, is not clear that the scottish people want a