washington showed up. and the other thing he did when he was there, he wasn't like the kind of general -- he wasn't an omar bradley. he wasn't a soldier's general. he is not trying to go into people's tents and be one of the guys in the middle of their adversity. he is trying to find them food and clothing. he's writing letters. he's getting the local authorities mobilized to support the foraging of this army. he is actively seen as trying to make life better for the army. he is not the one they blame when they don't have shoes, clothes, gun powder. they blame the continental congress, they blame their states, they blame the politicians. so washington is very popular among the soldiers. much of that spreads into the american people, as well. there is a reason he is the most trusted man in america by the end of the war. it's not just the soldiers but the stories they tell him about. these soldiers don't serve for most of the war. they served for short periods, then go back to being a farmer. it's likely tha

he received some earlier sketchy observation from washington and shares schuyler's notes with washington and washington writes a full and remarkably important set of recommendations in september of 1783. this document from september 7th is remarkably important and i want to share a few experts from it. to the proper line of conduct coincides precisely with those delivered by general schuyler. to suffer a wide extended country, to be overrun with land jobbers, and scattered settlers is inconsistent with the wisdom and policy or that an enlightened people ought to adopt. two things here to note right away in this letter. it deals with practical concerns. but it deals with philosophical ones and you'll see this come up time and time again in this important letter. he proposed that, quote, the indians should be informed that after a contest of eight years for the somvereignty of this country, greeat britain has seeded this land. george washington advised that congress should explain to the native peoples, as they engage with them diplomatically, that they were going to pursue a policy of pea

so washington is put on ice. here he is cooling his jets for two weeks in philadelphia trying to get the attention of lord loudon. he is finally allowed to see him and what does he did. he says i have no interest in hearing your ideas, young man. washington is only 24 at the time. he has very little experience, and he is a provincial to begin with, so he doesn't know about warfare. so not only do they go on the offensive, but the virginia blues, the regimen, that he trained in, he will have to lose some of his men and those will have to be sent to south carolina. washington emerges from a meeting completely humiliated and angry. and writes what i called the smoking gun letter that he writes to the ylieutenant governor, and he says i cannot con soouf that americconceive t americans, because they're not british, will be denied the rights of british subjects. how come we are not treated equally with the british. he goes on to point out there is no other regimen that served three bloody campaigns without recognition.

a lot of things that went to washington, d.c. are burned when washington is burned in the war of 1812. we lose a lot of those early things. so that is one of the challenges with a building like this, is you do not necessarily have all of the things what you try to do the best you can to give people the sense of what it looks like when men like james madison or young andrew jackson were sitting in the room as members of the house of representatives. well, we are in the senate chamber here at congress hall in philadelphia. the room, as you can see, is quite a bit more grand than the house of representatives would have been, and there are a couple of reasons for that. our roots as a nation go back to when we were british, of course. the british have a parliament with two houses, the house of lords, the house of commons, and there's definitely parallels with our congress. the house of representatives is very similarly set up to the house of commons, and the senate would therefore be based on the house of lords. but obviously we're no

of the dysfunction in washington. our nation's infrastructure has been crumbling for decades. the failure of washington has in falling t bridges, failing public health schools, and an entire generation of americans who are falling behind. washington, people on both sides refuse to give up little to get a lot. oads and bridges crumble while democrats and republicans insult each other on social media. the cost of education and quality health care are out of reach for out of everyday americans. one party wants to impose solutions that would create more problems than they would solve and the other party, too often, offers no solutions at all. the result is a crumbling vision of the american dream. the the average citizen is completely fed up with politics as usual. they think washington has been fiddling while america burns. on the world stage, china threatens not just our economy, our farmers, and our standing in the world but even the values we stand for. prosperity, liberty, and freedom. meanwhile, one party in washing

and that made washington crazy. so, that's when the original divide between washington on the one hand and the other three, the three younger men, began. >> which one did you most admire? >> i like to think of it this way, which one would i like to have lunch with and you know, the answer has got to be jefferson. oh, you're looking puzzled at that. >> i would have assumed it was madison. >> well, that's different. what kind of an experience must it have been to have jefferson talk about his experiments, or to have jefferson talk about his theories of government or talk about anything. he was such a-- man and according to one woman who talked to him in his presidency, he was modest which surprised me. she had no idea he was the president-elect. he would be very pleasant to have lunch with. i think i do admire madison more. he's steady, stable, not subject to whims. very profound thinker. the most studious of them all. and plus, he had a wonderful wife, dolly. she was really an unusual person in her time. she didn't t

well, monroe the argument with washington and with washington in particular is that washington didn't appreciate what he had done and monroe was nearly killed at the crossing of the delaware and taken out of action and not given the commission he thought he deserved and i think all of those things aid him feel as though washington was turning his back on him. the war did that to monroe and to washington of course and it was an opportunity for glory but it was also a tough loss. one of the things i admired about him was that no matter how tough he conveyed an aura of competence. not at the beginning. it was interesting that at the beginning his troops were worried about his indecisiveness and as the war went on and people came to maybe understanding him better it was that rockhard confidence or the ability to appear confident and that was very important. >> right. it speaks to the eye dia of projecting confidence more broadly among all four of them had a very distinct even those and i don't know what the right word is but there a public appearance and washington obviously having to lea

but in the years the city of washington, d.c. is being built, philadelphia serves as our temporary u.s. capitol. this room serves for the house of representatives. the second floor of the building that we'll see in a moment was the united states senate. the house of representatives, each representative at that point in our history represented 30,000 people. we had a population at our first census of about 3 3/4 million. we had six members of the house would sit in this room and eventually from 16 states. the story of the u.s. capitol is the story of where we're taking a new constitution and actually operating it, doing things like adding new states to the original 13. also the bill of rights would become a part of our constitution while philadelphia was the capitol. in fact, secretary of state thomas jefferson would formally announce the amendments to the constitution by basically coming to congress here in this building and officially announcing that we've changed our constitution, which the bill of rights is a huge part of our

the washington state senate passes by a bigger majority. and on february 25, 1909, the governor signs a bill to create the opportunity for washingtonians to vote for the suffrage for women in washington state. so, there's -- that vote is going to come up before washington men in november of 1910. so, the suffrage amendment passes on november 8, 1910. and washington becomes the fifth state in the union to pass suffrage. the people coming west were people who were probably risk-takers, who were looking to break out of some conventional life that they might have experienced in the east. and a lot of suffragettes came from the east and worked hard because they saw the opportunity. >>> since the seneca falls convention in 1848, 71 years would pass before congress proposed a 19th amendment to the u.s. constitution, prohibiting the denial of voting rights based on gender. the amendment would require ratification by 36 states. by august 1920, 35 states ratified the amendment with the tennessee legislature set to vote on the matter. on the eve of th

they are all of the washington -- all over washington. why? why we had all these columns? so it was the kind of assignment that simply whet my appetite, and that's just the direction in which i headed. we do like to turn it over to the folks? >> i'm sure they have got some questions. >> but i like yours. >> i'm coming back just to say thank you. that was just lovely and we hung on every word. and to turn over to jay, our historians resident at eei to continue the question and sort of monitor the questions in the audience. i just couldn't resist coming back on and saying thank you to both. just a wonderful conversation jay, take it from here. >> thank you, robert. my name is for those you don't know my neighbors jay cost, and the gerald r ford visiting scholar at eei. it's a real pleasure to be with both of you today, dr. cheney, vice president cheney. had some really interesting questions. the first one i want to ask you about is the quality of statesmanship among these men. i am really struck that pointed all of their professional lives, they wanted to go home for the wan

i was angry about most of the time with washington and then leading the country into monarchy. but to see that aspect and the ability to anger so quickly and easily, he was a good president and did not preside over great defense like the louisiana purchase. of course he was there to do some part of the negotiating what it was jefferson, i'm sorry monroe and john quincy adams. and in some sense real there was a common the country and the presidency he had the most stable cabinet of any other president and that is a security and continuity that people felt. and jefferson and the governor of virginia much to the delight of patrick henry and james madison and of course not cut of the military cost and the problems of public finance. talk about the ways in which the war shape their character and their understanding of the unio union. how does that affect them? >> he could not become a warrior because he had epilepsy. so this is a theory i think pretty much substantiated in my madison book with a complex partial seizure. and to have such an event so that is what happened in the milit

was washington. monroe and sit down and write e scathing letters, memos to washington telling in what a worthless person he was and how he was leaving the country into monarchy. this is fascinating, and i don't think we have been able to pay enough attention to it before. but to see this aspect of this character, and then realize that this fight, what seems like lia grievance flaw, his ability to anchor so quickly and easily, he was a good president. he didn't preside over great defense like the louisiana purchase, though of course he was there at the louisiana purchase doing some part of the negotiating. but his achievements were great nonetheless. it was monroe with john quincy adams help that made the united states a continental nation. the air of good feeling people always make fun of this description of mine rose -- his terms in office come his two terms, was in some sense real. there was a calm in the country and there was a calm in the presidency. he had the most stable cabinet of any of the p

in a lot of things that went to washington, d.c., are burned when washington is burned, in the war of 1812. we lose a lot of those early things. so that's one of the challenges, with a building like this. it's you don't necessarily have all the things, but you try to make do the best you can, to give people that sense when they come in to see what it looked like, when men like james madison or young andrew jackson was sitting in this room. as a member of the house of representatives. >> we're in the senate chamber here in philadelphia, the room as you can see is quite a bit more grant in the house of representatives would have been. there's a couple of reasons for that. our roots as a nation go back to when we were british, of course. the british have a parliament with two houses, an upper house the house of lords, the lower house, the house of commons. and there's definitely parallels with our congress, today. the house of representatives is very similarly set up to the house of commons. and then the senate, they would be left to be the house of lords, but obviously we are gonna have

washington, d.c., and at one point she was supposed to speak in congress, but because she would not agree not to talk about slavery, if that's clear, they wouldn't let her speak and so instead she spoke in a unitarian church, and all sorts of politicians, including southern congressmen attended and of course she spoke about slavery because that was always what she was compelled to speak about. but during that particular trip to washington, d.c. in 1843 she also met president tick tyler and his line about lucretia mott was, you know, i think i'll turn mr. calhoun over to you. you know, you can negotiate with john c. calhoun for me. so that was sort of the level of her ferocity and really intransigence on the issue of slavery. lucretia mott first met elizabeth katy stanton in 1840. elizabeth katy stanton was younger than her, 22 years younger than her. and when they met, they met in sort of unlikely place, which was at the world's anti-slavery convention in london, england in 1840. so you have, you know

washington -- theodore roosevelt had with booker t. washington? i thought a lot about that as i was working on the presentation. about the potential similarities between the current president and theatre roosevelt. i would say they are seemingly alike. because it is a calculated relationship. so, that was similar. theodore roosevelt and booker t. washington, they both had very direct, set objectives. they worked together to meet those objectives. what is really, really inherently different about the situations is, theodore roosevelt early liked booker t. washington. readerse kind of nerdy and talkers and engagers. they appreciated that in each other, a lot. i think if they did not have the political interest and were not a black man and -- and white man in 19 oh one, they probably would have been buddies. that is why i talked about it a lot in my paper. to answer your question, yes, i think it is similar. they got together because they saw a way to push both agendas, but i do not believe -- i believe it was a more sincere relationship for the good

in the 12 years in washington? and i said, the most significant accomplishment was running five campaigns for president, being chief of staff to two different presidents, being secretary of treasury and secretary of state , and leaving washington unindicted. [laughs] and i think my experience as a lawyer and my training as a lawyer really helped me in that. peter and susan write in the book about how i kept a file of every inappropriate request i was asked for. when i was chief of staff. and when i was secretary of state or anything else. and you know, i think i learned that because i was a lawyer. and remember, i came to washington in the immediate aftermath of watergate. so i saw what could happen to careless people when they go up there. that's a tough environment. and chief of staff at the white house, i was the longest serving chief of staff in the white house in history, up until my successors came along. and i tell people, it is the worst job in government, because you walk around with a target on your front

unfoundednt you made that the washington post isn't interested in pursuing these stories, the washington post is constantly in touch with election officials of both parties to investigate the election and to make sure we are getting a great tally at our own website and our paper about where the cap stance in various intes -- count stands various states. we are keeping up with the legal challenges from president trump, you can go to washingtonpost.com and read the coverage. host: our guest hosts a number of live events, another one coming up today, 1:00 p.m. eastern you will be interviewing bob casey of pennsylvania. the keystone on the election itself. what are you hoping to focus the conversation on today? guest: it should be interesting to have senator cooney senator toomey and bob casey from northeastern pennsylvania. he is a moderate democrat. pennsylvania was a key battleground in 2020, it is a state both campaigns competed for. it is representative of where this country is moving. you see the new democratic coalition emerging in pittsburgh, the thought of the area. the trump coalit

monroe's argument with washington -- i them with washington in particular -- his big argue. was that washington didn't appreciate what he had done . monroe is nearly killed at the crossing of the delaware. taken out of action. not given the commission he thought he deserved. and i think all of those things made him feel as though washington was turning his back on them. the war did that to monroe and to washington, of course. an opportunity for glory but it was also a tough slog, and one of the things i've admired about him is that no matter how tough the slog, he conveyed an air -- an aura of confidence. not at the beginning. at the beginning his troops were worried but this indecisiveness but as it -- as the war went on and people came to understand him better, it was that rock hard confidence or the able to appear confident. that was very important. >> right. it speaks -- idea projecting confidence, more broadly, all four of them had a very distinct ethos -- i don't know what right word is -- their public appearance and washington obviously having to lead men and what was

israel lobby group in washington. you are right, he was not always a strong supporter of israeli policy. he was part of the republican party the time that disagreed with the settlements. that was an obstacle to peace. there was some friction there between bush and baker on the one side and israeli leadership on the other. that has changed, obviously. today, republicans are staunchly pro-israel and there is no room for criticism of policy. that is an indication of the evolution of the republican party over the years. him asow hard was it for a trump campaign, as the 2016 election approached, was he torn over how he would vote? guest: he was very torn. was walking ings parallel the rise of donald trump and baker's visible discomfort and angst about what to do about it. he had been supporting jeb bush, his friends son, in the republican primaries. we talked with him as he wrestled with this decision. i think in a way it for us helped us to understand the plight of the modern republican party certainly the establishment p

hamilton -- you spoke about the washington post.rdon and jody powell specifically snubbed martha graham, declining invitations, refusing to return phone calls. that can't be a really good idea for an administration that's supposed to be transparent and a breath of fresh air. it doesn't include icing out the most powerful publisher in washington. so i think he tripped on his own good intentions in many ways, but if you look back at his conclusions about the press, he was -- he believed that the press negativity and cynicism was the worst obstacle he faced in his presidency. >> so coming back to ted, we're going to wrap this up pretty soon. ted, you quote john adams at one point saying democracy never lasts, never lasts long. there never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide. and that's a really rather dour statement. -- rather dire statement. i can understand, you know, quoting it in a book about lincoln coming to washington on the verge of a civil war, but what is your feeling about our current democracy today, having writ

and there even before we came to washington. and the family the modern houston and expected to do great things imparted on the family and one they were not meant to do was politics that's a time he finally breaks away from his father's domination and the world changes at 40 his first wife died of cancer. and with the country club tennis courts and then to put in the center of world events. >> the stories the books are so rich we could go in so many directions but to leave the stories together i use the word complicated why did you want to write about him? talk about his ambition and what drove him in the first quarter of the book is about vietnam. >> you decide december 1 - - he died december 2010 possession the secretary of state's office for the high drama characteristic. a few weeks later his widow offered me his personal papers. i knew holbrook a bit but not very well and i thought i have a chance to explore a flamboyant from a half century from kennedy to obama to vietnam. and an intimate look at his diaries so i said yes w

we do not need washington to dictate really need washington to get back together. need washington to make it sier, not harder to solve problems. we need washington to be a partner, not an impediment. a large majority of americans are thoroughly convinced their political system is fundamentally broken,hat we as a people are tragically divided. th washington is completely dysfunctiona most ofs are sick and tired of the angry divive politics. americans, civility and pragmatism, they think the raight talk is more valuable than empty rhetoric. these arehe things my party is going to have to focus on if we want to win national elections again. americans are not as divided abou politics and social media which suggests. the problem is not t american people. the problem is thatoliticians think the only w to get elected is to feed the extremes in a fire up the base and the only way to govern is through winner take all combat. the extreme voices that dominate social media, cable news and talk radios, i a tiny sliver of americans on the far left or the far right. over 70 peent

washington? >> so, a few things.all, there's some overlapping themes here between peter and susan's book and mine. one is ambition and one is tennis. holbrooke played a ton of tennis and i have this feeling that he rose up through the hierarchy in saigon and then in washington by whipping people on the tennis court or by being at least so competitive they had to respect him. first there was tony lake, anthony lake, his close friend and peer in the foreign service in saigon and they remained friends for 10 years and then their friendship mysteriously disintegrated with great consequences for them and for u.s. foreign policy, i think later when they were working together in bosnia under bill clinton. and then he played against west morland and eventually got to bobby kennedy in washington. and that's he holbrooke maneuvered to get to the best dinner tables in georgetown, and he revered this post-war generation of american statesmen from able herryman to george chrennen, clark clifford, george marshall, he thought of th

i have not been back in washington since february. i am looking forward to come back and seeing folks face-to-face and really engaging with them, but i am very, very happy and pleased to have this opportunity that we have now through technology to stay connected with them. >> should broadband, this is a question for both of you, be included in any infrastructure bill that might come before congress? >> let me start with the answer. athink broadband is today certainly critical element of our nation's infrastructure. there is no doubt that what we have seen over the past six months has really emphasized and underscored the need for broadband connections. and i do think that there are important things that congress and the fcc can do by way of an infrastructure bill or any kind of infrastructure movement that will really help to solve many of the gaps that might still exist. for instance, our members have done such a great job of serving their communities and meeting the need and keeping americans connected with so many of our members st

and how did he combine that with getting things done in washington ? >> so if you things, personal of overlapping themes between peter's book in mind. one is ambition and one is tennis. holbrook played a ton of tennis and i have the feeling that he rose up through the hierarchy in saigon and in washington by whipping people on the tennis court or by being so competitive they had respected . the first anthony closest friend and beer in foreign service in saigon and they were of a friend for 10 years and that friendship mysteriously is integrated with great consequences for them and for us foreign policy i think later when they were working together on bosnia under billclinton . then he starts playing tennis against west moreland and maxwell taylor in saigon and eventually got to bobby kennedy in washington and this is how holbrook maneuvered and work his way to the best dinner tables in georgetown, the rest of them holding april, he revered this postwar generation of american statesman from april herrington to george kennan, clark the third, george mars

who ran washington" and the life and times of james a. baker, iii. two brilliant books about two complicated and fascinating men. they were born a decade apart. baker in houston in 1930 and holbrooke in manhattan in 1941. baker a republican trained as a lawyer, holbrooke a democrat foreign service officers student of foreign policy. their lives are very different and they are project trees but they both ended up in washington where they became major power players. peter, picking up on that this is a man with great ambition and i was there even before he came to washington. >> yeah it was. he was a family of aristocracy. his family built modern houston and he was expected to do great things. a very dominating father who is in part done him the legacy of his family. one thing they were not meant to do with politics. he was told at the time he breaks away from his father's domination over his life at age 4020 suffers this great family tragedy. his first wife dies of cancer and he ran the country club tennis courts and george h.w. bush the tw

and the territory enacted women's right to vote in washington.it was only women in wyoming and utah who had the right to vote after the civil war until women in washington. it was quite challenging, as you might imagine. there were concerns that women would vote for prohibition. if they had the right to vote, they could also serve on juries. and there was a series of cases that came before the supreme court, first upholding the right to vote, and then the right was invalidated on a technicality. finally in 1910, women in washington permanently received the right to vote. >> this year marks the 100th anniversary of the ratification of the 19th amendment, giving women the right to vote. wyoming was the 27th state to pass that amendment. however, decades earlier, there were suffrage laws in the u.s. we explain why this territory was a prime spot for this historic legislation. >> we are in the women's hallway of the laramie museum in wyoming. this tells the story of why wyoming was so unique, granting women the right to vote, hold property, and elect

is the washington post national political reporter and moderates the "washington week" program every week. thank you for being with us this morning. we have been spending this first hour talking about continuing standoff, a weekend a day after the election. what is the trump campaign's strategy in all of this? guest: the campaign strategy is to mount legal challenges. and the republican strategy is to stand with president trump. it was evident on monday at the capital that mitch mcconnell, senator roy blunt and other members of the republican leadership stand in lockstep with president trump as he pursues different recounts and litigation across the political map. it's an example of the solidarity of the gop despite president trump's defeat, and also a challenge for vice president elect biden who is trying to mount a transition at this point but he doesn't have formal backing from the current administration. host: what are you hearing is the mood inside the white house, officials and sources you talk to? guest: president trump is unlikely to concede this election. he may walk away fr

you know his poll in washington d.c. thank you very much i want to bring it back into the studio with our guests joining us our own you know it's a big issue that you has just touched on there is what we can expect to see in the days ahead in terms of protests in terms of political violence and whether you know to what degree this could potentially escalate some of the predictions have been quite dire what do you think is likely to happen in the weeks and months ahead i think at these big protests we'll see a lot of peaceful activity maybe some counter process and trump people i think where the worrying is is where there are these small places where recounts happening or even initial counts happening and you see folks showing up to monitor the situation who are maybe heavily armed automatic weapons who knows and then something pop. i think there's this is still a worry but the more joe biden's win is convincing in some of these crucial small counties the less likely that is but i can see trump very much standing back if

at that point franklin looks at the chair where washington sits and says look behind washington's head. there's a carving of a half sun on the back of the chair. all summer i've been trying to decide whether that half sun is rising or setting and i could not make up-mile-per-hour mind until now. now at length i have the happiness to know that that is a rising and not a setting sun. he felt good. he'd been working for this since the 1750s, this kind of unity of the american states, and he finally sees it happening. one of the great stories that comes afterwards is he's supposedly asked what kind of a government they have created here in philadelphia, and he would say it's a republic, if you can keep it. his last warning to the rest of us, to make sure, but think about the united states. one of the things i like to finish with is this idea that we're still using that same constitution. we're still using that same government, but it's also allowed us, maybe not quickly, but it's definitely allowed us to improve because ultimately slavery in the united states doesn't really end by the civi

a story about the 13-day train journey that lincoln took from illinois to washington d.c. inaugurated as president. these are two very different books. i'm going to hold up each of them. this is literally a mini biography, well, not so mini, it's a substantial book, but focuses on 13 days and this is harold holzer's book on the president versus the press. there's very different books, but they are both about presidents. and both authors are deeply with lincoln in the civil war era. to my mind, both folks actually have a theme, which is the notion that american politics has always been deeply partisan, contentious, and downright toxic, toxic. so ted, let's begin with you. you give us a vivid description of lincoln's dangerous train journey, and at one point, you refer to it, to the toxic climate of 1860. so, i wanted to ask you right off the bat, is it worse today? [laughter] >> no. it's horrific today, worse in 1860. it's such an honor to appear with harold because he literally wrote the book on this period. lincoln president-elect was constantly on my book shelf as i was

washington arrived. roosevelt said, why don't you stay for dinner? dr. washington did.he press, most of the press in the north and the black press for sure, reported this is a great milestone. abraham lincoln had had tea with an african-american journalist, frederick douglass, who was still a journalist when he had tea with abraham lincoln at the white house, he ran his own newspaper. but this is the jim crow era, and this set off the southern newspapers and southern senators in really vile ways. one senator said that black people would have to be lynched in greater numbers now because they would become so haughty about this social advance. to his credit -- i think roosevelt was casual about it, to his credit. to his discredit, i think the administration responded by first trying to deny the dinner had taken place, and then later taking that back in acknowledging that it was no big deal. so he did not use it as a wedge to widen access for african-american reporters or visitors. there was never another event of its kind again. there were events in his administration wher

he came to washington. he ran the campaign against ronald reagan for george h.w. bush and ronald reagan shows him to be a white house chief of staff and he was seen as probably the most successful person at that job, this modern time. how did he do it? >> that's a great question because he didn't really have a background that was necessarily project that he would be successful. he was a lawyer and he ended up running gerald ford's campaign in 1976 coming in from nowhere in the wreckage after watergate. there were no republicans left in this generation and that's why the previous group had been convicted and sent off to jail and he opened up a world of people like jim baker, dick cheney brent scowcroft and a whole generation of people who came before. i think it's an example of a president that was an outsider coming in to washington but he wanted to get things done. he doesn't have the organizational skills to run the white house they didn't understand washington. this is a guy who ran not just one but two campaigns as his chief of staff but ended up being a smart

i will tell you this, i have been back in washington since february. i am looking forward to come back and seeing folks face to face and will engage with them, i'm very, very happy and pleased to have this opportunity we have now to technology to stay connected with them. >> host:his is a question of both of you, should brobande included in any infrastructure built that might come bore congress? >> guest: let me start with that answer, and i think broadband i today a certainly critical of it of our nation's infrastructure. there is no doubt that what we ha seen over the past six months has rlly emphasized and underscored the need for broadband connections. i do think there are important things that congress and the fcc can do by wayf an infrastructure bill or any kin of infrastructure blueprint that will really help sve many of the gaps it might still exist. for instant our mbers have done such a great job of serving thr communities and beating the need and keeping americans connected with s many of our members stepping up to adopt the fcc's pledgeo ke

he came to philadelphia in washington's birthday, 1861 on his way to be inaugurated and washington's birthday and he actually said in this room that he would rather be assassinated on the spot than fail the ideals of the founding fathers. exactly the kind of strength that america needed at the time, and then sadly, four years later he comes back having been assassinated, but having succeeded in saving the united states and they put his casket literally almost next to the liberty bell and they ran about 100,000 people through this building in a day to pay their respects to lincoln and in this space you had lincoln laying next to the liberty bell in the space where the united states was born and the ghosts of the founding fathers was present at one time and that's the kind of thing that makes the room so great and the park service comes in in the 20th century after world war ii and unfortunately, the one thing that had changed the walls and made them fancier. you know, it's a room and it had things like, and our thing was let's get it back to the way it looked to the plainer walls you

they were in washington's cabinet. hamilton was secretary of the treasury, jefferson was secretary of state, a pretty good lineup. eachwent after ejector -- other every day at cabinet meetings. two were said to be fighting cocks in a ring. jefferson did everything he could to dial back that regal atmosphere both in the way he conducted the government and also in how he presented himself and was kind of bound and determined to defeat hamilton. irony i think, the way things are different now, jefferson kept a bust of hamilton in his study at monticello for the rest of his life. even though they were blood enemies, he respected him and knew what a brilliant man he was and that he had a very respectable point of view. it just was not jefferson's point of view. rather than daemonic -- demonize each other, they respected if not admired each other. madison famously held a lot of social events, elaborate events at the white house after thomas jefferson's presidency. did you encounter in your research any information about any

particularly women in the washington d.c. area following the 1862 disturbing attack of columbia emancipation. act this top was part of a symposium held at the library virginia enrichment. >> our next speaker to me can only as assistant professor of history come in overland -- she is no stranger to virginia. having earned one of her amaze at the university of virginia. at overland, she has created the history design lab to allow students to develop real scholarly projects that range from digital humanities, digitalization, hot gas, historical fiction, public history. remember when i said earlier about our speaker's commitment to mentorship and to education. she is the author of essays published in 2018 and 19 on the civil war, transformation of american citizenship and new perspectives of the union war. as i was preparing this introduction with her work in the flagship journal a part of a round table discussion of the views on revision isn't. -- and the boundaries of freedom in washington, d.c." is now under contract, i am ple