tv The Anti- Defamation League Holds its National Leadership Summit CSPAN May 16, 2016 11:45am-2:01pm EDT
>> remarks in just a moment from ron dermer, the israeli ambassador to the u.s. he is one of the speakers at the anti-defamation league's annual leadership summit. follow that a panel on the agenda and the 2016 collective. this is live here in washington, d.c. [applause] >> welcome back. how our workshops? so it seems that earlier today we slide atlanta and i want to apologize. we would like to both recognize the regional board chairperson from atlanta and the national civil rights chair. thank you. [applause] >> we are seeing a lot of great reads and posts from social media. please keep at it. don't forget these are social networking sites to share your
discussions with friends and family. and please use the hashtag adls somewhat. thank you. adl summit and hashtag might adl story. so welcome back to the national leadership summit at anti-defamation league. the nation's premier civil rights and human relations agency. for more than a century we have worked to fulfill our dual mission of fighting anti-semitism and hate no matter the source. and promoting equal rights for all. we are leaders from across the country coming together for two days of conversations on the critical issues facing the jewish community and our nation. and now on with our program. at this time i like to welcome to the stage chair of international affairs eric to introduce ambassador ron dermer, ambassador of israel to the united states.
[applause] >> good afternoon. so i am pleased this afternoon and honored to have with us today ambassador ron dermer in israel's ambassador to the united states. ambassador dermer was born and raised in miami beach florida come a city where both his late father and his brother served as mayor. you can consult the adl summit avenue for information about his journey from miami to his appointment as issues ambassador in 2013. ambassador dermer is one of israel's prime minister netanyahu's most trusted advisers, and has been israel's emissary to united states during incredibly consequential times for israel and the jewish people. we are grateful that he can be with us today. mr. ambassador, it is an honor to have you at our podium. please join me in welcoming ambassador ron dermer. [applause]
>> thank you. is this on? that means bon appétit. ladies and gentlemen, it's a pleasure to once again have an opportunity to speak at this conference, this annual conference which are no brings in adl leaders from across the country. it gives me on behalf of israel the opportunity to thank jonathan greene. where is jonathan? is a year? a hand? okay. it still gives me an opportunity -- [laughter] to thank jonathan and marvin and the many others in this room who worked day after day year after year. in fact, decade after decade to fight the definition of the jewish people and the jewish
state. now, as another bishop to the united states, my mission is to advanced users interest in washington and also to strengthen the relationship between israel and america. this and you're fulfilling that mission has included focusing on ways to combat iran's continued aggression in terror. working on efforts to support direct peace negotiations between israelis and palestinians, and to oppose one-sided anti-israel initiatives in the international arena, as well as to try to forge a new 10 year memorandum of understanding with the obama administration regarding military assistance to israel which i hope we will be able to conclude soon. but today i want to use my very limited time here to talk to you not about my mission rather to talk to you about your mission. the adl stated that mission
clearly over a century ago, quote, to stop the defamation of the jewish people and to secure justice and fair treatment for all. this organization can take great pride in the work it has been over the last century to advance that mission. the adl has long been an internationally respected voice, both in the fight against anti-semitism and in the broader struggle for civil rights and human rights, and is always recognized that when the rights of one group are in danger, the rights of all groups are in danger. but we stating this more than 100 year-old mission is also a reminder of what some seem to have forgotten. namely, that the defamation of the jewish people preceded the birth of the jewish state. the adl open its first office in
1913, a year before the outbreak of world war i, two decades before the rise of hitler, and some 35 years before the birth of israel. the adl was founded to stop the defamation of the jews, and asked people in this room know very well, the decimation of the jews was not a problem unique to the 20th century. it's a problem that has been unique for more than 20 centuries. it has played both backwards and progressive societies, it has transcended time and space, face and cultures. and i mentioned a seemingly but i'll point because too many have forgotten it. too many believe that today the jewish state is the cause of the decimation of the jewish people. that israel is the cause of the spread of anti-semitism across
the world. they believe the shameful question as a student at ucla or the outrageous statements of politicians in london, or the murderous actions of killers in paris are somehow a byproduct of israel's policies. the irony, ladies and gentlemen, is that while some did they believe that israel is the cause of anti-semitism, when the adl first opened its doors in 1913, some believe that israel was the cure for anti-semitism. at that time some of the greatest zionist thinkers believed that hatred for jews was primarily a function of the jews being a minority everywhere, and the majority nowhere. they believed that if only the jewish people had a state like all the nations, that the jewish people would be treated like all the nations. so if the beginning of the 20th century, they believed that the cause of anti-semitism
was that the jews did not have a state. at the beginning of the 21st century, some people believed that the cause of anti-semitism is about the jews do have a state. the truth is that the establishment of israel is neither the cause of nor the cure for anti-semitism. but what the establishment of israel did do was it gave the jewish people the power to defend themselves against anti-semitism. it enabled the jewish state to defend itself militarily win that hatred inevitably spilled over into physical attacks. and by restoring to the jewish people a sovereign among the nations, it also enabled us to defend ourselves against the defamation that often precedes physical attacks. for the last 68 years, as israel has raised that sovereign voice, the adl has time and again
raised its powerful voice as well. and for that all of israel is profoundly grateful. [applause] >> now, ladies and gentlemen, today the defamer is against whom we must raise our voices together are the proponents of the bds movement, the movement to boycott, boycott, divest from and sanction issue. a movement that cast the show as an apartheid state come as a perpetrator of genocide, as an evil that must be destroyed. the bds is an anti-semitic movement, and should be exposed as such. but it is not enough -- but it is not enough to simply been a scarlet letter a on the chest of the bds movement.
we must first explain why the bds movement is an anti-semitic movement. and that's not difficult to deal. because one of the hallmarks of anti-semitism is the attempt to judge jews by a different standard than other peoples. that is why the attempt to judge israel by a different standard than other countries is simply an old hatred in a new form. and that is why when a christian church group born academic society wishes to divest from israel or boycott israel, the question we should be asking is a very simple one. is israel the 51st, 91st, or 131st country on their list of boycotted countries? if it is, the we should not accuse the members of that organization of anti-semitism. we should assume that they are misinformed.
we should assume that this in from -- organization has some principles, that it is applied the principle to all countries in the world, and that israel has for some reason been wrongly included. and our job should then be to engage this organization and dialogue, to get them all the facts, and to ensure that they know the truth your we should make sure that they know about israel's open society, about her independent courts, about our commitment to protect the enable rights of women, minorities, gays and all our citizens, and about our commitment to protect the sacred sites of jews and muslims, christians, and all faith. i would put the recent decision of freedom house to list israel's press as only partially free in the category of the misinformed. now, anyone with a slightest familiarity with the israeli press knows that this is an absolutely absurd decision.
if freedom of the press is defined as the freedom to check the abuse of government and to hold the powerful to account, israel's press is one of the freest presses in the world. still i would not call freedom house's decision in anti-semitic decision because they have included so many other countries in that category. i would say misguided decision and that the answer is more engagement and more dialogue so they can get the facts straight. but when we hear that a methodist church group has decided to divest church funds from israel, when we have an american academic society has called for boycotting israeli academics, and we find out that the only country being targeted by these organizations for divestment and boycott is israel, we should assume that this is anti-semitism.
that eminent these were ancient christian communities are being decimated and we are christians are being decapitated, the one country being targeted is the only country in the region where christians are free and safe, only makes the anti-semitism that much more disgraceful. that in a world in which academics and dozens of countries are shot or imprisoned for their beliefs, the one country whose academics are boycotted is the country where academics can say what they want, and research what they want, only makes the anti-semitism that much more obscene. the important thing to remember is that the answer here is not to engage. the answer is to ostracize. ..
and economists in anthropologist and all the rats, not to mention simple lovers of truth can argue themselves lunar phase, but those who believe those fables go on believing and act as though they were true. why in heaven name is a spirit there can be what one answer. people can believe such things because they want to believe them. they are predisposed to accept any and all accusations irrespective of object of merit that's it into their preconceived notion of the jew, the specific charges are nothing more than rationalization of an underlying animus. if one is temporarily outmoded, a dozen others spring up in its
place. and they need neither superficially plausible to be embraced as gospel truths. ladies and gentlemen, we can and we must state the facts clearly. we can and we must spread the truth unapologetically because the facts and the truth do matter. they matter first of all to the jewish people, but they also matter to people of good will and open mind everywhere. but we must also recognize that old habits die hard and that the oldest habit die hardest. way must recognize there were some people who will always want to believe the worst about the jews and the worst about the jewish state. and we must appreciate that israel is no more responsible
for the venomous hatred directed against it then jews were responsible for the venomous hatred against them across the ages. a century ago, this organization sent out on a mission to stop, to stop the definition of the jews. that is a noble mission, certainly worth pursuing. i am just not sure any force on earth can only achieve it. but if we cannot stop the defamation of the jews, we can certainly fight the defamation of the jews. we can spread the truth. we can expose hypocrisy. we can delegitimize that delegitimize there is. and we can do it, knowing that while this war may never be fully one, each and every battle
count and the action of each and every soldier can make a difference. so to you, the soldiers of the adl eisai thank you. thank you for continuing to be israel's steadfast partner in defending the jewish people in the jewish state. thank you. [applause] [applause] and now, john incomes and shared [laughter] thank you. i think they said i was going to
take a couple questions, which i am happy to do now. no question. >> the question is is there a difference between anti-semitism and anti-zionism. rave. whatever the day is no and i will explain why. there's a difference between anti-semitism and criticism of israel. that there is a difference for her. a number of years ago i worked with one of my mentors, martin sharansky on coming up with the way of telling the difference which i'm sure many people in this room know about it. recalled the 3-d test. to be able to tell the difference between legitimate son of israel which is tough. and criticism into anti-semitism. those were demonization of
israel, double standard and also the denial of israel's very right to exist. by the way, those of you who don't know, the reason why i chose the three d's is the image when you watch a 3-d movie, everything is alert if you're not wearing glasses. if you put it on, it pops up that you. i didn't know when i said that for the three-day pass, he had never seen a 3-d movie. i suppose growing up in the soviet union and spending nine years of your adult life in the go live probably limits your 3-d watching possibilities. it is supposed to show the difference. before the birth of israel, if the reagan dynamism, you're not necessarily an anti-semite. by the way, the fact that jews believe something doesn't preclude the possibility.
there's a lot of anti-americans. there's a lot of anti-semantic zika as well, so that is not an answer. once you have the sovereign jewish state come you have a living, breathing state that is 68 years old. what are they anti-zionist saying? they are saying that the jewish people do nothave a right of self determination. alone among nations of the world. to argue you believe the palestinian should have a state. the palestinians trace back their history as a collective all the way back to the 1950s. the jewish people trace our collective identity as a people. we were calling ourselves jews. i'm not getting into the debate. when the palestinians refer to themselves as palestine. we been a jewish people for 4000
years. so you are going to be against the right of the jewish people to a state of their own. that is what zionism is. now, zionism and the direction is self determination in the land of israel. you can argue about the borders of that state, what the land of israel should be. but if you are arguing against the self-determination of the jewish people and you were denied the right to a state of their own, unless you don't believe any people have rights, if you are somebody who does not believe there should be any nation in the world, any nation states in the world, then i suppose you can be an anti-zionist without being an anti-semite. but if you believe there are any nations in the world that deserve a right to a state, but you denied the jewish people the right to a say, you have
anti-semitism. [inaudible] >> well, obviously -- i'm sorry. the question is what is the position of israel to the rising anti-semitism in europe and jews in europe and coming to israel. first of all, we believe all governments should protect their citizens regardless of their faith. if jews want to stay in france, they should be protected from anti-semitism. what they should know is that they should always have the right to come to israel and to live there. that is the right that everyone who is a supporter of israel should never take for granted because it's a right that we didn't have as a people for
many, many centuries. we were kicked out of one land and then we were looking for some other key or president to take a stand. what is interesting with all the problems of jews in europe, one question that no one is asking us where are those jews going to go? that is because israel is an answer. it may not be the answer for those jews, but it isn't meant there and that is israel to provide a refuge for jews endangered any around the world. i will tell you this may be a personal observation from somebody who lives in jerusalem. i see it as a direct connection between anti-semitism in france and the quality of restaurant in jerusalem. [laughter] the worse it gets there, the better the eating is in jerusalem. one more question here.
i [inaudible] -- holding ourselves to a higher standard. i wanted to god jews are exercising not pattern. >> let me make -- i actually make a distinction -- the question was the jews are holding themselves to a higher standard and a lot of the jews involved are simply continuing that long-standing tradition. here i would make an addendum to what i said. i specifically mentioned church groups and i specifically mention academic groups because those are national organizations or international organizations. so therefore if you single out israel as the national or international organization, i believe you're an anti-semite. i do not believe the same can be said of jews or palestinians who
are engaged in the movement. i won't call them an anti-semi because the fact they are more interested in israel than they are in north korea, iran, syria or 100 other countries in the world is because they feel a specific connection and responsibility to die. so i wouldn't call them anti-semites. they might be, but i don't know it by the nature of the movement itself. what i would call them his moral , which is different. there have been many who have actually taken -- stood with the enemies of the jewish people throughout our history, who thought they were doing it for the best of reasons and who didn't intend to bring harm to the jewish people, but ultimately they brought to power forces that cause great harm to the jewish people. that was the case of the bolshevik didn't. it was the case they were even jews who wanted to join the nazi
party. in the case of the bbs movement, all of the non-jewish supporters of the movement i think without exception all want to see the destruction of israel. maybe you can find one or two people. they will say it openly. they don't support to states for two peoples. they don't support peace between israel and the future state of palestine. they support the dismantling of israel. so for jews to join those groups who are enemies of the jewish people. i say enemies because they intend to bring harm. your adversaries, your opponents are those who disagree with you on the best way to achieve a common objective. your enemies are those who try to do harm. 99% of people who were leading the movement want to cause harm
to the jewish state and the jewish people. that is why i called those jews who mistakenly and misguidedly join them moral. we have a long tradition of them among our people, but we have a new tradition over the last 68 years. the stories of jews siding with the enemies of the jewish people, a handful of jews is the old story. the news stories that there is a sovereignty which is days ready to defend the jews on the battlefield and the jewish people in the course of public opinion. thank you. thank you very much. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, to make a special presentation, please welcome ceo jonathan greenblatt.
got back >> good afternoon. first of all, before i get started and we begin the presentation, can i just remarked upon what a pleasure it is to have ambassador dermer here today. let's thank him for his clear and cogent and really forceful conversation. i think his description of anti-zionism or anti-semitism and the linkage between the two is something we should take to heart. there's not in wrong with criticizing israel. we all do it. but when you question the legitimacy of the state in a way that no one does for any other country in the civilized world, that's a problem. that's anti-semitism. we should acknowledge what it is. many years ago terrorism was a concern for all the bus and
before the horror of 9/11 and our friend, alan gerry had to help provide our expertise on terrorists and extremists who longed for his meant to a better job of protecting all of us. alan of the adl created an institute on extremism in memory of his beloved. period in the intervening years the materials and information that we through the center have been able to supply too long for meant to prove to be extremely valuable in the work that they do day in and day out protecting us. every single person in this room is an eternal debt of gratitude to those men and women in uniform who put their lives on the line numbers and go day to keep all of us safe and secure. [applause] we are extraordinarily proud that our horror with service award has been presented to many
bond person officials at the fbi and the cia come u.s. customs service among other federal agents to use. posted by recipients as in your program and i think you'll agree if you have chance to take a look at incredibly impressive roster. now the law-enforcement community and and truly a national leader on the issues that all of our communities face everyday. on december 18, 2014, 4 months after the events of ferguson, missouri made race relations between police and communities they serve is subject to national attention. president obama signed an executive order establishing the task force of the 21st entry policing. the task force is charged with making recommendations on matters ranging from use of debit force to police training. but it's paramount goal is to act as a catalyst for rebuilding the trust between the people and the guardians who serve them. the president's choice to lead
this initiative as cochair of the task force was a man widely recognized inside and outside of law enforcement as well as one of the professions most important and influential leaders of american law enforcement. that individual is charles h. bradford. [applause] and a career standing more than four decades, charles mansi earned the distinction of having led three of the nation largest police departments, chicago, washington d.c. and philadelphia. he simultaneously served as president of two of the nation's most prominent law enforcement organizations, the major cities chiefs association and the police executive research forum. commissioner ramsey is widely respected both for his expertise in combating terrorism and is a visionary police later in the arena of civil rights and police community relations. he grew up on the southside of
chicago and embolden the city's police cadet program to help pay for his college tuition. chief ramsey quickly rose through the ranks becoming the chicago police department's youngest african-american sergeant, lieutenant and captain. at the time he was simply deputy superintendent, chief friends they had established a reputation for across the country, particularly in this area building trust between police and communities. the u.s. selected to serve as police achieved at the metropolitan police department, transforming agency weakened by budget cut, low morale and misconduct and literally transformed it into one of the finest in the nation. in 2007 he left washington to become commissioner of the city of philadelphia's police department, the nation's fourth-largest and this past january he retired after eight years as commissioner. commissioner ramsey has always believed the leader must also be
an educator and mentor in a role model. commissioner ramsey has said david friedman, our very own regional director was the first community leader he met when he came to washington d.c. shortly after they met, david and chief ramsey visited the united states holocaust memorial museum together. that experience affected chief ramsey so profoundly that he asked if adl could create a training program for his police recruits. the training would use the history of the holocaust as a springboard to increase law enforcement to understand the relationship to the people it serves in this role is to protect the constitution and is the guardian of our individual right. he wanted something different from other trainings. one that would connect his recruits not just intellectually but emotionally. we will not change behavior if
we do not change attitudes he later bro. we will not change attitude if we do not change a person's heart. we need to affect the way in which officers see themselves and their role in society. we need to change what is in my bed and help them see things differently. the new program that resulted chief ramsey's inspiration we call upon enforcement society launched in 1998 and immediately expanded to training all 3500 sworn officers of the department. the next year, then fbi to read about the training and mandated that every new fbi agent must go through this program, this adl program. lax has trained 110,001 worsening as professionals in the u.s. as well as leaders from countries. it's now a required component in the fbi major training program for u.s. international law
enforcement. last year to be a redesigned its new aging curriculum and belted around lds. think about that for a moment. around leas. above all else, a role as police officers is to protect and preserve the rights of the people, defending these rights for all people alternately defined as police officers for more than four decades, charles ramsey has devoted his life to fulfilling that role. you know, at a time in our is so charged, when there's so much rhetoric that pushes people apart, it is an honor and a privilege that we today have the opportunity to celebrate chief ramsey whose entire career is about bringing people together. adl is proud and honored to present our service award to none other than commissioner
charles h. ramsey. [applause] [applause] >> as chief ramsey takes the award, i would like to read the inscription to everyone. we are proud to present the answer to service or to charles h. ramsey in recognition of their distinguished career of public service for preserving and defending our democratic ideas. the borowitz institute is dedicated to providing the law enforcement community with timely information and educational materials to enhance its product to be serving the public. adl with all citizens alike to
chief ramsey and of course we would like to thank alan kerry terrell for being here today. thank you so much. [applause] >> you took a lot of what i was going to say in your introduction they are. i want to thank you. you know, i just handed the award to an individual remains an awful lot to me and that is david friedman. [applause] and i handed him that award because about david i would a standing here quite frankly. it all started in 1998. i was pregnant police chief here in washington d.c. jonathan, i'm not certain if he was the very first person i met, but he was among the first. i can't really remember. when you first take over a city
as a police chief coming at get a lot of letters and a lot of invitation because everyone wants to meet you. i came from chicago. i wasn't from washington. i had no history with anyone. whether it's community organization, business groups, it really didn't matter. everyone wanted to know who the new guy was in town. one of those letters came from david friedman. obviously i've never met david before. read the letter and said okay, fine. it sounds interesting. a chance to visit the united states holocaust memorial museum within. and it was put on my schedule. and to be honest with you, it was absolutely nothing more than one more thing on my schedule. you know, you start each day in the see what you have to do. i have family still in chicago and so every other week i was flying back to chicago and that
afternoon i was scheduled to fly back to chicago. so that would fill my morning. i would leave, go to the airport. and so i go to the museum and i need david. but they also met another individual, i read weiss, who is a survivor. it is a group of people, fairly large group of people. some members from adl, from the museum itself. of course i ran and her daughter were there. as we're walking through the museum, i am walking alongside of a marine -- i agree. she is telling me her story as we walked through the museum. i am 66 years old so i i went to high school in the 1960s and i have to admit, history was not my favorite subject. and i don't recall learning them off a lot about the holocaust when i went through school.
it was glossed over. it probably to a large extent is still not dealt with the way that to be dealt with in school. but in the 1960s, i guarantee you it was not really talked about, at least not in the chicago public school that i went to. so i do a little bit about it and so forth, but i really didn't understand everything that took place. going through the museum, it was an incredibly powerful experience. in fact, it was haunting because after i left, i couldn't get the images out of my mind and i felt troubled but i didn't quite know why. because when you go on a tour like that come you are moving kind of quickly. you can stop and read everything. you've got to keep it moving. i remember just one very powerful moment with i read on trend irene.
there's this one boxcar that they used to transport jews to the concentration camps. this is very much like a car my family and i were placed in and taken to auschwitz. we walked through the car and she kind of pointed to a couple little areas in the car or there's an octave for people to relieve themselves. how crowded it was, how hot it was. and then there's this huge photographs that you see as you step out of the car. she points to it and says that is me right there. at that moment in time, someone snapped a photograph as she explained exactly what she was doing at the almeida. she was wearing a scarf, she had on a coat and she was turning around to try to get a glimpse of her mother and younger sister because she said she got out of the car it would be divided into two different lines. one was going to be executed immediately and the other to
work. the soldier looked at her for a moment and hesitated because she was at the age we didn't quite know what to do. so her mother and sister were sent for immediate execution and she was sent to work. she was turned around to get one last glance. obviously she didn't know what was about to have been. that when the photograph was snapped. it literally sent chills down my spine to actually see that. when i left the museum, i was thinking about it and i knew i needed to go back. i came back a few days later and announced because i wanted to take my time and go through the museum. it wasn't long before i saw exactly one of the first photographs you see is a photograph a police officer, soldier, german shepherd with this crazed look inside. i never understood the role of police in the holocaust.
i always thought about it has been soldiers and i never thought about police. as i went through and i saw more and more about how police were called in this, it made me stop and it made me think about the role of police in a democratic society, which germany was and how could people who took an open similar to mine allow some like this to happen? we have been struggling with race relations in all kind of tensions for a long time in policing. we were taking an approach, which i was part of, although i felt uncomfortable with it. uncomfortable with a pitch up at officers through called sensitivity training, which is a terrible title in itself. it implies everyone is insensitive. so you sit there. why can't someone site, black and latino on the other. it is a total waste of time because you are automatic -- you are almost accusing people of
being racist or having some kind of bias out of control or what have you. but i saw this as an example that is not the issue. the issue is the role of police in a democratic society. the ambassador said it in his remarks. the country has a right and obligation to protect all and not allow an inward to be singled out for any kind of different or special treatment. the holocaust been an event that is very, very real that happen at this point in history before the officers in the classroom were even alive yet so it doesn't carry the same kind of emotional baggage that it would when you start talking about current race relations, and get similar issues we are discussing. pardon the expression but it's a way of getting a current issues facing what happens when officers lose sight of primary responsibility and that is
protecting constitutional rights of all people and what can happen if you allow yourself to start sliding down that slope. so i gave david a call. he's the first person i called. i did not do that well. i sent this guy's going to think i'm totally nuts. nothing had been fleshed out. we got together and we talked and he didn't throw me out. and we got the museum people involved and they sat down and we sat down and they begin the hard work. i didn't do any of the work. they started to carve a curriculum and we went through a lot of different versions before we got it right. the bottom line is it really did stimulate thought. if stimulated emotion. it got people really understanding what it is to be a police officer and how unique
our role is in society and how important our role is in society. ask the average police officer with the role is to mount my faith to enforce the law. the reality is that it's a very narrow slice of what we do. it is also a reality in this country that when you take a look at the history of one person in the united states, we have not always sit on the right side of justice here as we would define justice today. you only think about the civil rights movement, all the things that have happened in this country, how we have evolved and continue to evolve. but there is baggage as we have not always lived up to the oath of office that we take. so this is a way to have that kind of discussion. we have sense as part of major city chief says resident decided we would start of leadership development program. the bishop in policing are more by luck than by design unfortunately. there's really no leadership program that really developed
their future leaders in our profession. it reminds me of a quotation i saw the true leaders don't develop followers. they create other leaders. i think we all have to have that attitude and we'll have to go about doing that so we created the leadership institute. the first people is david because i wanted to museum and adl to be a part of that and they are. we've had three cohorts go through. 46 people and up to 46 authority become chiefs in this country. that's a pretty good track record. [applause] enabled the departments in a way unlike people have been the past because they will have a deeper understanding of what it really means to be a police officer, but more importantly what it means to be a police organization and our port that is in today's environment in today's climate it's more
important than ever. i humbly accept this award. i share with you, david because he started the whole thing and without you it never would've gotten off the ground. i want to thank you, memorial museum for their efforts. everyone played the role because you are making a huge difference. users they made a difference in my life. god bless you and thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you, commissioner ramsey. and now, please welcome katie greenebaum and jason levine, participates from philadelphia to the bass -- to lead us.
[inaudible conversations] >> are rabbis taught me sad for the sake of habitable in the end good results in any which is not for the sake of heaven will in the end not yield results. >> in this political season, but mr. member of the words we choose can clarify and expire or provoke fear and hatred. advantage will reflect the kind of nation we want to become want to be a combination of repressing ratios are debated freely and with respect to regard this interview as we can break bread together in the spirit of unity. please join us. [speaking in native tongue]
>> this will be brief break in our coverage of the anti-defamation league national leadership summit. up next, a panel on the adl agenda in the 2016 election. live coverage continuing shortly hear from the mayflower hotel in washington d.c. while we wait for the next speaker is president obama's presidency comes to a close, here's a look of a conversation from earlier today considering the history of presidential transitions here in the u.s. >> martha kumar is the white house transition project director for that project here good morning. can you tell us about the project and what is involved in it. >> project is an effort to provide information to new people coming in to the white house when they come in in january. but the presidential records act of 1978 calls for all the records for an outgoing industry shame to be that the
administration, go to a warehouse in the process for presidential libraries so that the public can then view those records. so our project is a group of a couple dozen scholars who are presidency people, political scientist and we do interviewing with people who have served in a dozen white house offices that we've chosen as important to a new start an administration like chief of staff, national security council, price communications and some that are not well known but the staff secretary who controls all the paper going into and out of the oval office. and so, we do interviews that focus on the functions of the office and the responsibilities of the directors. we look at the office and how it has developed over time so that we do essays that and focus on
that. it gives an opportunity for a new person coming in to learn about their jobs. in the past two weeks, there have been two people in this administration who said that was the way they learned their job is that a read the essay and then also the organization chart so we can show how was the office organized over time? were there differences, for example, in the way democrats and individuals organize the offices are in most cases there is continuity that the offices are pretty much the same because they are structure because they have the same constituents. like for example, the press office. the press office had the same units as part of a because they are dealing with price and the press have certain guidelines. it doesn't make good difference with the administration is, they will have headlines to work
with. >> president obama at this stage of his presidency if he gets out of office, what are the things they have to figure out before they leave in january? >> there is a lot they have to do. in one hand, they have to be as active as they can work on rules and regulations that they want to leave in place. and so they have an agenda to finish. but at the same time, they also want to prepare to leave the presidency in good condition. so to do that, they have to be able to gather information from throughout the government on what the programs are saying in the different agencies and let the programs are, what the budgets are, what the positions are that somebody can fill when they come in so that they can handle the information to candidate and then to president elect and then to the president himself. national security will be part of it.
policy -- domestic policy is really all aspects of the process of government and appointments and what has been done, what have they been doing over the years. >> does that mean donald trump and hillary clinton and bernie sanders have to prepare for a transition are themselves at this stage? >> yes, they will have people working on aspects. like for example, appointment. you want to know what are the positions you can appoint and what are those positions about? what kind of people do you need in them? so that takes a while because you are going to have, you know, in your first couple hundred days, you'll want to put forward maybe 400 names. so you need to be in a position to do that. you also need to know how the government is now functioning and for hillary clinton there
are things that are different. certainly developed a social media, you have certainly a different tempo than how i white house operates, for example. or you can have an operation that is off to decide where you have people who are working on governing. and you also want to make sure at this point that you had in the campaign agenda that you want to take into governing and that you have articulated that agenda, repeated at and have the public understanding what that agenda is. and then you work on policy around that agenda. >> our guests with us to talk about the topic of presidential transition. you can ask what is happening at this stage, what is happening between now and january by calling 2,027,488,000.
2,027,488,001 for republicans. for independence, to a 27488002. you can also send your thoughts on twitter. the transition operations of candidates including barack obama, john mccain and president george w. bush also wrote a book on the topic. george w. bush and barack obama and manage the transfer of power came up with the lessons learned from george w. bush's way that a transition out of office? >> guest: he started early. the president is what makes a difference when the president focuses on it. so in december 2005 end, he taught to josh goldman, chief of staff and said he wanted him to direct the transition and that is needed to be transition effort. and so you have working on -- but the departments about rules
and regulations and and regulations and with the guidelines would be for them to hand them in. you have the president's management council meeting was clay johnson who's the deputy of management -- for management at omb, the gathering, the agency deputies to discuss what information they should be gathering. they met in the spring and then he put out a memorandum and i think july 8 and telling the departments and agencies what information they should gather. so all that information is thinking of what you have to do customarily. dalton did something that other administrations have not and that is the representatives of the presumptive candidate and out within early july, and of june and early july he asked for representatives to be appointed by the mccain obama
operations. and so, they came in and discuss things like the memorandum of understanding that needs to be created in order for representatives of the presidency that to go into the departments and agencies to gather information, which is traditionally done as an agency reviews team. you need rules in order to do that. the rules are established in memorandum of understanding. they wanted to get both sides together, hammer out an ammo you have both sides would agree upon and they did. and so the results of that is the review teams went in early. you had the election on tuesday and on saturday the ammo you was signed. so that kind of action in the security clearance also discussed the security clearances and how that should be done. the bush people encouraged the
candidate to send in names for security clearance for their transition team and the obama people did bad with over 200 names. so what that meant is that they were cleared right after the election they could begin doing their work. >> host: macaw from a collar. to reset temple, you are on the tear gas, martha kumar with the white house transition project. >> caller: hi, good morning. it is great that we as americans have an opportunity to understand the presidential transition and what they look forward to. and also, the question is in the state of florida, will the homeowners be able to withstand all data changes that may come
about before president obama leads in right after he leaves office with the infrastructure of transportation and the department of transportation. some of us lose homes in historical site because of transportation come in and then there has been suggestion of how federal laws put in place. we all know the federal laws put in place for which means you may not have the choice to stay where you are. the second part of my question is a hud administration on president obama, residents in the state of florida, who are receiving an assistant housing. but they also still have an opportunity within the presidential transition to have self-sufficiency programs to assist them, to wean off and become self-sufficient contributors. >> thanks for the call. speak to the general that they have the administration deals
with it. >> yeah, when a transition team goes into a department, they do try to find out what all the programs are, what the status of the programs are as well as what kinds of issues, their problem without a program is being implemented. that is sent and they want to get hold of. so if necessary, they can make changes when a new one comes in. but during a transition, the president is the president until the end of his administration until mid january 20th and he's going to be acting until that time. (202)748-8002 for independence for the process of presidential transfers of power. jay from kent, washington. independent line. >> hi, hello. i am a student at university california burke. the question i ask first off its
this political transition is very unique around the world at my question is how would you sort of take this process and mix it with developing countries in the middle east and africa. second, what are your thoughts on obama to stay in d.c. for two more years. is this a political transition for the next person of power or is this merely his decision to stay in d.c.? >> guest: well, but may take questions about how deals can be transported in other countries. in november i went to nigeria and worked on the conference at the national democratic institute, how the president was interested in the issue of transition and having a smooth transition for the next person who comes then as president. they were very interested in the issue and what kind of legislation that you can bring
about that would be helpful. some of the most important thing is having is a very sound career staff that can make that will do the government operation. they have legislation that calls for end of implemented transparency so that records are actually kept and those records are handed over and that you really need legislation that ensures that. and then you can have, like in the philippines now they are going through a transition and so the keynote government is in the process of handing over and out and notes are also important in nigeria and transition and other west african countries
like is on. they look to the u.s. as having a transition model and government says they become democratic and have elections that are real elections were a person who bought actually get some power, that the american model has been very important. as obama stay in 10, that he wants to do because his daughter is still in school and he wants her to be able to finish high school. i would imagine he would be doing a lot of traveling. and he may take the stand that president george w. bush dead, which is not to talk about what your successor is giving. you had your chance at the presidency and then you can talk about what you've done. traditionally, presidents understand that it's a really hard job and they don't want to
make it difficult for the person that follows. >> as far as president obama, how is he preparing for this? is there something different than the previous president? >> guest: he did a couple fridays ago, he issued the executive order, which carries into execution the law that was signed on march 28th of this year that calls for certain types of planning. in 2010, legislation says that the president may create a transition coordinating council, which clinton was the first one to create them and he did it by executive order. the law had called for a ban to create those if you wanted to do so. but the 2016 law says they shall
do it. there is no choice and that it be done six months before the election, that you have a transition coordinating council, which is going to be -- they get to choose who they want to have on it, but it's cap the character missing or white house officials all have a role in transition and an agency transition directors council. that council is going to be career people and they are going to ensure that it is moved from the career angle. >> from ohio, when doug, you're next. hello. >> caller: good morning. it is a beautiful day and ohio. .. >> caller: one comment and i've heard other countries
admire the smooth transition of power that we do in the u.s. there's no violent takeover. >> guest: that's a distinguishing characteristic is the smooth transfer of power. >> caller: i hear other countries admire the. here's my question. don't laugh too much but is that true that the outgoing administration staff will pull pranks on the incoming? like come i've heard win w. staff left, our when clinton's staff left they pop off all the w.'s on the typewriters in the offices. >> guest: the computers, keyboards. there were some that were done. that are pranks that are done. i remember somebody from an administration much earlier than the clinton administration, i
guy who said that he had taken this tuna sandwich, and the ceiling had those titles, you lift it up and put his sandwich in there to rot. i guess they're sometimes pranks that are done. i think generally they are pretty harmless. the general accounting office did a study about the clinton to bush transition. and yes, there were some things done. they talked about broken furniture, but furniture is going to break during an administration, and there was no indication that was done at the and. >> host: is there attention specifically incoming party, different political parties, is there more during the transition? >> guest: i think can be but i think the time it would be is when a president loses the election for reelection.
then you've not had the time to prepare for a transition because people would not have wanted to prepare because it looked as if they would thought they would lose. this new legislation is important in that way because every presidential election year, these councils have to be created. it's six months before the election. will so that gives a lot of time for planning. it make sure the plan is to. >> host: from arizona, rodney is next an independent line. >> caller: good morning. >> guest: good morning, rodney. >> caller: there's a rumor floating around that a past president family left the house, the white house and took items from the white house. whether that be true or not is not up to me to even question, but my question is, is there someone that is supposed to ensure that the inventory of the
national treasures that are housed in the white house stay in the white house? >> guest: yes. you certainly have an operation that there. there's a resident staff that is headed by a chief pressure, and they are about 96 people that are on that resident staff. i think the issue that comes up are for gifts given to a president. and whether the people, the outgoing administration wants to take some of those gifts that have been given to them, which really go to the united states. they can pay for those and, for some of the things come and take them if they want. but those are not part of the white house collection. the white house collection does not move. but one of the interesting things is that when the president comes in, they have a
choice of what items they want to use out of the white house collection to furnish the private spaces in the white house. and if they want they can bring very little. like george w. bush brought paper euro just that i think belonged to his grandmother, and that was about all they brought. so it makes leading pretty easy but there's so many things that are in the white house collection that are in warehouses that you really can furnish it without bringing anything much but a toothbrush. >> host: . we are talking about how presidential transitions work with martha kumar. the candidates for office, you talked about national security, are they receiving briefings and how much information do they get as far as national security?
>> guest: the national security briefings are for the candidates that have been nominated for the presidency. they would not get a briefings until that point. yes, they would get briefings that are from the national intelligence operation, and the director of national intelligence. they are not the same as what a president would get. in 2008, particularly with relations to sources and methods of information, and those president bush did not want to hand over until he said that when the president-elect came in and was sitting in his chair, but that was the time when you get sources and methods. you don't need that complicated bit of information. and when you compress --
>> host: the transition teams than suffer the candidates or whatever stage they're at, how underfunded? i get taxpayer-funded? >> guest: all of the agency review canseco in our volunteer. there will be staff funding once you have a president-elect. but generally the transition operation, the only operation is funded, is self-funded. and then in the legislation that covered the 2012 transition, that called for government space and some, also computer technology that would be secure. and that costs in the range of
about $9 million, although less than 9 million. but they are all private funds. so the legislation covers private funding, and has for some while that people can contribute up to 5000 an individual, and their names were publicly released. >> host: from georgia this is ryan, independent line. go ahead. >> caller: hi, martha. i assume you -- do you transition from bush into obama? and will you transition from obama into the next candidate that wins? >> guest: we are a nongovernment organization, and so it's a group of scholars, my partner in this operation, terry sullivan, is at the university of north carolina. i for many years was at tufts university and have retired.
so we are not part of the government. we are just simply scholars who are interested in one thing, and that using the white house work effectively and to try to provide information on the offices. we also provide information on presidential appointments and what the pace of appointments is. professor sullivan has a project on that. another item that we have, that he has is a study of the president's daily diary. if you've never seen one they're really interesting, and you can find it in the presidential libraries where they track during a day just wha where the president lives. like 9:05 the president comes into the oval office. 9:22 he goes into the roosevelt room, and who he is meeting with there is a person who is on the payroll of the national archives has called the presidential diarist. a lot of this is pulling
together secret service records, and then from the schedule. ansley get a good idea of exactly what a president does. not what people says a president does but what he actually does. so professor sullivan has a team that has been working on that so that we will know in the first couple hundred days what is it that the incoming president can expect? one of the things they can expect as they will be doing a lot of different things. i've gone through reagan's diaries for seven years, and it's amazing in some ways how you have to go from one thing to another. you can be dealing with preparations for conference with a soviet leader and then at the same time you are meeting a poster child of one sort. he met a lot of children that have had various kinds of difficulties and had overcome them, and he loved those
sunshine stories. so he was doing that, meeting a small business meeting, anti-disco from one thing to another. and that's one of the things that somebody has to adjust too, the presidency, how you're going to be from different things large and small. >> host: frank from maryland, democrat line, you are next. >> caller: i was wondering if there were any kind of google bought outgoing presidential traditions like lastly you are carving your name in the basement, something like that? >> guest: you know, there is a nice tradition that started at the end of the reagan administration. and that is the chief usher, gary walters was the chief usher who came up with this idea, which was to take down the flag that flew over the white house the first day, and then the one that was flying over it the last
day, and those two i put in a box that is carved by the carpenters office at the white house. and they have been doing timbers, making it from timbres from the original white house that, you know, truman just did a total reconstruction of the white house, and some of the timbers, the earlier timbers that came from the period after the burning of the white house in 1814. so they used those timbers to make the box. and so the resident staff gathers with the outgoing president and first lady. and i guess it's probably around 10:00 in the morning, and the chief usher speaks, and the outgoing president speaks, it is
usually a very emotional time, particularly in an eight year tenure on the president because they know each other very well. that's a very nice tradition. >> host: daddy from north carolina, democrat line. >> caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i have a quick question, so bear with me. the transition of power is very important to americans and our allies around the country, as we both know. my question is how do we transfer that type of power? we are supposed to be the most powerful nation in the world, to someone who really doesn't have any knowledge of domestic or foreign policy? and w we're living in perilous, scary times. millions of people around this country and abroad. how do we do that with someone who has no knowledge of what he may be getting ready to get into? thank you for taking my call cast back thank you.
i think that -- >> guest: . thank you. i think a lot of people in both parties at an early point that want to assist a candidate in making that transition from campaigning to governing, which is a very large transition for sure. and there are people with experience who come forward, and more of them will come forward as the campaign goes on. and i think that any candidate, i assume you're talking about donald trump, and as a shrewd businessman he knows that you need to figure out what your resources are, what your possible alternatives are in situations, and that you need to gather all the information you can. and this is a very serious
business and bring on people who are interested in governing. i think that people are interested not just the president but india's addition of the presidency, and the state of the u.s. government. so i think a lot of people come forward with experience to help. we are starting the transition early in the transition planning early. so i think that people will come forward. but in everything from whether it's outgoing or incoming, the president is the one who really makes the difference, both in the call of the preparations are going to have, the seriousness with which you take it. and i think that's true with the presidential candidates and with the president-elect as will. >> host: what was your initial reaction was donald trump's
announcement that chris christie would be a transitional manager? >> guest: well, having a government is a good idea because an executive has a sense of what kind of political situation, what kinds of pieces you need to put together for transition. but i think also it's important to have somebody with political experience because you know what the difference is between campaigning and governing, and the difference between just talking about what possible policies are and turning those into legislative priorities for a new administration. so that transition between campaigning and governing is a big one. >> thank you. thank you, everyone. that was a great, great morning and rather wonderful afternoon for you. first i would just like to tell my adl story in six words.
i imagine a world without hate. [applause] as advocates, we know sometimes it's not enough to be smart or even correct. our success also depends on a solid grasp of the political landscape so that we can craft the best strategies to succeed. for this deep dive into policy and politics, we've enlisted to thought leaders who smart, moxie and deep understanding of adl's mission will inform a conversation about where we are and what should we look for in the next phase of this election campaign. ruth marcus writes a must-read "washington post" column that's so often seems to give voice to what is just undermines come including a number of core issues of the adl agenda. her appearances on sunday
political shows like "meet the press," and "face the nation" are a staple for political junkies are peter madigan as one of washington's most respected republican strategists. his rich experience working at the intersection of policy and politics has been honed over many years whipping votes for the house republican leadership at the top legislative strategist to secretary of state james baker iii and as an advisor to presidents reagan and both presidents bush, 41 and 43. today, anyone who wants to bring republicans and democrats together in a right left coalition for social justice and other policy issues knows peter is the first and best cause. and was so pleased to have stacy burdett, i very own adls
talented vice president for government relations. [applause] advocacy and kennedy engagement to moderate the session. >> thank you. so this has been such a high-energy day. we are going to continue to dive into topical, timely issues get on about remind everyone that you can send your questions to me. i am not texting with my husband. i'm looking for your questions to come in on the app now, you know that adl is a completely nonpartisan organization. we are uninvolved whatsoever in campaign politics. we are fierce advocates, and we are partisans but only of the adl mission and of our policy. still, from time to time in the election season, our issues are
propelled to the floor of the debate. this campaign season hasn't exactly been an exception. [laughter] and you've certainly heard our voice loud and clear, calling up bigotry and stereotyping as part of this debate. so we are a movement intent on making an impact, and so we are so happy to have our panelists here to help us wrap our heads around this moment that we are in. we started our conference, ruth and peter come with a session on the art of perception, and how difficult it can be to see things that are hiding in plain sight. i think you know where i'm going with this question. our expectations were so out of sync with what happened in this primary. what did we mess? with come i will start with you.
-- ruth, i will start with you. >> first of all thank you all for the great and really important work that you do. i think that in retrospect, in some sense it's blindingly obvious what we miss. and some sense i think we'll still be trying to figure out what exactly we missed for some months, if not years to come. but i think what we missed on both th republican side and the democratic side in the primary process was this deep-seated sense of, i actually think anger is the wrong word for it. because i don't think the voters that i've talked to are angry as much as they are anxious. they are anxious about the future, but even more they are anxious about their children's future. they are anxious about america's place in the world, hence the residence of a certain a slogan
that may come to mind that you might have read on a hat. and they are anxious, many of them, about a world that is changing in ways that they fight its demographically changing, it's a socially changing in ways that they find uncomfortable. and so i think both donald trump on i guess the right, but i don't want to aggravate you at the start -- [laughter] there's enough time for that. and bernie sanders for sure on the left, have tapped into different forms of that anxiety, and i was sort of later as a really big dollop of icing on top of that anxiety, a real sense on this is where the anger does come in, of frustration with politics as usual in washington, and with the inability in various ways of
watching pashtun washington to get done what americans voters think the what needs to be done. that's my diagnosis. the part of think we don't yet understand is sort of a combination of how far this anxiety/anger/anger goes, and where it gets channeled in the future. >> thank you. peter, why don't you take a stab at that? we have spent time together so i know you missed a little something also. >> well, thank you for reminding me. [laughter] >> if ruth had to do it, equal opportunity. >> right, and i had the benefit of not being on these wonderful -- >> i didn't get to eat anything that though. >> that was a recipe that was in the "washington post," if you don't get it, you don't get it. [laughter]
i read this column's by the way. i read it everyday so i remember how i should think. [laughter] i mean, after all i am an ethnic irish second generation roman catholic from maine. so i know this is actually thinking any other way other than the way ruth thinks. if you look at the situation, you know, is the question everybody is asking right now. and i think i'm at it from experience. i've been on presidential campaigns. i've been in tough contested primary. i spent most of my time in new hampshire during those times. you see the way that a campaign develops. you see the number of candidates that the republicans fielded, nbc basically, i had a candidate and i will say it is and was marco rubio, and there are reasons for that. with regard to what we miss, i
think most of us thought that this primary was on the level. and i had a sense that there was a hostile takeover of the republican party starting sometime in october, a symbols have been out on the campaign to. when i say hostile takeover of the republican party, i knew just what i'm saying. mr. trump has gotten itself to in terms of being the presumptive nominee, means that effectively the whole ground game has been changed with regard to the kinds of issues, policies and expectations that republicans have for somebody to be their nominee. i don't think we've seen anything like it before. i'm kind of sick and tired of hearing about 1860 and, you know, well, 1860 is one, or 19 know them boulder's party. guess what.
we tell folks were talking to all the time, you can't look back at history as it's the same. the phenomena of the media and the ability to free media constantly in a way that intrigues even us. ruth marcus of in the six columns in the last two weeks. judo before them have been on donald trump. >> five. spent in a two-week period of two months. five out of six. >> by the way, she as a progressive columnist writing about a republican nominee because the readership wants to know what's going on. so did we miss it? we missed you. if you support mr. trump as my brother was a radiologist in maine and would do all across college, just kind of irregular nice, sweet guy, thinks donald trump is great, you delve into the mind and they say they're frustrated we have a lot everybody to think that america needs be great again. and i promise i'm going to finish the. i didn't know america wasn't great.
[applause] >> so, peter, from her perspective as a campaign strategist and tim wuliger from ruth, talk about the role of the media. ruth wrote that donald trump has been the most constantly available candidate to press and has managed to still evade the question. but, peter, as a campaign person, how have you seen the change in the roles of media and its impact on campaigns parts which candidates are elevated? >> wow, that's a tough question to break down in say, 60 seconds. let me give an example of the following things that are new to this cycle. donald trump as a candidate was able to push just about everybody else out of the news cycle on any given day because
of the things he said or the things that were going on. i mean, my god, we had coverage last week on cnn, a station i don't usually watch because fox is what i watch, just to make sure i need to be indoctrinated into the world. [laughter] covered him coming out of the rnc. it's like oj again. why? so what happened is this. when you are a campaign operative you're working on a campaign as many of you in this room know. you do everything he can to get ruth marcus to write about you. hopefully favorably come right? or to get o on a television program are beginning to understand a show or to get on a sunday show. everything you can. most of what you having to do is get your message out through grassroots, door-to-door, the old fashion way of doing things because they get that much media exposure is way too expensive. so when you have a phenomenon,
it has been celebrity and presidential politics before, but there hasn't been the availability of the outlet, of the outlets that they're unable to candidates. the one thing about media edited and how we would've had -- handle a candidate before, i thinthink john mccain the certificate on the campaign he invited press on the bus. occasionally a continental the bit of trouble because it was too much straight talk but he was are accountable with media and had been. but donald trump doesn't anybody handling him. we can come back to the editorial board, what with a dot dot dot before, the transcript of that which i highly recommend to everybody in this room before the "washington post." but you'd never let a kid go in blind to something like that. they would be prep, these are the issues you want to hit. this guy's going to say whatever is on his mind when he goes out, so, therefore, he could often be he wants because he doesn't have any set up. ..
and i think in the jewish audience i can pay even before november, i think we in the media will have some to do. i think to put it in the framework of the prayer, we kind of went running to do kind of idle gossip and we really failed the paradox of donald trump. it wasn't that he was so good at debating our questions, even while being constantly available. he was both constantly available
and we've failed to adequately question him because there was this kind of red shiny object of his latest outrage. so whatever he dangled in front of us, whether it was intentional or unintentional, he says the main thing about john mccain and megyn kelly. we are looking not at. march 21st, he came to the editorial page of the "washington post." he had a very clear strategy, which was not to ask you got your questions, not to ask nasty questions, but just to ask basic russians that any reader and millions of them, god bless them because people do want some status in their cap videos. there's an occasional cap video myself. we want to ask basic questions they u.s. voters and readers
with think to ask somebody who wants to be president. peters said they were softballs and they're kind of right. so when you think about nato? the answer is we're eliminating the problem is that we did such a good job of thinking of those questions. the problem is that was march 21st for goodness sake and why was that kind of questioning before him? i think there's a lot of things to be said about the roles, but i think the grade that week at is not one that my father would've approved of me bringing home from college. >> so ruth, with you talked about the anxiety. a main focus for all of us in the room is this rhetorical frame of us versus them.
real americans versus the other. and i want to ask you to tease out a little bit more and see where the people this appeals to and also, what is the responsibility of a candidate and campaign to tamp it down. the question we are asking every day and we hope we get the answer right 100% of time. i would love to hear from you. >> to tamp it down, that is asking a lot of candidates in the context of a hard-fought campaign because candidates job isn't hard to find with the mood and energy of the voters is into the responses to it. i distinguish between a candidate, some of whom say things that i find so repulsive
and upsetting, which explains the reason i feel compelled to write about some of them near calm family because it is not just that people are interested in it. i actually feel like a moral obligation to speak out and if you do what i do come you have to believe that has some potential impact or at least he can sleep better at night. but they are certainly supporters of individual candidates who have horrible things to say and horrible views. as a general matter, i think trump voters and other voters are not people. they are people who have anxiety is and who are hurting. and it is a very natural human and staying when you are feeling anxious and is a very powerful
cover story in this month's atlantic about the remarkable numbers of people in america including the author of this piece is a fellow journalist and a well-known writer who could not scrape together $400 on the spur of the moment. about 40% of people are in that state of extreme financial insecurity. so when you have something like that, it is like your immune system is love. your immunity is low. your instinct is to blame it on others, blame it on immigrants. we are all scientists about terrorism. we know who we can blame for that. blame it on others. when a candidate comes along who can kind of take advantage of that reduced immune system, you get what you get. >> is hard for a candidate to address this, to fail to let it
flourish? >> well, listen, and again i think the dynamics changed. i don't mean to sound like a prude, but i mean, this is a country now that has full-length motion picture called whiskey tango foxtrot. if you are in the military, you know what that means and apparently my 22-year-old son no-space means. >> peter, he knew what it meant when he was a lot younger. the bar has been lowered. it is almost like what bar with regard to the quorum in politics. maybe that is in the public side of the politics because a lot of things you set a lot of things used to happen underground and people bring it back up and speak to it. if you look at the landscape of republicans that ran for the
nomination in our party this year, you have a lot of theory good candidate, good people with diverse views on a lot of different choice and whether or not any of them were going to be the one that would be the best leader is a question that gets kind of worked out through the process. but i mention hostile takeover. the process was also hijacked. i go back to something i said before and we've made the point here it didn't matter who have the best answers to real policy questions. in the debate, it didn't matter. even on nights that some of the candidate other than mr. trump did pretty well, trump still scored okay no matter what he said and what he did and hacks into that what he said. they say people inside the beltway don't understand certain things and people outside the beltway understand them better.
i think the bottom line is that people outside the beltway don't understand is the system as it is set up, barack obama in the white house and the republican congress or republican senate is designed to do nothing. because the country is equally divided. it can only do things that it's closely aligned on. and so you know what? i argue to my friend who say congress wanted certain pieces that the obama administration was moving forward, but actually the republican congress did good. it slowed things down or stopped particular things that people were worried about. today in our political system, no one is a legislator anymore. they are advocated and all they have to do -- i have to do is come back and navigate to you in this room that i'm working hard for this issue. i am working for sentencing reform. i am working hard to keep peace
in the middle east to undo in all things and not enough. no one anymore holds me accountable to a pieces of legislation in getting done in there for the judgment of washington and who should be the commander-in-chief for the executive doesn't favor the person to get it done. mark arabia said this on the stage. he said of this election is about a resume we might as well all pack and head secretary clinton has a resume that people with day as her head and shoulders above everyone else. however, the problem is it is about electability, likability and communicating back to the public. she's had her run getting her message out. can they chanted down? should they does the different issue and should a political party embraced the candidate in the end, not just two wins the
popular vote, but if you want the support of the party, should there be a certain set of standards that you hold yourself to? i think that is a reasonable question. i'm sorry i'm going on. i want to say one thing. this is really important. i have a big problem with the current president for a lot of reasons. but there's one thing i've never had a problem with president obama on. i have never once been ashamed or cringed at the way he has had himself as a human being, i think other nsa has been ever. -- or as a husband, ever. [applause] i'm probably going to kick out for that, of the party. >> you always have a home with us, peter. [laughter] can we look at the impact?
i'm not going to ask any of us has something is going to come out in the end. we will work out what is going to happen the next few months. so how did the dynamics of the presidential and primary impact state and local candidates? you know, we are really puzzled by this unchartered water and rank-and-file republicans struggling with what to do with their nominee. so what are you looking at? >> we have one potential pickup in the united states senate and that is harry reid's seat in nevada or nevada. [laughter] i say nevada. >> well, we have some friends here. >> how do we say it? nevada. the >> that should come naturally to you. if you look at the other states
briefly in you, the line, you look at the situation in which incumbent republican senators who are what they would call in danger, the other party would other party would look at them as a key target for a pickup. it runs different in different states, right? say you have new hampshire. kelley ayotte is the incumbent. you have ohio. rob portman is the incumbent. you have pennsylvania. pat to me is the incumbent. you have now missouri on the list. you have potentially a situation in north carolina, okay, that is getting dicier. richard burr has always had a tough time. and then you have florida. you have some other states where there are potentials. i don't think i missed anything. here are the things that we usually look at in a campaign.
look at how president obama did in each of those states. look at where he performed in each of the different districts and then look at how the republican candidate in the past has either outperformed or performed behind the democratic resident, okay? if you look at ohio alone, and where rob portman is running against ted strickland, the former governor who has great name i.d. and if hillary clinton were to win the state of ohio by seven points, let's say better than six, ohio folks here? hey, guys. >> arrestor home registering to vote. [laughter] >> sorry about the bad guys. if you look at that state alone, the question is when we look at demographic, if hillary clinton were to outperform donald trump in the state of ohio by eight points, what happens to rob
portman in that case? so what's going to happen to her candidates, what would happen in the old for nokia would be portman could not make up the vote that he needed to make up. unless of course you localize the race. but the national republican senate committee is saying is we want you to go back and we want you to localize these races in which our incumbents are doing anyway. and it doesn't come down to an issue of who the best senator is. i would submit to you the fact that john sununu, and she cheating in new hampshire in in new hampshire is near the barack obama won the presidency was probably 85% george w. bush because his favorability as a senator was up the charts. so trump underperforming on any of those tickets will put in my mind the senate in play. i'm not saying anything they wouldn't say to you if you're sitting at the national republican senate committee. >> so, everything that peter
said. plus how it's going to play out in the next few months. the republican senate candidate. you wake up in the morning. you go to your first event. the reporters gather around you and their first question is senator salad of our candidates so in though, what do you think about what donald trump said yesterday/this morning about tax. and you are going to have to figure out what to do. the next day you will get up and go through the same thing all over again. so the advice to not nationalized to raise them to run as a local raise and to run as your own man or woman is very good advice. it's going to be very difficult for these candidate number one. number two, it is perhaps not a coup in event that in a number of these battleground senate states, the republican is going to be running again a big challenger on the democratic side, which just takes that
gender gap that is going to be confronting trump and magnifies that too i think at least half if not detriment of the republican candidate. so i think people like me should learn to get out of the prediction business. but i think it is going to be a very difficult all four republicans in the senate. >> talk about the role of gender also. again, a woman nominee and really one of the first kerfuffles that showed we were going to be in that repetitive pattern with donald trump started last summer with megyn kelly issue in this care or a station of women. >> so, it is going to be just fascinating to watch how donald
trump, to use his phrase, plays the woman card against secretary clinton. he has been so canny and the way he has gone after and picked up kind of one by one his republican opponent and he nailed them with absolutely perfect nicknames that resonated and therefore did damage. i am not sure i am seeing that same brilliant strategic or he when it comes to secretary clinton. i think that the nickname he has given her has some resonance potential assigned a value judgment. it is simply looking at the polls and the trustworthiness. when he says "crooked hillary" and is going to go after her imac, i get that as a strategy. no judgment here.
the other two things he has gone after her on enabler of her has been loved and that someone who would be up there on the stage if it were not for the fact that she is a woman just seems to me to be absolutely all but guaranteed to take 70% negative rating that he has with women and drive at even higher because i just don't be the women who are potentially up for grabs for him safe suburban women, republican suburban women. i just don't think they are going to look at that and say he really has a point. she's done nothing except her be a woman her whole career. not convincing. so as with everything trump related, i guess i am prepared to be proven wrong. and i guess one final name is i can't wait for those debates.
[laughter] they're such different characters. i can even come up with assorted animals in a cage analogy. but i think she has every aspect of really getting under his skin and some way and the debate and having him say some mean that is going to be splashed all over the natives. of course maybe he has a prospect of getting under her skin, but she's done a lot more debate. so you know, sign me up. [laughter] >> go ahead. >> your face does say a lot. >> the good old days. the silent movies. black mark i want to say some and a little different because i
think people form judgment and you try to have an open heart and an open mind. everybody is trying to figure out how somebody seems to say things that are so outrageous that can end up where they end up. but that is because it's been turned on its head. what i want to say is the reason that anybody things that donald trump beat hillary clinton in the general election. i've been thinking about this. what is it? what happened? the clintons have lost their mojo. they are not worthy anymore. i was like 20 something years ago. when you looked at mrs. clinton, i have high regard. i have high regard and respect for mrs. clinton. when i look at that stage and
hillary clinton and the president, they look like somebody's grand parents. >> pilot bernie sanders. >> wait a second. wait a second. bernie sanders has played that card. it was called curb your enthusiasm. here is about what with the clintons. i don't think they understand it is that the group don't start -- when they ruined that fleetwood mac song, don't stop thinking about tomorrow. they think it is still groovy time and my kids and our kids are looking at them going who are they again? they missed it. they are two generations often they have it figured out how to recapture it. i think what mrs. clinton has not as it was in about the mojo that they had before. it was about the fact that her resume and her experience and her calm judgment as the united states and other first secretary
would be more than enough to hold their own in to get her to the general. by the way, the old clinton mojo should have left anybody in the dust. i mean, there shouldn't have been room. that is what i would say to you as a liberal is there shouldn't have been room for bernie sanders. on our side, we've got our own problems. [laughter] >> so, this is an amazing idea and spirit i want to thank you call for incredibly thoughtful question that are coming in. i am going to aggregate quite a number that is common in relation to peter's observation about the hostile takeover. they were wonderful questions and one of them focused on how can we restore -- this is that my characterization, a sense of
greater respect for tolerance in the republican party. and then another set of questions was around you talked about a hostile takeover, but it is not dealt on a previous antipathy to government, to science and other things with top about from the stage. >> the second part of the question is fair. that would take me an hour to answer. i think the first part of the question is look, here is the plan. a group, a sliver, the lefties to be in the democratic party, which is why you couldn't nominate until bill clinton a centerleft candidate, far left. the right has taken over enough of our party to be able to stop it, to demand and command different things.
i am happy to become part of the party that's now in the minority in a way that gives them the majority so they have to lift them to us. the reason that the party has got the way it is on our side is we are the majority in congress and in order to have a majority, you have to have that sliver of people based on the demographics in this country that will have views that are further to the right. i don't want to call them extreme because frankly, my word for them is that roddick. >> i'm going to get a lot of questions about that. >> so i'm happy to move back. what happens to her party is one of three things. trump loses on the right as we didn't nominate a right enough candidate. trump loses into mrs. clinton and its close and a bunch of the same candidates come back again better center right.
trump wins. [laughter] >> it was your third. >> trump wins and he does one of two things. either does assemble a group of people because this was the thing worth and i were talking about a little bit, which is why are there some evil people that have been in the republican in the republican governments community if you will. you can't just walk into washington and figure it out. i'm sorry, there's no it is to govern. this is not a business. there are people in government. every candidate runs down anybody who works in government. i'm pretty sick of that, too. they are taking care of running this big government, whether it's on the regulatory side or
whether it's up on the hill are in the judicial system, they are taken advantage of it. they say pretty much everybody here in washington stinks and nobody backs them up and defend them and that should be done. but the chance is and they are saying he opposed the reagan. he has the rare for different people built this wonderful team. i mean, is that possible? it's possible. would he listen to any of them? i doubt it because the problem right now is what he showed us if he is missing a fundamental piece to governing. i think this is that, but maybe not the only one. i really don't think he has a sense of history. and i think you have to have a sense of history and you have to be curious then you have to listen to govern. [applause]
>> thank you. by the way, i am not going to ask peter who he is voting for in the election. but thank you for all of those. [laughter] >> it's a secret ballot still, isn't it? >> to quote donald trump, none of your business. >> i would rather quote you. >> i want to ask you if you would feel comfortable. we've paid attention and we've noticed a journalist recently, a jewish journalist to profile at malan in a trump in a way that trumps dot was less than favorable. and he's been targeted by terrible, anti-semitic harassment online. very ugly, shocking. you identified as jewish in your column once in a while. tell us what happens to you online. >> so it turns out you actually don't have to.
i do actually write when i think is relevant to what i'm writing about. my dad passed away and he would never let her go there. now he's gone and we went to berlin. you know, at the time, then carson was making all these really repulsive holocaust analogies. so i told them about all the places i thought he should go to in berlin to really and what the analogies are part of. so when relevant, i bring up being jewish in my column. turns out you don't have it be jewish and it happens -- it would be wrong to suggest that at some a new in an ugly new phase of our society. in my experience, which is now probably into its fourth decade
in washington, there's always been a small group of people who can only see through the lens of your religion or ethnicity or gender, one of the things i really love is the people who interviewed me, which first of all really kisses off my mother. second of all, it always bothered by something condescending to name nasty and belittling. there's always some cathedral many years ago who, you know, they cut out the thing and right jew bitch on the thing and mail it to you. like all right. but the mechanisms of modern communication have made that so much easier. >> and we are going to leave the last couple minutes of this and take you back to the senate. you can watch this fall event
online at c-span.org. today the senate works on the u. s. district judge for the district of maryland. they get to that at 4:30 on a confirmation vote at 5:30. until then, we expect general speeches from the floor. live coverage now on c-span2. the presiding officer the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. barry black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. eternal god, who preserves our nation with the power of your might. we lift our hearts in praise. we're grateful for your unfailing love and faithfulness because your promises are backed