tv Public Affairs Events CSPAN November 23, 2016 4:00am-6:01am EST
institution klein, then washington examiner national security and defense reporter jamie mcintyre, on president elect trump's national security agenda and his decision to choose michael flynn as national security adviser. be sure to watch live wednesday morning, join the discussion. >> president obama awarded the michael jordan, ellen degenerous, diana ross, robert dinero and architect were among the recipients. you can watch the entire event at our web site, go to cspan.org. now a look at the on going protest of the dakota access pipeline project on the standing rock indian reservation in north
dakota, hosted for policy studies, this is an 1:20. >> i run the new internationalism program here and i would like to ask everybody first, the usual question, please silence your cell phones. we're going to be recording today's presentation, so we don't need ring going on. we wanted to have an opportunity for friends of ips to have a series of discussions following the elections, this is one of many discussions and particularly on this question of the new kind of centers of activism and resistance that have emerged since the election, even before this election,
standing rock had emerged as a kind of a morale car of resistance in all of our movements, all of the progressive movements. resistance to materialization. resistance to the military attacks, attacks on native rights, attacks on water, the environment, attacks on the planet. and in that context the economic gains of major corporations were put forward as not surprisingly far more important than those native rights, the environmental protections, protections of the water, protections of the earth. what we're talking about in north dakota, the dakota access pipeline of 1,200 mile pipeline that will provide some say jobs and help the economy, but in doing so, puts at great risk the people, the land, the water, the history, the culture there's a
remark david who said, "this demolition is devastating, these grounds are the resting place of our ancestors, the an comment stone prayer rings there cannot be replaced. in one day, our sacred land has been turned into hollow ground." the equivalent we might be building a pipeline under arlington cement tear and across the patomic and saying, well, it provides jobs, as if that were, one, true, and two, the only important issue. it's also, i would say, an example of the classic consequences of white privilege in this country, of why supremacy in this country. if we compare it to the treatment of the occupation by the militant bundy family a year or two ago when they occupied federal land and were treated with an extraordinary cautious
hands off careful position, no one from the federal government wanted to move into quickly, no one wanted to risk injuries and appropriated approach, if it were something that were applied across the board. instead, what we've seen is an incredible materialized response, police sheriffs from across the region national guard as well as local, private security guards under the control of the oil companies, the pipeline companies, with a major escalation sunday night that left over a hundred people injured, some of them very seriously. the use of tear gas, rubber bullets, sound cannons, and in the visual reminisce sans of the civil rights movement and how it was attacked, the use of dogs and fire hoses, in this case, it was fire hoses that were used in 26 degree temperature so that many of the people were
hospitalized after being attacked with fire hoses were hospitalized because of hypo therm ya, because it was so cold and being sprayed with freezing water aside from the physical injuries that they can lead to, they were sent to the hospital with new illnesses. there's also this whole question of the economic primacy that is the root of the standing rock pipeline. this is a $3.8 billion pipeline project. and the claim is that the lapd would otherwise be considered worthless because it's not generating large profits for any known corporations. of course, that doesn't take into account the people who live there, the people who live on that land, the people who rely on that water. there's no way to quantify the economic value of the culture of the ancestors graves that are there of the treaty rights that
are being violated with impunity. we could look for one model internationally because we're seeing international responses to this set of attacks that have been going on for the last six or eight months. in the palestine where the claim was made that this was a land without a people because the people who live there, the indigenous population, were not tied to an economically useful for international western countries or corporations. what we now have at standing rock is over 300 tribes that are represented, north american tribes and some from.
>> but also young people who had never been at a protest before but were moved by the question of standing with rock. president obama who, of course, famously said no to the pipeline, which, of course, is now at risk again, has not said no to the dakota pipeline and the army core of engineers the wallet largest native gathering and native led protest since back in 1973. we're going to have three speakers -- >> the mics are for recording. >> we're going to have three speakers with us today, but we'll start first with a short video, it's about -- it's less than five minutes long, rise withstanding rock put together by the journalist laura flanders
i know what's happening right now is extremely important for the larger picture and what's going on. but i don't know how to make it live other than everybody who is taking a little bit of what's good there and keep that flame lit. keep tending that flame and making sure that it never ends. . and our first speaker, we know that in standing rock, standing rock, water defenders are native led, the protests are native led. there are also nonnative allies that have traveled to standing rock and are bringing back information our first speaker today is julian barnett who recently returned from a visit to standing rock, she focuses on communities of struggle, liberated zones that people carve out to sustain their
movements and work on living the principles of justice and equality they want to see in the world. >> i wanted to start with a gesture that philip said about being an ally. this is a navahoe necklace that a friend gave me a few years ago. and i'm using it today to indicate than to draw attention to the fact that we who are progressive people, who are allies are -- despite even because of our world view have
we want to be respectful and we want to honor native peoples, however, we are all conditioned raised in this system and we have been colonized as well, i'm using this necklace as a way of indicating that a decision needs to be made to notice that we need to pay attention when we are well for example in standing rock and in all movements that we need to very very deliberately decide not to act upon these colonized thoughts
and to be respectful and never to pretend try to speak for the community as a whole. i'm here and so i want to put this into the safekeeping of my brother for now. and i want to show you, as my own experience, as a person who visited and participated in -- which is the large encampment of the several that exists in the rock. so can we see the first slide. that you see as you come by. it's very large. you need to picture these are all photos that i took.
when you come in, you were -- you are greeted by security. this is security at standing rock. now, i contrast that with the materialized police and all of the equipment and so -- whoever happens to be there, with the security team asks you what you're doing, where you're going and, in my case, they directed me to media hill or facebook hill, as it's sometimes called which is one of the few places that you can get the reception. and so we -- behind there you can see the tent. up at the -- most of the public spaces, the indoor spaces were large army style tents and so -- but the angle here allows us to see the solar company is taking
charge this is absolutely critical. this is not a place. this this out in front of the missouri river on highway 1806, does not have telephone or electricity or running water. and i got there a press pass so and many very well considered guidelines about what to take pictures of what and what not, because the secure when you see a ceremony there's been a
special arrangement made. because -- and i was told that the people took pictures, missionary ris, particular, took pictures of native ceremonies. had these ceremonies declared legal, and they were declared legal until 1978. there is a central fire in the middle of the camp, all day it's tended and there are speak outs, prayers songs.
from the fire, from the place, from the biker phone they would call the entire camp was to come and gather. and because of defending the sacred land and the water, and the whole camp was. that this is both -- all of the mundane things happening, but there was a kind of a -- there was a kind of a sacred ethos
over it. -- all of the tribes have brought -- bring their flags and so there's a very impressive avenue down the middle of the karch with the camps raised on high. the flags are always blowing and so that's the main -- the main avenue and then often on people -- on the camps of the various tribes -- everybody is expected to work. this is not something you're instructed to do. people go to work. somebody in the video is saying you share your gift and you share your time and that is
really how people get -- what day is it. what time is it. it has to do with the activity you're doing and what you -- who you're with. i went on my own and not part of delegation. an indigenous she took it to process the corn, she had all of these people in the middle of this open space husking corn. and so i participated in that and they hung to dry and will be
made -- i will be ground for use in the winter. this is one of the few pictures that have people in it because you have -- you have to ask permission of -- before taking picture -- people and then i -- helped this family. this is an extended family. put up a -- and so i was just walking by and somebody -- they needed a little bit of help to hold the pole, i ended up spending a lot of time and with them and befriending, especially, the elder who is right next to me and so we worked on the -- on it. full disclose sure, it didn't really work out so well. but then this young woman, her mother who is the real expert came the next day and she -- she really made the -- she really
they were very good about servicing -- that came every day in the wee hours and this was part of -- it was the nitty-gritty of creating this community. and hear it said camp meeting, 10:00 a.m., 4:00 p.m., every day, anybody who was part of the camp came and who was a visitor would come and participate in these meetings. they were led, they were all native led, but anybody
everybody dade what they needed to say, until nobody had any more to say and believe it or not, the meetings were not all that long and things really did get done this is the medic tent, there's a dedicated the woman who will be calling in is part of the healing team who provide free health care as people need it. >> this is, it says we are still here. this is the camp that was set up in front of the pipeline. this is the camp that was rated. i stayed there on the last night of its existence and that was, you know, so it was had been very quickly built, but, you
building, people making self screen signs to -- for the banners that people carry, beautiful signs. and this -- and this can be for the final remarks because this is -- this is the woman who is going to be speaking to us from standing rock. she's a healer. so that is all that's the tour. >> thanks, julie. >> this is great. >> our second speaker, jay winter night wolf, who i have known for many years here in washington, his full name is irksz u oirksd jay is the host
on wpfw the american indian truths, night wolf the most dangerous show on radio, so jay will be giving us more background part of this discussion. >> thank you for inviting me today. . the truth of all of this is that is actually standing for all of humanity. the issue is no whether you're indian or european or asian or black person. it's about what are we going to do to survive on this planet.
if water is not available we all die. death has no color. . we're standing up to protect our grandmother of the earth and the blood that she gives us, which is the water that we drink and live on. the only thing they care about is their bottom line. and i say to those the head of these corporations, when there is no water to drink, what will you do, how will you survive? do you have an exit plan to go somewhere else in the universe,
to exploit it. this is what ewe ear creating and it's all about what the european brought here to america 500 years ago. they bought diseases, greed, they bought arrogance. the only thing they have left behind anywhere they've gone in this world is death and destruction. or do you have anyone with you that tells you what you're doing is wrong.
i'm a grandfather. isle also a great grandfather and i love my grandchildren. what will we have to leave our grandchildren, our next seven generations to follow us if we don't make a change and demand through spirit and force because that's a very intergal part of how you get things done. what do we leave behind? i know you all, all of you sitting here. you either have children or grandchildren, am i right where
do we go from here. the army corps of engineers had a press release, where do they want to stop everything. why do they want to stop everything. because they realize that they broke the law because whenever you go on indian land and you want to build anything or bring about something new, you must have the tribe and come to sit at the table. tla didn't do that. they broke the law. they're guilty. now that we've got this new president elect coming in what
do we tell him. is he listening to any of us, i don't think so. antiimmigrant. this country is built on immigrants. people that came from all over the world to be here. but he's bent on sending people back to south of texas. well, i've got news for you, mr. trump, these people are not illegal aliens, before the european came to the americas, there were no borders. the borders were put in place to separate people to put in control of these economies. the one you've called latinos. there's no country called latin. there's no such thing as a hispanic. that's the pain that spain put
upon those people that came south of texas like the british and the dutch and the french put on us in north america, that's his pain. they are spanish speaking american indians. they are us and we are them. we get so caught up into these self made descriptions of people that we failed to see the humanity in all of it. every color and it's only four colors to human tanty.
agencies. >> e several people who were injured sunday are still in hospitals. i think we have with us now -- we have with us on the phone or we will in a minute, lolib, she's specializing in trauma recovery. she's helping to coordinate the mental health. we're just trying to figure out the technology here.
>> we have a room full of people and cspan here. could you tell us -- we have just a few minutes. could you tell us what you are doing at standing rock and what you are seeing and what you think we need to know here from allies outside of standing rock. and i've seen the way changed and the intensity has ebbed and
has become the voice and catalyst for the of this movement out around the world. >> much of what we've seen in the united states and somewhat internationally is the sense that standing rock has become the moral corps of a lot of movements that are on the rise right now, the environmental movement, the antiracist movements, the -- all of these various movements are convening around support, standing up for standing rock. could you talk about how people there -- how you see that symbolism of standing rock as the centerpiece of these broader movements? >> yeah, well, i think that basically hallmark of this movement is acknowledging the disrespect, racism, discrimination and oppression of the native people of this land. and i think we'll end that by empowering and honoring the most that have been in this country for a long time. we're bringing to light the
people have disrespected all different kind of people of color, and basically just highlighting the needs for all of us to come together and learn to live with respect and honoring one another in a nonviolent way. >> thank you very much. is there anything else you would like to tell us that you think at a very broad audience across this country should know? >> yeah. i think that, honestly, the best thing that everyone do to support us is go into your local community and start bringing the spirit. one of the most important things we're seeing here is the way that people are take k care of one another, almost too much we can handle here. i encourage people to go into their local community and reach out to those in need and reach out across class, race, all that we've created that divide us.
and in their name of standing rock, cross those connections and connect from the heart and also honor prayer and spirit that's been entry cal to this movement understanding that every tradition we can come together and honor the great spirit and this beautiful planet that we live on and all the resources that are given to us. >> thank you so much. >> thank you. [ applause ] thank you all for listening. we're doing to open up for some questions and discussions now for jay and for julie.
do we have questions in the audience. >> so i think some of the activists there, that they're really wanting president obama to take a stand, to stand up and say, no, end this, are there any thoughts or feelings about why he's absent and what role he can or should or shouldn't play in this fight. >> certainly, i feel that president obama could do more. but as so many of us that are realist know that the day he stepped into office, they had handcuffs waiting for him there's been a lot of efforts
that he put forth to make things bet for humanity. but every time he does, somebody cuts his hands off. now know he's only got but a few days left. maybe a presidential executive order to stop this right now. we don't know what's going to happen when this new president gets in. but at least stop it right now and show the world that he's on the right side of history when it comes to protecting grandmother and protecting
>> do you want to add to that. we're getting lollib back on the phone. the question that we just had from the audience was having to do with the request being made to made to president obama. while you're there in standing rock, can you tell us what people are saying they want the president to do during his final days in office? >> we want him to stop building the dakota access pipeline. >> say more about the campaign that is under way to ask him to do that. hello. are you still there? >> yes. can you hear me? >> we weren't hearing you for main. can you talk about the campaign that is underway to ask president obama to end the pipeline? >> so i'm not sure exactly what the final campaign is, but basically, he met with our tribal leaders and we're just
asking limb to step in and this end pipeline. at the very least step in and end the violent tactics that police are using against us here. because it is breaking a lot of laws. if he can't ask the department of justice to keep the north dakota county police in check and not treat us like we are in a war when we are unarmed that, would be a start to protect our safety. i'm not sure about the formal way that we're just asking him to stop the pipeline, to end it, just like he vetoed the keystone xl pipeline. he can do that. >> there is a call out in the lobby. can you pick up a piece of paper with numbers to call the authorities. >> there is a petition on the website calling on president obama to end the moves towards
the pipeline. another question. there was -- >> maybe julie can you speak to. this one thing that i was reading recently was just sort of making sure that the native allies we're supporting in the way that makes sense. so i'm wondering if you might offer just what a nonnative person could do from here that would make a difference. and maybe you could also share that. just being respectful and also sort of having the most impact now. what i understand is going to the camps is less useful than donating. i want to know if that is still true. >> were you able to hear that question? >> yes. so i agree that at this point we really need action coming from all sides and all places. it's really intense and challenging here to be on the ground and also we have limited resources just to provide for people. so i think that bringing awareness and putting pressure
on government officials, guys i've seen from the bank that's are funding this and basically just changing it in a systemic way from the top down is the most effective thing can you do. and also donating winter shelter. that's imperative. >> and just to follow up actually on what lali is saying in her earlier remarks. the more that the connections can be made between local organizing and the standing rock message and as -- and as both the moral core and the impulse that is a very strong sense that it is radiating out. and people -- but it takes organizing and takes thought to take that and translate it.
and being informed and separating out whatever news may or may not be accurate so that requires some research and for groups to keep the knowledge flowing and keep making the connections. >> i'd like to ask all three of you, i guess, a question about the intersection of so many of our movements and so many issues that are coming together symbolically standing rock. so we have the questions of environmental justice and environmental protection. protection of water and the land. we have the question of native rights and the whole question of white supremacy and history of genocide against native peoples in this country and how that fits with other anti-racist movements. we have the questions of how the
mobilization has brought together people from other tribes but also around the world. the question of international law is at the root of this in terms of treaty violations. so could each of you perhaps talk a little bit about how those combinations of issues come together at standing rock? do you -- jay, go ahead first. yeah. >> first of all, treaties are supposed to be the supreme law of the land. there are hundreds of treaties made. and every onest treaties have been aggravated. we have tried and tried. we have set and talked and tried to reason with these people. however, they refuse to be human in what they do.
it's a hard road. everybody can see that. i think the question is where does your humanity fit into all of this? when you have people from all over the world weighing in, when and where does it stop? you know, we've come to the cable in times to know avano av. so what's next? and i'm going to pass it on to phyllis, not phyllis, but julie and then i want my sister lali to comment on it.
i'd like to focus in on how they take place in a concrete community. i think that is a key if not the key thing about standing rock that we can take elsewhere. because there are many very vigorous vital important movements going on. what is happening at standing rock is that there is all of these -- all of these aspects are being worked with together in the flesh by people how native and nonnative people work together. and how it is that all of these issues -- all these people come together and deal with all of these issues but focusing on very, very simple basic needs of every single person and the earth, the planet which is water
and land. and so it really -- so there is something that is extremely integrated there. i think it is important, a very, very important thing to focus on. >> do you want to weigh in on this, too? >> yes. i think that what brought manufacture us here and uniting people across so many different backgrounds is that this is for the water and for the earth. and for honoring our relation to this planet and also for honoring to the way we relate to one another aeven from different cultures from different lands. and really realizing that we have to come to a place of more harmony and respect within ourselves and for one another as humans which will translate into respect for this planet. i think that's what's so beautiful about being here and caught the heart and spirit and we're focusing and we're all together regardless of any other
difference clz is the water. >> thank you for that. >> you reminded us that the latinos is a false name for what really many are indigenous peoples. i think an intersection that is going to be brought hard home to us in washington is the rights and dignity of people who are living here who are called undocumented, who are called alien. i think we have to reject this division among people and have that as a basis of our resistance and nonnative
offering of sanctuary achz as we're able to do that. i do think these fights, these stands are related. >> absolutely. >> for many, many years before 1942 right here on the potomac river people from as far south as the southern or the tip of south america and as far north as barrow, alaska came here two or three times to trade. that is recorded history. it's not until the european invader came that things got
separated. i think if we were -- like my grand father you used to always say, whether you talk to me, look at my eyes. because when you look in my eyes, the eyes are the pathway to the heart. you know who i am. it's only going to get worse. with this administration coming in now talking about sending the mexicans back, i don't know how dumb you could be to even think like that.
these are the north american inldians, the original inhabitants of the western hemisphe hemisphere. long before the europeans came here, we had real democracy. and the people of the confederacy had the great law of peace. 30 miles east of missouri is a holy place. every year people from all of the tribes go there to sit in council with each other. so i think we need to go back
and look at history as human beings. and we will find answers there. nobody tried to cover those answers up. nobody tried to burn those answers down. they're still there. put the human back into humanity and a lot of things will change. and as far as what's happening with the police action in north dakota, the president with send a u.s. marshal out there and stop that right away. >> that's another model of the parallels with the civil rights movement, the struggle to get federal marshals to control the actions of local police.
>> i was born in colombia. and i grew up in this country. >> we're losing you again. >> i have the identity of latina and is actually indigenous and realize wlg we understand our history in that context, it really does unite the north and south and central american native people in a way that i think a lot of us forgotten for a long time. so i think that by -- and also we had people here from south america from central america that had taken stands against the same kind of invasion,
genocide and oppression. so i think the connection to this land is really empowering and as to everyone else who has ancestry that has come into this country and these lands in the different way. i'm grateful for that awareness and i hope people that immigrated from central america to this land are respected in a different way. >> thank you for. that we had another question. >> i would like to know what impact has the resistance have made the killers on the land? >> what impact has it made on those who are killing the land and destroying the water? do you want to go first?
>> how it impacted those people, personally, i heard of 27 police officers that have turned their badges in and there also are our statements here. i'm really not sure. the dayst raid, winlt around and tried to look into the eyes of police officers and play the drum in stand of front of them. three out of 75 of those mostly men were able to look necessity mt eyes and see me as a human bei being. what i saw the other night is they were not seeing us as people anymore. and so i -- i'm not sure what, you know, the workers or people think of us.
but i wonder how this impacted them. >> an indirect but very clear way to see the impact is as the resistance or reaction to the resistance grows, this shows that they are feeling more and more threatened. this is not the impact that we would want. we would want a softening, not a hard ening. but the actions are being noticed and it is often confounding. when i was there, i saw that sometimes there was -- the reaction -- it seemed like sometimes there was a huge reaction. sometimes there was no reaction. sometimes they sent this message when nothing was going on about extreme alert and so on.
there is a lack of strategy wlaen needs to be done. certainly -- there is certainly strategy at the level of the company. it seems like there is absolutely no impact as far as people's minds. but as far as the notice being taken by authorities, that is certain. >> jerry? >> i want to say something. the use of fossil fuels is coming to an end very quickly. this pipeline that they're
wanting to complete, is to transport this natural gas to be sold in foreign countries. none of this is going to benefit us. they want to sell it to foreign countries at the risk of destroying a people, destroying their culture, destroying their sacred grounds, their burial grounds for the cost for a dollar. now my question to all of my white brothers and sisters, if
they dug up the graves of your ancestors, how would you feel? because we do have native-americans that have degrees in archaeology. if we decide one day to say let's go to that cemetery over there that white cemetery over there and dig their ancestors up and see if they really did have syphilis or what they died from, that would be classified as sacreligious. there's no difference but they're protected by laws.
where is the honor? where is the honor among human beings? where does that go? and solar energy and wind energy, that's free. but they would rather dig up and frac for oil and dig for grass. you have ever heard of earthquakes on a level of five in oklahoma? where do all the sink holes come from? you take, take, take and do you nothing to put anything back. we're in trouble. we're in big, big trouble. if they won't bring us to the table, maybe we need to bring
them to the table and teach them something about common sense and reality. because they lost it, if they ever had it. >> i would just add that one of the things we have seen a shift, i can't speak at all to what the impact has been on people, but at the institutional level, among other things, when there was several thousand people camped out outside the army corps of engineers headquarters here in washington last week, the head of the army corps came out and had to speak to this crowd who were silent waiting for his answer. he had to say, yes, we did not consult before. we're doing that now. we are hearing this. maybe this is beginning to have that impact whether it will be
on the president, whether it will be on the white house, the department of energy, on the army corps of engineers, some where along there, there are institutional shifts bebeing considered. and we have just a few more minutes. i was going to ask each of our three panelists to leave us with their sense of what we should take away, what we should be thinking about going forward, what the next steps are for supporters of those who stand withstanding rock, those who stand to defend the water and the land. you've been very patient us with on your phone. perhaps you could give us your final words first. >> sure. i would like to share that this is only the beginning. standing rock is a catalyst and it's inviting everyone on this planet to change the way that we relate to the earth. and that this is an awakiawaken
that we feel is happening and i look forward to seeing what will unfold and invite all of you to be a part of it so can you tell your children and grandchildren that you said to protect the water and the earth. >> thank you. >> perhaps the most impactful thing of being at standing rock was to really be part of, to be welcomed into a different kind of community. a place that is really in the process of creating a piece of the new world now. it's not like people sat down and mapped it out. there is plenty of that as well. but it is something that is generated in all of the
interactions, the thinking and the feeling of respect and being together with this overarching purpose. it is something that is extremely -- well, it is something that is -- it's much greater than all of the various piece that's make it up. even though all of those pieces are essential. and i think it also tells us how much the day to day work in the trenches, you might say, doing the cooking, doing the healing of people, all of this is -- it's obviously important and important in all societies. but it becomes part of this
whole new -- it's a way of sustaining long term a movement so it can really, you know, make a place for everybody. and that something that i really encourage people to think about as we create our movements. how do we create, you know, these areas, these zones where we can really make our lives different as we go along, creating -- creating the path by walking. >> thank you. >> as we always look upon everyone else that's not a part of our tribe or tribal communiti communities, we're all relatives.
it's time to be about being human again. and if we don't do it soon, it's going to be too late for all of us. and i'll close as i always close my radio show, i love you all. all of you. even those of that make it almost impossible to love. i love you anyway. let's not talk about it. let's be about it. thank you. >> thank you all. lali was joining us on the phone if standing rock, a holistic healer specializing in trauma recovery. julie barnett recently returned
from a visit to standing rock as an ally there. and jay winter knight wolf comes frous wpfw every week. he is a cherokee tribal member. and just to close us out today, the institute for policy studies was very glad that we had this opportunity to begin a longer conversation about standing rock, about what it says for all of our movements as we build our movements together. ips stands withstanding rock. >> the colombian journalism school hosted a forum on school segregation throughout history with investigative journalist. watch wednesday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. here's a preview.
i wanted to understand why. like what -- what is causing this? why are our neighborhoods segregated 50 years after we passed the fair housing act? why our schools still segregated, but when you look across every measure, black and latino students are getting, you know, the least qualified teachers, less likely to get access to academic courses that get you into an institution like colombia across the country. i wanted to understand why that was. so that's really when my work began to focus on looking at the particular actions that we take in the past and also that people are taking right now that maintain segregation and racial inequality. so with schools, resegregation was a way to do that. if a place had been segregated and then it was intergrated, you could go back to that point where it starts resegregating and show that someone had to do
something. something -- so i started looking at school districts that were order bid federal courts to integrate. when federal courts ordered you to integrate, they lay out certain thing uz have to do. you have to bus the kids or have racial balance and have a white school and a black school. and then once the school district is released from that court order, they can do whatever they want. they can create all black schools if they want to as long as they never say we're doing this because we want to discriminate against black kids. they did do whatever they want. and so it was easy then to go to this point where a school district or school had been integrated and now it was going backwards and you could find who did what, who made this decision that resegregated this school? >> watch the columbia university conversation with school segregation at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span.
>> well, if james madison is the architect of the constitution, and he might be, then george washington is the general contractor. >> george washington, nationalist. >> what he thnt whatted to do is recruit washington in as part of the coup d'etat. hamilton already talked to washington before about this democracy stuff is never going to have to work. you'll have to be our king. washington was a true republican. he believed in republican government. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span's q&a. >> up next, josh earnest about the transition process between the obama administration and president-elect donald trump.
. good afternoon, everybody. if you joined us on the trip, welcome back. i hope you caught up on your sleep. maybe a little. i don't have any announcements. i'll go straight to your questions. >> thanks, josh. has the president spoken to the president-elect since their meeting in the oval office shortly after the election?. oval office shortly after the election? >> the president-elect indicated his desire to continue to consult with president obama with, of course, a transition. and you also heard president obama indicate the high priority in a he has place ond facilitating this movement.
so reports that the two may have talked after their white house meeting is not particularly surprising. i can tell you that the president has -- had a conversation with the president-elect since the oval office. >> when the president speaks to other important world leaders, members of congress or congressional leadership, they're able to have private discussions where they keep on top of things. >> that hasn't been trud whether president obama consulted with
other presidents. i think that is the president's privacy that we're trying to protect. as president-elect donald trump indicated in the oval office, he was hoping he would have the opportunity to consult with president obama over the course of this transition. president obama has committed to a smooth transition. >> is the white house hoping trump and his team will be similarly coy in not releasing a lot of details about what the two presidents discuss? >> the president-elect can discuss whatever he chooses to about his conversations with president obama, presumably there will be an opportunity to do that beyond off-the-record meetings. >> reporter: you may have seen the president-elect, his team, at least, is now saying that he won't go ahead and try to prosecute hillary clinton if elected -- once he takes office. is the white house relieved to hear that that seems to be off the table or are you concerned that the independence between the white house and the justice department that you've worked so
dutifully over the last eight years to maintain now seems to be going out the window? >> josh, i think the end of your question is where i would begin which is that we have gone to great lengths in the context of the obama administration to uphold a fore foundational principle of our democracy, which is preventing politics from influencing independent criminal investigations. that is a basic principle of our democracy because we don't want to leave anybody with even the impression that there's the potential that somebody could be treated differently by our criminal justice system because of their political affiliation. this is the principle of every american being subject to the rule of law and every american being equal under the law? so we have gone to great lengths not just to uphold that principle but to even avoid the
appearance of that principle being called into question. and for better or worse in the context of the two and a half years that i've been doing this job, i've been asked repeatedly, even before secretary clinton had announced her campaign i was asked about her e-mail system. eight days before an election i came out and stood before all of you answering questions about a letter from the fbi director that he had sent to congress saying that the investigation had been reopened. and at each of those terms i've made clear that those kinds of investigative decisions and investigative conclusions should be conducted free of any sort of political interference and should be conducted independent of any white house interference. and that's the principle that we have protected. that's the principle that
previous presidents protected and we certainly believe that's a principle future presidents should protect. but, again, i can't speak for the president-elect's team or any decisions or pronouncements he'd make to make. you have to talk to him about that. >> reporter: i want to ask you about the president-elect publicly lobbying for britain to nominate nigel farage as the uk ambassador to the u.s. is the white house concerned by that apparently pretty significant breach of protocol given his status as political opposition to the current leadership? the uk? >> as somebody who has covered the president closely for the last several year years can you know the president has been contentious about not waiting too deeply in another country's politics.
there's plenty of politics in this country to keep everybody busy. so there have been occasions where the president has taken a position on a particular issue or spoken publicly about a particular issue, the brexit question comes to mind. a lot of people made note of the president's public statements about the brexit vote when he visited the uk earlier this year but he was quite direct in laying out his view that this was a decision for the british people to make but he offered his opinion for a couple of reasons -- first of all that we saw some of the opponents of brexit suggest that somehow the united states would benefit or have a favorable view of a brexit vote.
that was obviously not true so the president wanted to set the record straight. the president also felt it was important for people to understand the true feelings of the uk's closest ally as they weighed this decision that was before them. and so the president made the argument accordingly but at each turn in making that argument he went to great lengths to make clear that he respects the sovereignty of the british people and certainly respects the responsibility that the british people and the british government have to make decisions that are consistent with their own countries and their own citizens' self-interest and that's a principle that we've sought to uphold during the president's eight years in office. you have to talk to the president-elect or the people of the uk about whether or not they
are concerned that that tweet may have violated that principle. it's not something i'll weigh in on from here. >> reporter: i wanted to ask you about president-elect trump's recent comments on immigration. yesterday in a youtube video outlining executive actions he hopes to take as soon as he gets into office he said he was going to call on the department of labor to investigate all abuses of visa programs that undercut american workers. does the president have a response to this? does he think that visa abuse by american companies is on the rise? and does he support an approach that would investigate a piece-by-piece each abuse? >> well, listen, over the course of the election i think we made and the president made very clear, even to people who are only sort of paying attention, that the president-elect's vision for the domestic and foreign policy he chose to -- he hoped to pursue is quite different than the priorities and agenda that president obama set over his last eight years in office so it shouldn't be surprising a number of the priorities that the president-elect has discussed are not the same priorities we've been discussing. but for me to weigh in on and
react to or even criticize those well-known differences would undermine the president's priority of ensuring a smooth and effective transition. it's certainly a responsibility of the president-elect to communicate with the american public about what priorities he'll pursue when he takes office. he has that right and ability because he won the election. and the election is over. the debate about the consequences of the election have been resolved and the president is following the will of the american people and fulfilling his institutional responsibility to give the incoming team the best prospects for success when it comes to uniting the country and moving us forward. >> an area where there may be overlap and you might be able to comment is president-elect trump's plans to unravel the daca, the dreamers act that allowed children brought to the u.s. by their parents work authorizations. obviously it was a big push of this administration to get those
people to give their information to the government to come forward. that information will now be put in the hands of an administration who could use that for enforcement. things liked a dresses. what does the presidency now to reassure or to try to provide some comfort to people who felt -- who he convinced to trust the government enough to come forward and share that information? >> i know the president has had an opportunity to talk about this a little bit already. i think what i would say in general is that this does
underscore the need for congress to act on the clear bipartisan agreement that exists about some of the benefits of comprehensive immigration reform. the obstruction by house republicans prevented the realization of that goal and ultimately house republicans who continue to retain the responsibility for governing the country with their majorities in congress will have to evaluate whether or not they want this country to enjoy the significant economic benefits of common sense comprehensive immigration reform. the second thing i would note is that the president-elect since the election has given voice to the same kind of prior tease and criteria that this administration has long pursued. the president-elect has indicated his emphasis when it comes to deportation should be on criminals, that's actually the policy that this
administration has been pursuing for quite some time. that's the policy that we turbo charged in the context of the president's executive actions that were announced a little over two years ago now. so that -- you know, ultimately it will be the responsibility of the president-elect to determine what sort of priorities his administration will pursue, the kind of enforcement priorities that are laid out in the context of the dreamers' executive action taken by the administration was something that largely rested at the department of homeland security so certainly the president-elect's choice for secretary of homeland security will be a consequential one but
ultimately the president has made clear that those individuals who qualified for daca, the dream act executive actions that this administration pursued are individuals who are in the united states through no fault of their own. these are individuals who are american in every way but their papers. and these are individuals who attend the same church, attend the same school, shop at the same stores, live in the same communities as americans across the country and our country benefits from making an investment in those young people because those young people made an investment in us and many of them have gone to college and demonstrated the kind of entrepreneurial spirit that benefitted our economy. many enlisted in our military and fought and died protecting the united states of america and the people who live here so there's a strong case to make about the valuable contribution these individuals have already made to the united states and a strong case has been made about how unraveling them and dividing families in the way that some suggest would be bad for our
economy and entirely inconsistent with the kinds of values that have long been severed by american policymakers for generations. >> reporter: one last question. will the president withdraw merrick garland's nomination to the supreme court? >> well, listen, the president believes strongly that chief judge garland is the best person in america to fill a vacant seat on the supreme court, that's why the president nominated him. presumably there are some republicans who agree. they agree for a variety of reasons, they agree in part because chief judge garland is the most experienced supreme court nominee in american history. he spent 19 years on the federal judiciary and no one can call
into question his qualifications, certainly the non-partisan american bar association didn't call into question his qualifications, they rated him unanimously well qualified for the job. you had republicans who in the past who described chief judge garland as a consensus nominee, as somebody who is going to set aside his own political leanings and focus on a judge's responsibility to interpret the law. merrick garland led the investigation into the bombing in oklahoma city and played a key role in bringing to justice those who killed more than 100 americans in oklahoma city more than 20 years ago now so chief judge garland is somebody who is qualified, he's a man of impeccable character and a man who served his country and it's disgraceful the way that the republican in united states senate have treated him.
even setting aside their failure to fulfill their basic responsibility as elected officials, as elected representatives of the american people in the united states, so this is a -- his treatment and the way this situation is likely to end is a scar on the institution of the united states senate and it is a scar that i do not anticipate will go away quickly and that is rather unfortunate. but you can certainly be sure that president obama will continue to have chief judge garland's back until the end of this congressional session. >> reporter: i wanted to ask -- you talked about ensuring a smooth transition and helping the president-elect. in his video yesterday he said on day one he would signal his tension to withdraw from tpp. i'm wondering for you guys, do you still plan to submit a final statement and the draft of the implementing bill for congress or is your support for tpp at this pointing a dem wick the realization that there's no interest on capitol hill and certainly not for the
president-elect. >> we certainly were well aware of the public statements of e president-elect and this is true of both candidates. neither of them was supportive of the transpacific partnership. i don't have any future steps to preview but i would acknowledge the prospects of tpp being ratified by this congress oar before president obama leaves are not very good and that's unfortunate. >> reporter: are you going to try? >> i don't have any steps to preview at this point. i think the argument that would make is simply that this is -- if congress does not move forward with ratifying the transpacific partnership, it is a significant missed opportunity for the american people, in part because there were some pretty clear signals from other tpp countries that they actually intend to move forward even if the united states does not and
that will put u.s. businesses and workers at a disadvantage. you have other countries with significant economies and growing economies where the united states already does business but u.s. businesses and workers will be put at a disadvantage because we don't benefit from the created by the tpp. you will see other countries part of tpp move in and capitalize on the market share u.s. companies have lost. in the asia-pacific. and this's a real shame because so much of the anxiety that was -- according to many analysts -- expressed in the context of the election -- was rooted in the idea that the forces of globalization have had a negative impact on too many american workers. and those workers were frustrated that their government hadn't done more a help them and their companies counter those forces of globalization. that's exactly the strategy we have laid out and it's tragic so see that be rolled back, to see that that policy that could address some of the concerns be rolled back by the person who
claims they share those concerns so that's deeply disappointing, this is also concerning when you consider our broader relationship with china because we know right now even as we speak china is seeking to advance their own trade agreement with countries in this region that we know is going to further disadvantage with u.s. workers and businesses. so it's not a situation where congress refusing to advance the tpp that the status quo is maintained and we'll find a different solution. the fact is the u.s. will be consequentially negatively affected by the refusal of the congress to ratify the tpp in terms of lost opportunities and lost market share but also in terms of lower standards being implemented by china.
the last thing i will say is there was discussion about the campaign about nafta and the need to improve nafta. that's what the tpp would have done. it would have included some environmental and labor standards that would have been increased and made enforceable that the context of tpp that was not true in nafta and that potential improvement is on the verge of being cast to the curb, if you will. and that's rather unfortunate, too. so there are significant lost opportunities and it will be difficult, i think, for, frankly, democrats and
republicans in congress who oppose the tpp moving forward to justify this action or inaction as the case may be and to lay out some sort of coherent strategy for addressing these concerns. this administration pursued a coherent strategy. we worked for years to negotiate the kind of agreement that would advantage u.s. workers and our broader economy but it looks like that responsibility may fall to someone else. ill think they will have a hard time putting together the kind of coherent strategy with as much promise as the one this
administration put forward. >> reporter: i know the president was asked about the director down in peru but the president's answer was broad and so i wanted to ask a couple tighter questions about -- i thought you did a good job. >> be specific. [ laughter ] >> would you like to sit up here and handle this one? i can take a break for a minute. >> reporter: did the president receive a recommendation from secretary carter to remove director rogers and has the president made a determination about whether there should be severed changes of command between the nsa and military cyber operations?
i say all this acknowledging i'm probably not going to get more than gardner did. >> fair enough. you wouldn't be job if you didn't ask and i wouldn't be doing my job if i gave up a whole lot more, particularly when it comes to something as critical to our national security as cyber security. something something i think was evidence in the president's answer, something the president has been thinking about a lot, about what we can do to enhance and further fortify the kinds of cyber protections that the american people and the u.s. government rely upon to ensure the protection of our national security. if the president was unwilling to describe the advice and
recommendations he's getting from his secretary of defense, it would be out of line for me to do so i won't talk about the kinds of advice or recommendation the president has received from the dni or chairman of the joint chiefs of staff or the secretary of defense. but i can tell you that this is a question more generally about how to structure our national security apparatus, that the president has been talking about this with his team, as it relates to admiral rogers you heard directly from the president in pretty unambiguous terms how the president views admiral rogers as a patriot and somebody who devoted a significant portion of his life to protecting our country and i
think all of us can be and should be grateful for his service thus far. if the president were to make a decision about changing the organization of this structure by dividing the responsibilities of the nsa director and 2 commander of cyber command into two different jobs, that's an announcement i would let the commander in chief make. >> reporter: last one. all four major stock indices yesterday closed at record highs. i know you don't comment on day to day fluctuation bus there have been a decided uptick since president-elect trump was elected so i'm wondering if you can reflect on why investors may seem encouraged by the prospect of transitioning from an obama economy to a trump economy. >> i typically am quite reluctant to talk about individual market movements and i suspect there are plenty of analysts out there who have their own theories about market movements over the last couple weeks and -- so i'll let those highly-paid analysts do that work. the market movement that i would comment on is the one we've seen over the last eight years. most stock indexes have more than doubled under president obama's leadership and i do think that that speaks well of the kind of economic strategy that president obama has implemented and it certainly will be a very high bar for a future president to live up to but hopefully they'll give it a good shot. mark? >> reporter: josh, in your answer on merrick garland, does that mean that president obama will resubmit the nomination in january during those days when the new congress overlaps at the end of his presidency? >> i don't think anything to preview at this point about whether or not the president
would resubmit his nomination but obviously the president i think shares my -- i'm confident shares my view that the senate's treatment of chief judge garland is deplorable. >> reporter: speaker ryan today is urging president obama not to put forward any steps that would bolster iran's economy, he's worried there might be new concessions in the pipeline. does he have reason to worry? >> well, i have anything to preview at this point. what i can tell you is this administration through january 20 whether fulfill our on ligations around the iran deal that have prevented iran from advancing their nuclear weapons capability. in fact, that capability has been substantially rolled back because of this international agreement the united states brokered with our closest allies. and the results of the deal meant that iran had to ship out 98% of its enriched uranium, had to dismantle two-thirds of their centrifuges, thousands of centrifuges were dismantled. that they had to render harmless their plutonium reactor and they have adopted and complied with the most intrusive set of inspections ever imposed by a country's nuclear program. so the steps that have been taken thus far have enhanced the national security of the united states significantly. they've also enhanced the national security of our closest ally in the middle east, israel, and our other european alleys in particular feel very good about the progress this agreement has
yielded. in fact, it has exceeded not just the expectations of those of us who believe the attorney deal was the right approach but it has refuted every criticism that we heard from opponents of the deal. there was a suggestion at the very beginning that iran would never sit down and negotiate this kind of an arrangement in good faith. once those negotiations started there was a sense that was put forward by opponents of the deal that iran wasn't interested in negotiating an agreement, that they were just negotiating for time. they were wrong about that, too. once the agreement was reached critics said iran would never comply with the deal. never live up to the terms included on the paper. they were wrong about that. even the israeli intelligence community that had significant doubts about the deal have confirmed what we've seen from other places which is that iran has lived up to the terms of the deal so while iran lives up to the terms of the deal the united states is going to make sure we're fulfilling our commitments to make sure the deal doesn't
fall apart and we know that our allies -- the president had the opportunity to talk about this with countries that were part of the international agreement to prevent iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and they shared that sentiment. the next administration will have to decide what they want to do moving forward but the risks of pulling out of that agreement or doing something in violation are grave. >> reporter: the speaker is also asking president obama to sign a ten-year extension of the iran sanctions act. is that something he'd be willing to do? >> we know there's been a robust debate in congress about the wisdom of this approach. if there's a bill passed by the congress we'll obviously take a close look at it. i know much of the rhetoric on capitol hill is them -- is advocates of bill saying they want to give the president tools
to impose sanctions against iran where necessary. the truth is, the obama administration has significant authority to impose those kind of financial penalties and we have not been timid about using them. this administration has repeatedly through the treasury department imposed sanctions against iran for a ballistic missile program that extends beyond the accepted guidelines of the international community. we've imposed sanctions against iran because of their support for terrorism in the region. we have imposed sanctions against iran because of their repeated and flagrant violation of universal human rights. so these are tools that the administration already has and we have certainly shown a williness to use them. but, you know, if congress wants to put more on the table, then we'll take a look at what they propose. we certainly are not going to, however, sign a piece of legislation that would undermine the ability of the international community to continue to
successfully implement the international agreement to prevent iran from obtaining a nuclear weapons. >> reporter: and one last question on today's event. can you tell us or remind us how president obama selects the recipients of this medal of freedom? >> well, i know this is a process that was created by -- an award created by president kennedy. and the president every year looks forward to this opportunity that he has to acknowledge the contributions of people, mostly americans, to the world and to the united states and it's a rather distinguished group of individuals. and you will see human-driven cars and autonomous vehicles operating side by side as the technology continues to emerge. so, it will be interesting to see how this works. >> yeah, i would like to actually contradict what i just said. i think that, you know, the next generation could be much less
about tangible goods. this could be a generational issue. are richly deserving. okay? all right. andrew? >> thank you. i want to go back to the question about donald trump's prosecution of hillary clinton. you spoke about a core principle about democracy. do you think the president-elect's comments and thoefz his staff are risk eroding the core principle of democracy? >> well, listen, i -- there's ample opportunity for people to weigh in this debate. and certainly many people,
democrats and republicans avail themselves that opportunity in the two weeks leading up to the debate. i suspect that comments to dale give more people a reason to weigh in. but i'm not going to weigh in from here. i think the one thing i didn't mention in my previous answer that is relevant here is that there was an investigation. the investigation was led by independent officials at the department of justice including the director of the fbi. this is an individual who is a registered republican. this is something who served as high-ranking official in the bush administration as a political appointee. he's somebody confirmed in the united states senate by majority of democrats and majority of republicans when president obama appointed him to the job. president obama selected him for the job because of his demonstrated ability and long-standing track record of putting aside political considerations to focus on the law. and his conclusion after the evidence was presented to him
was that no reasonable prosecutor would move forward with the case. he made that recommendation public. that was approved by senior officials of the department of justice including attorney general, herself, somebody with decades of experience conducting criminal prosecutions. so i guess the point, andrew, is that we don't need staffers in the next white house to resolve the question about whether or not a prosecution should move forward. this decision was already reached by senior officials at the department of justice in a way that should resolve everybody's concerns about the
potential for political interference. and it's important this long-standing tradition and principle that is the foundation, or at least one critical part of the foundation of the criminal justice system is one that is not just upheld but one that is carefully protected. it is erosion as the potential to raise questions about whether or not everyone in the country is going to be treated fairly and under the law. cheryl. i'm sorry. i didn't mean to cut you off there. >> the president has spoken quite a few times about the negative impact of partisanship and the need for reaching across the aisle. i was wondering if you think the outreach to the trump campaign offers an example for democrats in that regard? >> i'm not going to comment an congressman gabbert's conversations. what i can tell you is president obama invited president-elect to come to the oval office and meet with him. so at this point i don't think i have the standing for