tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN September 22, 2016 4:00am-6:01am EDT
70 years of cold war. following the soviet union wallowing that, 17 years between 1991 when the soviet union fell to the 2008 financial crisis when the united states had a kind of unchallenged position in the world. that ended to a degree in 2008 as confidence in our position in the world was shaken a little bit around the world and in that time, we had the luxury of dealing with issues that looked to us, preps artificially, but looked to us like black and white. a clear mission, world war i world war ii, the cold war. and then the moment of 17 years when there was not great powers but it great power. now, we are back at a moment
when a lot of the issue start to look gray. when our relationships, first off let me say, i think great power rivalries are here to stay at least for the foreseeable future. it is not a thing of the past but it is different the end it used to be. we do not have a lot of practice with this type of world. the closest thing you might have might be the interwar. between the two world war wars when there was a kind of balance of power situation but at that time we did not see ourselves as having greater power. remember, 1929, the secretary of state basically eliminated budget for cryptographic work. that's how much interest there was an intelligence that then. but then world war ii, we see ourselves as a world power in then we have the unusual time of the cold war. these relationships are all
complex. on one hand, we are disturbed with russia. on the other hand, it would be hard to settle syria without it. we probably could not of gotten an agreement with iran without it. we are disturbed with china, but it would be hard to manage the north korean problem without it. with economic interdependence. this is an environment where the united states is not very practiced at the kind of great power rivalry we are starting to see. frank: and the interwar time led to the second world war, germany going in the direction it did. john: the munich analogy is ever used of course but nonetheless the lessons of that apply today to a degree, but in a very different world. you have a big factor that has changed hair. great powers now share the stage with so many non-state actors.
terrorists, and she'll cause multinational corporations and also the fact that social media has empowered small groups of people individuals in a way that is unparalleled in modern history. frank: peter, dennis, what are your takes? >> i completely concur. the great power war is not ever going to go away. there will always be a struggle among great powers. constant competing to get to and equilibrium. someone totally bent on being a dominant force, don't know if i see that right now. maybe china. >> i think from the chinese point of view, the world changed in 2008 with the asia financial crisis. before that, the chinese sort of believed the world order was
in the ascendancy and you remember they talked about a high strategy of the of the chinese. there was a term we used but the chinese say it is much more complicated and they would say the bottom part was narda's nefarious -- was not as nefarious as some had considered. chinese needed to get strong before taking a place in the world. the flaws of the western system showed itself. while china is still growing at a remarkable rate. the other thing that happened was a new chinese leader comes on the scene.
deng xiaoping made china economically strong. the leader who came to power in 2012 is a man who believes he will take china forward as a great power now. china is not going to hide anymore in the world order. china has the desire to be the second world power and so one of the things he did almost immediately when he came to washington in february of 2012 he talked about a new great power relationship with the united states. what does that say? it says that for the first time, china is a great power. in the great power relationship, china wants to be our year. we have struggled with that since 2012. we do not really consider china
yet ap or of the united dates. in of course, china in this great new power relationship with us to back out of situations they believe are they are business. they do not see the far china sea as our business. i do not see as the east china sea is our business. it is a new wants sort of great power rivalry. a need united states on the economic side, but they also want the united states to recognize there are now two great powers in the world and china is one of them. frank: since you are the russia expert here, it if let them your pigeon wants to be asserted, he has to deal with something the soviet union did not have to deal with before china. it is a different alliance than it was once upon a time. peter: it is interesting that vladimir putin and china has a budding relationship. vladimir putin has been there several times in the last couple years.
the chinese president has been to russia. there is an and the 1970's when there is a triangular balance between russia, china, it that kissinger frequently focused on. i want to go to the clear effort to reassert russia's role in the world. there are two things driving vladimir putin. one is to restore the rightful role as a great power. given where the russians were after the yeltsin years. you see this and 70 ways. i instructed in some ways he would like to restore the world in which he grew up. if you think about vladimir pridgen's coming-of-age in the 1960's and 1970's, his early years in the kgb. the soviet union was the other great power. it was a bipolar world in the world knew it. and vladimir putin seeks to make sure the world understands there is very little you can do
these days in many areas without that russian role. the famous adage, there's no issue that cannot we resolved without a soviet handle or a soviet role. mostly, the middle east. the interventionist areas exactly about that and partly about shoring up the severely beleaguered client state with whom we had a relationship for 30-50 years. as much as a it gave vladimir putin a chance to show we had a role to play. they inserted themselves in this conflict which forced the united states took knowledge that role and here we are negotiating cessation of hostilities, which is touch and go right now. frank: i would like to spend a few minutes on russia and putin and then a few minutes on china. and then to do things together
in the context of the questions we pose as we discussed great power rivalry. we should think about this. what do you think vladimir putin is up to? what is his objective to let the world know russia is a great power, but more than that reasonably. >> two things, and they are intertwined. first, russia's status in the world and that particularly applies to the area we see very clearly in ukraine. it will be interesting to see what happens as we have secession challenges in central asia where china begins to play an increasingly important role in the other thing, and i'm struck by this, there is a domestic portion to vladimir putin's agenda.
when people ask me what he is really up to, it is not just about fulfilling russia's greatness of the world, it is also about defending his regime and specifically legitimizing his brand of authoritarian rule. we kiddingly collect managed democracy. they just had in election, preferably world to see the have election, multiple parties. but in other ways, he is in my view a little defensive. more than a little defensive. in what we are seeing domestically is to legitimize his regime he is constantly attacking the west and the u.s. which in his view is hypocritical. so for example, if you look at the links that came out. on the dnc. the russians media was very quick to pick on the fact that see, the west is always blustering us and look at the system. where is the level playing field, which is something the americans always question the russians about.
we see this sensitivity in the other links from the world's other agencies. anti-doping agency. the russian media was very quick to pick on the fact that this is very interesting after the russians, many of the athletes were banned from the olympics, we now found out that a lot of other athletes in the world, including americans supposedly were legally given a pass because they had attention deficit disorder. if you watch the rest of the media closely, this comes through loud and clear and to me it highlights sensitivity. the other thing vladimir putin seeks to do and this is where it is intertwined, one of the main arguments for defending his system is we promised the people order and stability and
we so frequently cite, look what happened in libya. look what happened in syria. in other parts of the world, o and we cannot have that in russia. particularly what he saw in 2011 which was a wake-up call to him unexpectedly a large number of people protested. the elections. frank: is an also important thinking about russia to step back and ask ourselves, what have they been through? hundreds of years of having a czar. a real distortion of history. then the yeltsin area from 1991-1999. john: at the end the war actually an apology after the time of great instability and turmoil. in some ways good for russia because they opened up the media and so far. in vladimir putin comes in and has to stabilize the place which i think is the reason for his initial into enduring popularity. whatever the downside, it has
become predictable in russia once again. they have a very different view of recent history then we do and it is easy to refute but you have to listen to them. the first thing with your adversary is to understand where their coming from. it is different than our history when you look at libya, look at syria. >> look at poland, ukraine. >> nato enlargement. >> absolutely. >> they endorse that. they have the feeling, i don't know if it is true, but they will tell you that you promise not to enlarge nato beyond inclusion of germany after germany's unification -- i don't know, i don't think we did that but that is their perception. >> peter, will become back to and ask you about something you said in -- the headline in today's new york times.
vladimir putin tightens grip. there is a lot of suspense run this, i know. president vladimir putin leverage his popularity to assert greater control over the malibu parliament with results released monday showing the party gaining a majority. the live five was made possible in some part by voter turnout just under 48% on election sunday for the 450 seat. what is going on? in totally, politically in vladimir putin's russia? >> 2011 turnout was 60%. one of the challenges in trying to manage democracy is the right balance. i think the russians, the early polling results show was around 40%. they were worried it needed to be closer to 50.
at the same time, i think they were worried that too big of a turnout might actually give an edge to some of the other parties to work competing although that admittedly they are not that into regime. the true opposition parties are miniscule. it is hard to run a candidate and get them on the ballot. i wanted to get back to the issue of what vladimir putin is really worried about. by the way, he publicly said he is considering the reelection bid. i do not know if he said he is formally running in 2018 for up most of us believe he is going to run for reelection but he has got to be thinking about what will happen between now and 2018. indicators, the day after the election, one of the major russian newspapers reported there may be a major restructuring of the russian intelligence services to put it together with another agency and most would agree the one is
the dominant domestic force in russia. what i see is potentially a continuation of tightening up on society for a number of reasons. i think flooding your putin generally fears instability and disorder. after he was elected in 2000 he described the scene when he was a kgb office there and the civil war collapsed in germany and there was a large mob that approached the facility where his people were located, the kgb. and he said, i called my stuff for guidance and got told, we do not have any guidance and he was shocked and i think it was also a little afraid and of course, 2011, we see these
protests. pretty spontaneously erupting from pretty angry they recognize the sham democracy being pressed on them. he wants to ensure that will not happen again. >> so all this being said, russia wanting to reassert itself and wanting to lock things down politically at home, doing with plenty of economic and domestic challenges. what does he want? from his confrontation with the united states? what is the point of the cyber meddling? what is his endgame? >> these are my views and not necessarily those of my
colleagues at the agency. i want to be clear about that. we have a range of views. i am very much struck that putin has grown and matured in his time in office. if you hear the millennial speech in 2000, this is a man who realized how weak russia was and that it needed to be more integrated in the world. it was a very interesting and fascinating document. it's burnt a lot of analysis. no we are seeing more of the kgb putin we knew from his early years. i think a little bit of what is going on is he is thinking about his legacy. the agitation in crimea, bringing back to russia what he also -- always believed was russia's. i think in his own view now, he
feels like he has done something that will mark his place in russian history. he would also like to be the man who restored russia's greatness. he definitely believes russia needs to be a strong competitive military power. it has gone on an upswing every year since 2000, and there have been huge jumps every year. this year, there is a public debate going on with finance ministry officials about having a cut in the next three years. overall, i see them taking a little bit about the future and his role in russian history. he is constantly talking about russian history. mr. sesno: had you see him looking at his future with united states and the west which has become nonproductive for him because of sanctions? mr. clement: i think he access the reality that there has to be some kind of relationship.
in syria, it was clearly about bucking up a, and russia needed to protect their interests in the region. i also think he forced the u.s. to come to the table and acknowledge him, essentially not just as an actor but an equal at the table. we cannot resolve syria without russia. mr. sesno: what about russian meddling in the baltic states and romania and other emerging but still unstable states of eastern europe? mr. clement: i think it has to do with their obsession with nato. the nato expansion, white as nato insist on moving further? the second part is the missile-defense peace. they think they need to be positioned to counter that.
mr. sesno: how worried should the world be about their military arsenal and steps they are taking? >> we have to acknowledge that russia is the primary power in the world it could destroy our city. a nuclear arsenal is important for putin. it is particularly important with the weakness that russia has. he is playing a we can't very well. -- weak hand very well. by that i mean that in terms of the economy, russia is a wasting asset. it is based primarily on exporting natural resources. if you look at the price of energy and the fundamental restructuring of the national
energy market, that is a personal view, will prices hovering between $40-$50 per barrel, it will probably not be going much over that. russia historically has needed $100 per barrel because it is their principal export, they need that to make their budget. sanctions plus the price pressure puts him under a great deal of pressure to probably move to austerity, and he will need additional power. mr. sesno: talk about the shape and origins of the chinese assertiveness. you talked about a moment ago, but there are so many different fascinating things happening. if putin is playing a weekend, the chinese are playing a strong hand.
>> but they are not playing it as well. mr. sesno: we are not going to talk about and we are playing. >> i don't carry a diplomatic passport anymore. mr. sesno: professors don't get them. mr. wilder: to go back to the construct of looking at the long-term, i once had a chinese professor say to me, mao said china has stood. the professor said he is lying. we were crawling in 1949. we were the fifth man in asia. the member that term? he said now, today, we are standing up. we are reaching our destiny. the last century is yours, the century is ours.
there is a chinese thinking that this is the inevitability of history. if you look at gdp, china will be the largest economy within a few decades. they will pass us at some point as the world greatest economy. gdp per capita is a different question, but overall gdp. right now, it is somewhat similar to putin, which is why i think you see them having common thinking, what they see is that we are trying to keep them from achieving this goal. they talk about containment all the time, and american say containment, we by your goods, how can we be containing you? they mean strategic containment. they believe that we want to create a revolution in china the weighted -- way that we did in, in their eyes, in ukraine.
they see as trying to keep taiwan out. pivot is the equivalent to the chinese of nato. it says to them we will put a lot more force in your area of the world because we don't trust you. we prefer our structure of the past in east asia. our close relationship with japan, south korea, with soucy -- southeast asians. one of the things that's interesting is the expansion in the south china sea occurs in the same year that putin takes crimea. mr. sesno: you see it as their crimea?
mr. wilder: it is an assertion yes. mr. sesno: how did they read the u.s. response? mr. wilder: i think they were disturbed. we effectively used the situation to bring the arts closer to us. china lost ground. people who would been there good friends like malaysia indonesia. these countries were confused by why china all of a sudden was being aggressive toward them. it sort of lays the chinese threat issue in a way -- i know the chinese diplomats were uncomfortable. but mystically, he got huge points for this. china -- but domestically, he got huge points for this. mr. sesno: china is also asserting itself economically
around the world in ways that russia has not. where they are spending money. mr. mclauglin: i don't know if dennis would agree with this but one of my themes is that we are in a competitive world. if you look at what china has done with the asian infrastructure, about 60 countries have joined. most of our allies. what they are beginning to do with their one belt, one road proposal connecting china with middle eastern europe, these
are big changes. it is a big transformation, ideas that rival anything the united states is come up with in terms of changing the dynamic. one point, what these two countries are doing now, there is broader meaning. they are essentially challenging what we consider the global order. there is a certain several that putin has broken in ukraine crimea, at least two treaties that we consider sacred. the chinese in the south china sea and east china sea are challenging vegetables we have relied on for maritime domains for global order. the global order that came out of world war ii. from the united states perspective, that is what is at issue. mr. sesno: some of what i was talking about with the incredible economic dominance that china is playing, takes superpower rivalries and takes it to a place we did not see when we had our last issue with this with the soviet union. what does that say? how do you view that rivalry
threat, relationship? mr. wilder: i remember in the bush administration, we were talking about how do we create a vertical line to central asia, how do we connected in a impactful way down to pakistan and the oceans? we experiment with it and really did not go anywhere. the chinese come in with this one belt, one road, and they said they are connecting everything. they have a huge ability of building railroad infrastructure. they're building what these countries desperately need. they have an overcapacity right now.
their industries are way overproducing for their domestic. mr. sesno: is that a rivalry with the united states? mr. wilder: it is a challenge, absolutely. they are challenging us. they are saying we are the new power and we will connect these other areas only will connect europe. they want to connect between shanghai and brussels. mr. sesno: a larger issue here. mr. mclauglin: it feels like the chinese are starting to tiptoe into the political realm, not quite taking global responsibilities but showing up in port visits. they have had a large peacekeeping -- >> the chinese the years, every time i met with them, they would say we are better because we do not
station our troops in foreign countries. that certainly has gone away as a talking point on the chinese side, and they are now the biggest contributor and peacekeeping force around the world. they are offering a great deal of money, and i would also say -- it is overlooked -- chinese enterprise. all of the investment around the world. alibaba. there is a new book out called "the house that jack built." allie obama -- alibaba is all over the world. jack moll has a vision -- jack ma has a vision of a global commerce. the idea being that there is no
borders for e-commerce anymore. these are big, visionary ideas you not here in the united states these days. mr. sesno: let me put this to you. how do great power rivalry's change when we move into the digital domain? when we moved into the jack ma's and cyber attacks and invisible transactions that happen in real time, instantaneously, globally? that is a different kind of power rivalry, isn't it? mr. wilder: china has the opportunity to reach people now in other parts of the world that it never had before. one of the things we will struggle with on the traits i
is what is the new trading order, what are the rules for data flow? there are a huge numbers of issues on the commerce i that we are only beginning to touch. mr. sesno: other panels will get into cyber business, but your take? mr. clement: i can't say a lot about the russians been particularly innovative, they are stocked in the -- stuck in the mono economy. if i look at what is going on in the future, and this is why i think putin is not necessarily the strongest guy and what i think he is concerned about the strength of his political position, the economy is a huge weakness. i am struck again, looking at the russian press, they are talking about increasing the retirement age because they have a budget crunch. they're going to move the
retirement age for men from 60 to 65, and women to 60. i'm thinking you will not have a big retirement plan. the point is, they are starting to count nickels and dimes. they're talking about cutting the defense budget, they recognize that they have a big problem, they are still suffering from sanctions. there is no idea of growth. there is a huge problem with corruption, stolen money and money that is going abroad. mr. mclauglin: with regard to china, the economic model is beginning to sputter. mr. wilder: we can overstate what is happening in china today.
one of the problems they have is the export led economy that was effective for them, south korea, japan. with the world financial crisis and slowing growth in the world, china has to move away from that model because there are not the markets there used to be. this markets are not going the way they were. the chinese, though, are reluctant to move too fast away from that because what comes next is hard. real reform of the chinese economy, moving upscale in the manufacturing area, and singin paying has an election next year.
this will be where he selects his public bureau standing committee. they need the chinese economy to be stable between now and then, but there are cracks showing. they have been running up debt because they have been doing very large stimulus packages. they have been successful, but they lead to the kind of overcapacity in things like steel and the rest of the work gets angry about it, and president obama had to talk about it when he went to china. the question is, can china make that leap? can they make the leap from the command economy and has today, the half command, half market, to a much more competitive economy? and that is an open question. mr. sesno: that also involves political dimension in that one party rule is based on command. economy does well. it is a social contract. i want to put this one to you
before we do that. we have always accused -- we are always accused of fighting the last war, think back and said looking forward. let's say wait a minute, maybe we are thinking wrong. in the 21st century, robbery and -- rivalry and threats will be completely different. is there something to that? what is the playing field? mr. mclauglin: i think there is something to that. the way it would summarize it is that the united states is still the most powerful country in the world, but the margins of our lead oare contracting. what that means in terms of policy is that the problems in the world cannot be sold without the united states, but the united states can no longer be solving them alone or be
dictating to others exactly how they get solved. so the premium in these coming years for united states, i think, as the leading power in the world, will be coalition building and aligns management. mr. sesno: when we think about terrorism and cyber terrorism and the chinese able to make big investments -- mr. mclauglin: i think our leadership is changing and it has to change. i've written a lot about u.s. power, and at the end of the day when you added up, all of the factors in power, the united states still comes out ahead in almost everything. innovation, demographics strength of our military. it is a different model that we will be faced with given that we are now working in a world that is a kind of allen's of power world was rivals that do not agree with us, but with whom we share important
interests, both russia and china. we look at our traditional partners in europe, for example, or we have always been able to turn and have a reliable -- someone has our back them up following us. we also have some central focal -- central focal pressures building. take the brexit, for example. you can drive straight line between the problems in syria and the brexit. immigration was a principal driver of brexit. if brexit stimulate similar movements in europe, and you start see the eu come apart, it
will be a very different world that the united states has dealt with for the last 80 years. a different leadership that is more agile, coalition building alliance management. we don't have a lot of practice about. mr. sesno: let me go to questions for each of you and then out to the audience for questions. i want each of you very briefly to name one or two flashpoints that you are looking to with concern, potential flashpoints looking to the future in this superpower rivalry or this great power rivalry we are talking about. mr. clement: for me, it would be ukraine. some people still wonder about putin's real agenda, is he intent on slicing off the east of ukraine, or is this part of a tactical -- mr. sesno: he is not done yet, you think. mr. clement: people debate this. we are watching it closely. it has an impact on the baltic
states and nato, and is energizing the alliance to recognize there may be a problem here and we can no longer take it for granted. mr. mclauglin: i think -- mr. wilder: i think north korea and how the chinese handle that. in our view, we would like to get rid of north korea, that is why it is hard to get the chinese on board with that concept. they still believe that is where we are going. north korea is going to have a nuclear tipped program soon. how do we deal with that problem? i think the next president has got to address it quickly. the second one is taiwan, which is that of the scope for a
while. they no longer have the independence party in power. the president has done a good job of being careful, but chinese patients -- patience can run out and i worry that they will want a new understanding of the taiwan question. mr. mclauglin: if i had to pick a couple, leaving aside terrorism, one would be an extension of what peter said that putin tempted to not move physically into one of the baltics, but to provoke some ukraine like uprising in the ethnic russian population, which would confront nato with a difficult circumstance. the second would be, not in the
headlines every day, but maybe the most dangerous spot in the world is the east china sea or south china sea, where i don't know how many times the japanese have scrambled aircraft the last year, i think it is close to 100 times. a miscalculation there, where we have at least 2-3 treaty allies, could confront the president with a very difficult situation. mr. sesno: let's move to your questions. i think we have a couple of microphone runners. if you have a question, there is one in the front row. let's start here. just ask your question. go ahead. >> question for you. we've heard a lot of chatter in the press about the russian hackers wanting to interview the election -- interfere with the election. how seriously do you take
it? mr. clement: that is the million-dollar question. it is one that i don't talk about publicly because there is an ongoing investigation. what i will say, i think clearly the russians have taken advantage of disclosures became out of these hacks. i think putin sees this as a way of trying to legitimize his own people, we are not different to anybody else, everybody dues -- does these things. mr. sesno: the cold war is over and the cyber war has begun. are these the opening salvos? mr. mclauglin: i think they are experimenting to see what they can get away with.
the whole problem with the cyber war talk is that it is like the talk in the 1950's. we did not know then what we would do with nuclear weapons or what would mean to the world, it took some years of negotiations to develop an arms control regime. we've not even begun to approach and understanding like that with cyber, and probably never we'll -- will, because it is not a uniquely state problem, you cannot get everyone's intent. we will have to feel our way forward. mr. sesno: there is a big difference between this and nuclear. this thing is subversive and invisible and meddling. to what end? what do they want to do with this?
mr. clement: i see it as an extension, if we are talking -- mr. mclauglin: i see it as an extension, if we are talking about russia, as an extension of what russia has always done. what the russians have always -- japan makes cars, we innovate things, the russians to operations like this. mr. mclauglin: this is what they do. they're very good at influence operations. what we now call gray war, hybrid war. that is not something that fits neatly into our deck of cards. and so i think they have a new tool to do what they have always done. if you go back and look at their activities during world war ii and their activities during the cold war, they did not have cyber, but they had a kind of attempt to interfere in politics of others.
mr. sesno: another question from the audience. one here. thank you very much. sorry for inconveniencing your seatmates. >> hi, i am a student, and i have an article here from nbc news and they say that the relationship between china, the u.s. and russia can be compared to the high levels of tension in the cold war times. do you think this is an accurate statement? mr. sesno: do you want to start, john? mr. mclauglin: it can be compared to the cold war times. people increasingly are talking
about the russia-u.s. relationship is starting to feel like a cold war relationship because we are going to a higher level of tension. the main thought i have when i read that sort of thing is that, again, thinking of the next president. one of the first questions we have to answer is where do we want this to end? what is our vision of where this ultimately ought to settle out? the cold war, there is a difference. in the cold war, we knew where
we wanted it to end. we did not necessarily want the breakup of the soviet union, in fact, 41 bush tried to prevent that. we certainly wanted to defeat the idea of a global communist system, which we did. i don't know that we have as clear a vision in this current confrontation with russia. where do we want this to end? what do we want that relationship ultimately to be in something other than an idealized vision that we can never realize? i think that is how i reacted that, and that would be the principal problem politically, policy wise for the next administration. mr. clement: i think there is an interesting parallel between the early 70's. the reason example eyesight -- i would site, when the russians annexed crimea, one of the first things putin did was turn to china, and very quickly director there were a series of deals. he was looking for market because you realize i have to plan ahead, maybe my european customers are not going to be there. i've got to maintain my position in this triangular relationship. he quickly turned to china. it was like the 1970's. mr. wilder: on the chinese side, i think there is important distinction. china wants nothing to do with the conflict with united states. they fought as in korea and vietnam. their future is not about a conflict or pressing the united states that hard.
with they want is for the united states to honor their sphere of influence. to back out of their sphere of influence from a political standpoint. but all the students that come here, we have 400,000 chinese students per year in american universities and graduate programs. mr. sesno: a lot of them right here. in our program. the chinese are very eager. this is something in the same context. the chinese have been voracious consumers of american expertise and knowledge, they want to come to our program to learn about media and believe it or not, the government
communicating with the public. mr. wilder: absolutely. mr. sesno: do you see that appetite diminishing? mr. wilder: no, and idea was put forward in the fourth industrial revolution. it is the cyber revolution. the chinese are interested in that idea. what did jack ma do the other day he bought a start up in kansas city. that company did retinal identification. he did that because he needs a system to make sure that the deals on alibaba are legitimate.
this is what the chinese are doing now. they're scanning the world for new ideas. mr. sesno: another question from the audience. someone on the aisle. we have a couple of minutes, if you could be brief. >> in regard to nato, you talked about the questions russia has about the enlargement of nato. can you discuss the question that russia must be thinking about, how it can try to influence nato, the european partners and nato, to try and we can the ties to go on between the united states and nato in a very changing world? mr. clement: great question.
think we see a very active russian program right now to try and sow discord in nato. a lot of europeans are asking themselves how committed are we? are we prepared to do what it takes at a time we have a migration crisis? i want to bring in the syria angle. one of the things that struck me, because the russians are faced with the sanctions, and i think over time they are beginning to bite more and more, how you get europeans off the stations train? you intervene in syria and find a way to and that war, and i think that is with the negotiations are about. then you take credit for helping to stem the tide of the migrants in europe. and then you say, look at what we've done for you. you need to work with us. this is a silly argument, we need to be reasonable, rational people.
and i totally by the sphere of influence argument. everyone needs to recognize that russia has certain prerogatives from a security perspective of having neighbors that they feel have conflicts with russian security needs. mr. sesno: anything, john? mr. mclauglin: i would just say that this discussion so far is making me feel even firmer in my initial comment that it is a conflict world and things are not as black and white as they might have seemed to be previously. we have to be careful not to demonize our adversaries, even though they are adversaries on some level. we have to understand them where they are coming from strengths and weaknesses, and construct our policy with a realistic appraisal of those things.
mr. sesno: that is a good call in this political atmosphere we are in, but demonizing enemies and functionally -- unfortunately goes with the territory. we have just a few minutes remaining, i would like to ask you all to conclude things this way. we pretty well decided here i think, that there are indeed power rivalries. that the premise has changed that the nature of the challenge -- powers has changed, whether it is terrorism or cyber attacks and the election meddling is a good example.
we have ample challenges. in thinking about the united states of america and its global responsibilities going forward, in thinking about moving from a bipolar world to a unipolar world, to a multipolar world, we talk about this alliance management that needs to adapt to this new superpower, great power rivalry. can all of the talk about how you think this needs to change going forward as we think about the future of these rivalries. mr. wilder: i pick up from john's point, it is a nuanced world. there are a lot of different subtleties. my concern on the china side is that we have not invested heavily enough in understanding the chinese position and the of not invested heavily enough in understanding our position. the presidents meet, but frankly, for short periods of time. i think there needs to be
somebody in the new administration, a cabinet member whose assignment is china, who the president relies on to build that relationship and start to understand the complexities of this in greater detail. to talk to the chinese about a new great power relationship and what that means. mr. sesno: just that way, a great power relationship. mr. wilder: where we going? we know one answer. mr. sesno: you think that would lead to things that have not happen for? mr. wilder: as long as it is on the stratospheric level and is private. i saw in the bush administration. we made tremendous progress. i think that would be my recommendation. mr. sesno: on the russian side?
mr. clement: i think there is an interesting debate i see a different quarters about how to deal with putin. he will be here a while, in my view. he wants reelection. he will be here until 2024, who knows after that. i think he is very much more the kgb putin we worried about originally. you have a choice to make. you try to engage this guy and see if there is an area of negotiation, and there are areas where we should. military spending. can russia afford to keep doing that? they might see benefits engaging in certain areas. are we prepared to continue to talk about things that are at the heart of the problem? missile defense. the other side of the debate is that this man is beyond redemption and there is no way we can negotiate, we need to take the long view, take the containment, chosen we will meet them every step of the way and see what happens over the
long term. that i think is an instant question for the new administration to consider. mr. sesno: john, you started this, i will ask you to finish. mr. mclauglin: a wise statesman once said that there are no permanent friends and enemies, only permanent interests. i think that is an important launching point for this point in history. what are the interests, how are they changing, and what are the interests of russia and china? make sure we understand that and then trying to harmonize these things in a way, i'm not talking about kumvybaya, but one where we realize what we want to achieve, what were -- what are our priorities, and move forward from that base. it has worked for centuries. understand the interests of
your rivals and negotiate on that basis. i think will be in better shape. clear eyed, real politique. mr. sesno: it has been a great discussion. it has remind us -- reminded us of the great powers are here to stay. it is also reminded us that there is a new dimension to explain this in some fashion to the public, social media. this cannot be the domain of professionals to figure out how this world works. we've got to engage and enlist public understanding of public support for this, because it is complicated and we are in for the long haul. we will see how that plays out. thank you very much.
>> at a campaign rally in florida hillary clinton talked about the economy and improving opportunities for people with disabilities. >> i am so happy to be back and i want to thank all of you to be here today at the center which does so much good work in the community. i want to acknowledge your mayor who was here earlier.
i want to thank paster wince, the chair of the orange county disability caucus, and everyone especially val demming. where is val? val i know got this crowd really whipped up. and i want you to stay whipped up for val. she is going to be a great member of congress for everything that we care about and are fighting for. i want to thank anas tashea for that introduction. didn't she do an amazing job? i first met her when she was nine years old. she raised her hand at a town hall and she said, my twin sister can't speak.
because of that they put her in a separate class apart from the rest of the kids. but she can communicate with a computer. and she's very smart and would do just as well as anyone else if the principal and teachers would just give her a chance. i was just blown away by this nine-year-old girl, her confidence and how much she loved her sister. so anas tashea and i have stayed in touch over the years. when she grew up, she became an intern in the senate. i was so proud of her speech at the democratic national convention in philadelphia.
i'm glad to be back with orlando. you've been through a lot this year. you've responded with grace. you've shown the world what orlando is made of. strength love, and kindness. this is something we could all use more of right now. i'm here today to talk about the economy but first i need to say something about something that took place over the past
few days. first, an unarmed man was shot and killed by a police office anywhere tulsa. then a man was shot and killed by a police officer in
charlotte. i'm sending condolences and prayers to their families. i know a lot of you are as well. there is still much we don't know about what happened in both incidents but we do know that we have two more names to add to a list of african americans killed by police officers in these encounters. it is unbearable. and it needs to become intolerable. we also saw the targeting of police officers in philadelphia
last week. and last night in charlotte 12 officers were injured in demonstrations following the death. every day police officers across our country are serving with extraordinary courage, honor, and skill. we saw that again this our country are weekend in new york, new jersey, minnesota. our police handled those
terrorist attacks exactly right, and they likely saved a lot of lives. i've spoken to many police chiefs and other law enforcement leaders who are as deeply concerned as i am and deeply committed as i am to reform. why? because they know it is essential for the safety of our communities and our officers. we are safer when communities respect the police and police respect communities. i have also been privileged to spend a lot of time with mothers who have lost children and young people who feel that as far as their country is concerned their lives seem
disposable. we have got to do better. and i know we can. and if i'm elected president we will. and we will do it exactly together which is the only way it can be done. look i know i don't have all the answers. i don't know anyone who does. but this is certain. too many people have lost their lives who shouldn't have. sabrina fulton has become a friend of mine. her son trayvon martin was killed not far from where we are today. sabrina says this is about saveling our children. and she is absolutely right. we need to come together, work together white, black, latino, asian, all of us to turn the tide, stop the violence, build the trust.
we need to give all of our kids, no matter who they are, the chance to grow up safe, healthy, in their communities and in our country. now, there are so many issues we need to take on together. and that is why we are here today -- because in just 48 days -- can you believe it? 48 days. americans will go to the polls and choose our next president. well i hope so. i want to stress that our campaign is about the fundamental beliefs that in
america every person, no matter what you look like, who you are, who you love, you should have the chance to go as far as your hard work and dreams will take you. and -- that is the basic bargain that made our country gread. and it is our job to make sure it's there for you and future generations. building an economy that works for everyone, not just those at the top, is the central challenge of our time. and i take it personally because i'm a proud product of the american middle class. my grandfather started working in a lace mill in scranton pennsylvania, when he was just a boy and worked there for 50 years. thanks to him, my dad was able to go to college and then start his own small business printing fabric for drape riss. and because of my dad and my mom, i could head out into the world and follow my dreams.
every american family should be able to write a similar story for themselves and their children. and history has shown us -- our history has shown us that the strongest growth in our economy is inclusive broad-based growth. when everyone can contribute to our prosperity and share in its rewards. now, here's just one example. the flood of women into the american workforce over the past several decades was responsible for more than $3.5 trillion in economic growth. but as women labor participation has slowed in recent years due in part to our failure to provide family-friendly policies like paid leave and affordable child
care. so our economic growth wasn't as strong as it could have been. women who want to work deserve to work. and whenever they are denied that opportunity, it's not fair to them. and we all lose out. in a competitive 21st century global economy we cannot afford to leave talent on the sidelines. when we leave people out or write them off we not only short-change them and their dreams. we short-change our country and our own futures. that's one reason why i care so much about supporting working parents. it's one reason why i'm such a strong supporter of comprehensive immigration reform -- because bringing millions of undocumented workers into the formal economy will decrease abuse and exploitation and it will increase our economic growth and our tax base.
it is estimated if we did this, despite what you hear from the other side, we would increase our gross domestic product by an estimated $700 billion in ten years. now, we need that. it is also one reason why we've got to break down barriers of systemic racism, including underinvestments that have held communities of color back for generations. that is part of building an inclusive economy, too. and it's why i believe we need to do more to help young people who are left behind in the wake of the great recession. find those strategies and opportunities that will get them moving ahead again. and we've got to help older americans who have been displaced by automation and outsourcing in our changing economy. and too often training and retraining doesn't work as it should. you don't have a four-year
degree, if you haven't really had the chance to upgrade your skills over the years it's hard to just make a course correction. we need to have apprenticeships and community college and technical programs starting in high school and moving all the way up to older workers. whether you're trying to start your career or you've spent decades contributing to our economy, you deserve better. now, these are some of the elements of my plan for an inclusive economy. i'm going to hold up the book tim kaine and i have put out because we have actually put in one place all of our plans. you see, we have this old-fashioned idea if we're asking you to support us, we should tell you what we're going to do. right?
and today i want to focus on one area that hasn't gotten enough attention. it concerns a group of americans who are too often invisible. overlooked. and undervalued. who have so much to offer but are given too few chances to prove it. now, that's been true for a long time, and we have to change it. i'm talking about people with disabilities. men and women, boys and girls who have talents skills, ideas, and dreams for themselves and their families just like anybody else. whether they can participate in our economy and lead rich, full lives that are as healthy and productive as possible is a
reflection on us as a country. and right now in too many ways we are falling short. we've got to face that and do better -- for everyone's sake. because this really does go to the heart of who we are as americans. i intend this to be a vital aspect of my presidency. i want to bring us together as a nation to recognize the humanity and support the potential of all of our people. and i want you to hear this, because this is not well-known. nearly one in five americans live with a disability. now, some of those disabilities are highly visible. some much harder to notice. if you don't think you u know someone with a disability, i promise you you do.
but their disability is just one part of who they are. across the country, people with disabilities are running businesses, teaching students, caring for our loved ones. they're holding public office, making break-through scientific discoveries, reporting the news and creating art that inspires and challenges us. they're veterans who service and sacrifice has protected our freedom and kept our country safe. they're working in the white house. just last year, a young woman named leah became the first west-wing receptionist who is deaf. so when world leaders come to the white house the person who greets them is leah. think of the message that sends about how our nation sees the talent in everyone.
and americans with disabilities are working on presidential campaigns. i know because several of my staff and advisers have disabilities and they are doing phenomenal work. i am grateful to them every single day. and people all over america would say the the same about their boss their colleagues, their employees, their family member with a disability. now, over the past few decades our country has taken leaps forward. not just in recognizing the humanity and dignity of people with disabilities but in making long overdue changes -- in our schools, work places, and communities drk so everyone can be part of our shared american life. even so, not that long ago if you had a disability, if you couldn't see couldn't walk live with dyslexia or muscular
dystrophy or some other health issues that one fact was allowed to define your entire life. because of that -- and that alone -- the world was closed to you. not all of it. not for everyone. but for most people. basic, essential thing that is others could do, you couldn't and never would. and that was sad. i saw this for myself as anas stashea said years ago when i was just starting out as a young lawyer working for the children's defense fund. one of my first assignments was to figure out why so many american kids weren't in school. we looked at census track numbers. ok how many people between 5 and 18 live in this track? then we look at school enrollment numbers and there would be a gap. where are the kids? why aren't they in school? i went door to door, along with
people across our country. i was in new bedford massachusetts. we saw a noteable disparity there. and i soon realized that part of the problem was kids were stuck at home because of disabilities. there were kids who were hard of hearing, kids with intellectual disabilities. i remember one little girl in a wheel chair who was smoort, curious, desperate to go to school. but that chair held hell her back. not all schools had ramps or accessible bathrooms. most teachers and aids weren't trained to help her. so she didn't get to go. it felt like the world had said to her sorry kid, your life just isn't going to be worth very much. and she and her family weren't rich. they weren't powerful. so what could they do about it? that little girl reminded me of another little girl -- my mother. she didn't face the same challenges but she too was blocked from a full and happy
childhood abandoned by her own parents, raised by grandparents who didn't want her, and ended up on her own when she was just 14 supporting herself as a housemade. but then something finally went her way. the woman she worked for encouraged her to finish high school. and that family showed my moth whear a happy family looked like. after many lonely years it was the start of a better life. the core lesson from her childhood was that none of us gets through life alone. we all have to look out for each other and lift each other up. and i remembered that sitting with that little girl in a wheelchair. my colleagues and i at the children's defense fund along with others gathered the facts and we built a coalition of activistings and families
across america. and together we helped convince congress to pass a ground-breaking law saying that children with disabilities have the same right to be educated in public schools just like any other kids. so we opened the doors to school and then some years later i was so excited when americans with disability act finally passed, 26 years ago. it was bipartisan. the notion that workplaces and public spaces belong to everyone was something democrats and republicans both supported. and, by the way, i'm proud that some of the democrats and republicans who passed that lark -- landmark bill are supporting the campaign because they know where my heart is on this.
as secretary of state i appointed the first ever special adviser for international disability rights because i wanted america to stand up for the rights and dignity of people with disabilities all over the world. and over the years i've spent a lot of time working for kids with disabilities. in addition to anastasia who spoke at the convention, another young man, ryan moore, also spoke there. i first met ryan when he was seven years old. i was fighting for health care reform. he was born with a rare form of dwarfism but he never let that stop him. he's had so many surgeries, we've lost count of them. but his family was always there for him and he was the advocate for himself as he got older. now he's a college graduate working in the technology department of his local school
district. and he's just one of the most optimistic people you will ever meet. listening to ryan and anastasia tell their stories at the convention this july made me think about all the people who never got the chance, never got the chance to get the education, let alone go to college, become forces for change. and i thought about all the mothers and fathers across america who love their children more than anything and want so badly for them to have every opportunity that they deserve to have in america. i'll never forget something that the acter christopher reeve said. some of you may be too young to know who he was. he was a huge star. he played superman. he was unbelieveably good looking. he and his wonderful wife were friends of mine. then he was paralyzed in a
horse-riding accident. he once said he had been thinking about a phrase that comes up a lot in our politics. family values. since my accident, he said i've found a definition that seems to make sense. i think it means that we're all family and we all have value. i couldn't agree more. we've come a long way since the fall of 1973 when i was going door to door talking to kids and families. but make no mistake, we still have a lot more work to do. we can't be satisfied. not when over 60% of adults with disabilities aren't in the workforce. not when businesses are allowed to pay employees with disabilities a subminimum wage. not when people with physical
and intellectual disabilities are still subjected to stigma and discrimination every single day. we've got to build an inclusive economy that welcomes people with disabilities, values their work treats them with respect. now, one advocate after another has told me the same thing. we don't want pity. we want paychecks. we want the chance to contribute. and as president i'm going to give them that chance. first, we're going to focus on jobs and incomes. i'm going to fight to give more americans with disabilities the chance to work alongside those without disabilities, and do the same jobs for the same pay and benefits. people with disabilities shouldn't be isolated. they should be given the chance to work with everyone else. and we're going to eliminate the sub minimum wage, which is a vestage from an ugly,
ignorant past. good work deserves fair pay no matter who you are. second, we're going to work with our colleges and universities to make them more accessible to students with disabilities. to have a truly inclusive economy we need a truly inclusive education system. so let's raise our standards. for too long accessibility has been an afterthought. let's make it a priority. in our curriculums our classrooms, and the technology our students use. it's like what anastasia said about her sister. she can communicate through a computer. then let's make sure students who have the ability to do so have the opportunity to do so. then we'll make sure those with a disability can get hired and stayed hard. we'll launch a new program
called autism works to help people with autism succeed in the workplace. fourth, let's build on the success of the americans with disabilities act by finally ratifying the united nation clsvention on the rights of persons with disabilities. it has the strong backing of leaders across the political spectrum and it's a chance to show american values and american leadership. and i have to tell you, ever since i was first lady i've had the great privilege of traveling the world on behalf of our country. when i was secretary of state i went to 112 coufrpbltrizz. and one of the things i have noticed is how far behind many countries are in how they treat people with disabilities. very often, people with disabilities from the time they are babies anded to lers are
locked away. basically forgotten. i want us, since we have been the leader in this area to get that ratified and then to demonstrate to other countries what we have done and are doing to give dignity and opportunity to people with disabilities. now, these ideas are just the start. we're working with advocates to come up with even more. if you've got an idea we want to hear it. go to hillary clinton.com and leave your ideas because we are welcoming this debate. this issue is very close to my heart. i've always believed that the ultimate test of our society is more than the size of our economy or the strength of our military. it's how we treat our fellow human beings especially the most vulnerable among us. and on this front especially i intend for my presidency to
move our country forward. together we will make our economy and our country more welcoming for people with disabilities because we all win when everyone gets to share in the american dreams. now, if you want some proof, let me tell you this story. it's story of a woman named friah david. now some may have read about her in the boston globe. i've carried a copy of that article around with me because i've loved it so much. she has do you know's syndrome. when she was -- down's syndrome. when she was 21 she got her first job at the local mcdonald's. her mother was a little worried as any mother would be. she wondered would she be able to handle being independent could she handle the job? would she even pass the six-month training program?
not everyone in her class passed. but friah did. and then she excelled at that job for 32 years. her colleagues loved her. and she loved them. the restaurant became such a home to her that she would bring her family there on off days just to hang out. earlier this year, friah began to show signs of early onset dementia. she knew she had to stop working but 32 years is a pretty good run. it broke her heart. one thing that made it a little better was the whole staff threw a party in her honor. nearly 100 people showed up. customers, colleagues, and friends from over the years. the party lasted three hours. and at one point one of friah's
former managers asked for everyone's attention. he turned to her and said, we love you. we appreciate you. we respect you. and we are all better people for having you in our lives. my friends, after years of hard work and treating people right isn't that what we all want to hear? isn't that america at our best? we don't thrive on tearing each other apart or separating ourselves. we know we are stronger together. we believe in equality and dignity for all. and when we fall short we strive to do better. not to blame and scapegoat. but to improve ourselves, to move toward becoming that more perfect union that our founders hoped for. this election is a chance for us to move still closer to that goal.
to make sure everyone can contribute to a growing and prossperg america. to say loudly and clearing in this country no one's worthless. no one's less than. we're all of value. in the united states of america, the greatest country in the world we believe everyone is created equal. and you know what else we believe? we all believe love trumps hated. thank you all.
w. bush and mrs. laura bush, chief justice john roberts congressman john lewis. watch the opening ceremony for the museum live saturday morning at 10:00 a.m. eastern. >> both bush and obama to some extent were prisoners of the situations that they didn't create. on the other hand, they both were willing participants in sort of the existing budget game. >> this sunday night on q&a. author and "washington post" come umist talks about his columns on business and economic issues and the economic performance under president obama. >> my opinion is not so high because he pursued policies that essentially were aimed at
but ressing his reputation and his legacy and it seems to me undermine general confidence in the economy. >> sunday night on c-span's q&a. >> c-span continues on the road to the white house. >> we all want to get back to making america strong and great again. >> i am running for everyone working hard to support their families. everyone who has been knocked down but gets back up. >> ahead, life coverage of the presidential and vipetial debates. monday september 26 is the first presidential debate live from hoffstra university in new york. then on tuesday, october 4 vipetial candidates governor mike pence and senator tim kaine debate.
and on sunday october 9 washington university and st. louis host the second presidential debate. leading up to the third and final debate between hillary clinton and donald trump taking place at the university of nevada, las vegas, on october 19. live coverage of the presidential and vice presidential debate on c-span. listen or watch live on demand. >> the front page headline in today's "washington post" also available on line at "washington post".com donald trump used charities money to settle his legal disputes. the reporting of this story joining us from the post news room. >> the i.r.s. rules say that if
you're the president of the charity you can't use the money to buy things for yourself or benefit your businesses. it's totally against the law. we've found a number of cases where it appears trump did just that. either to pay off money that his businesses owed or to buy things to decorate the hallways of his clubs or house. >> the latest in a series of stories you have been working on. i know you sent donald trump some questions so far no answer bus what are some of the questions still unanswered? >> well, the biggest question for me is whether trump has actually given any of his own money to charity since 2008. 2008 is the last time we can see that he gave money to the trump foundation. the foundation is named after him. as far asics tell, to anybody else. he claims he's given millions away but i've found almost no gifts since 2009. >> how much time has donald
trump typically spent on his foundation? >> it's a good question. every year in his irs filings he has to tell the i.r.s. how much time he spends. so for nine years he told the i.r.s. that he worked an average of zero hours per week. i don't know how that's possible. but an average of zero hours per week. in the last filing in 2014 that he said one half hour per week. >> first the case of martin greenberg back in 2010. what was this about? >> martin greenberg was a player at a charity golf tournament that took place in new york state. and that charity golf tournament had a $1 million prize. if you hit a hole in one you win $1 million. he hits a hole in one. everybody goes crazy. he gets his picture taken. he goes to the clubhouse and while he's celebrating they pull him out and say you won
nothing because the rules of the hole in one contest say that the ball has to travel 150 yards from the tee to the hole or else it doesn't count. if it's less the prize isn't good. it turned out that trump's people had set up the golf course that it was always going to be too short. so when he made that shot, he won nothing. he sued the golf course. there's a legal settlement in which they agree that they're going to pay some money to charity as a way of settling the lawsuit. but what you can tell from tax records is that his foundation received nothing from the golf course, the party to the law suit. instead they got a $158,000 donation. so it appears that the charity paid a settlement that the golf course was supposed to pay. >> perhaps more significantly, front page of the post is a check, $100,000 to fisher house but there's a story behind this
check. what is it? >> so trump has a resort, a club in palm beach florida and in 2006 he puts up a giant american flag on a giant flag pole. it was a great publicity stunt but it was against the town rules. so after a lot of fighting he ends up with $120,000 of unpaid fines against this club. so they go to court. there's a settlement. the agree is the town will waive the $120,000 of unpaid fines but trump's club has to make a $100,000 donation to fisher house. so what happens is that the town does do its part. it waives the fines. but trump's golf course actually paid nothing. instead the donald j. trump foundation pays the $100,000. the club had an obligation the charity paid off. host: today the port rate of
donald trump. what is this all about? >> there's two. we found two cases in which trump at charity auctions bought large pibturs of his own face, one for $20 and one for $10,000. now, that under the i.r.s. rules means that if the charity pay force those items the charity owns them and they must be used for charitable purposes. he was welcomed to put them up in his house but he had to use his own money. he used the charity funds. so the question is where did they go? one painting is still missing, the six-foot tall. but one we found hanging on the wall of the bar of his golf resort outside miami. so unless they run a soup kitchen in that bar in the off hours that is not a proper use of something bought by charity. >> we are a couple days away from the first debate.
a lot of questions about the clinton foundation that will likely come up. now questions about the trump foundation. does one negate the other? >> they're really very different. they're so different in sort of the moral understanding of both. clinton's foundation is a really big foundation. it employs more than 200,000 people has a budget of $250 million a year, does real work. but the question for clinton is about sort of the moral responsibility of power. she had a lot of power in the government. did she misuse that power to give access or favors to donors? so people shouldn't think about the foundation itself is as suspect. the work it does is true. in the case of trump foundation it's much smaller. it doesn't employ anybody doesn't do any charitable work just passes money on. the question is about the moral responsibility of wealth. he's also over the years made a
big deal of how fill an thropic he is. but from what we can tell he doesn't seem to give any of his own wealth. in general he has other people pay instead of him. >> he's made that reference opm, other people's money. >> this year he promised $1 million to veterans in a iowa. but before that i can't find any evidence that he was using anything other than other people's money to pay off charitable obble congratulations. >> looking into the donald j. trump foundation. the story is available on line. thank you for being with us. >> thank you. >> donald trump and his running mate mike pence talked to religious leaders in ohio yesterday. he discussed his plans to improve inner cities and commented on the recent police shooting of an unarmed man in
tulsa, oklahoma. this is an hour. >> i'm mike pence. i'm the governor of indiana. and it's my honor -- [applause] and i was deeply humbled just a few short months ago with my wife karen at my side to accept this man's invitation to run and serve as the next vice president of the united states of america. and we are grateful for the opportunity. the introduction i prefer michael was kind but the introduction i prefer is a little bit shorter. i'm a christian a conservative
and a republican in that order. and i stand before you today with a firm belief that should we be given this great opportunity, should this good man be elected to the highest office in the land in 47 days i know that he believes and i believe that the pull piths that you stand at have greater capacity to strengthen and unite this nation than any pulpit that we will ever stand. so let me begin by thanking each one of you for the ministries you have in this state and in this nation and the way you pour your lives and your faith into people all across this great state. thank you so much for your leadership.
i stand before yeah today as a republican but i actually began in politics as a democrat. i was deeply inspired by the example of two men in particular. president john f. kennedy and the reverend dr. martin luther king jr. they still inspire me. and dr. king's life and his example and his sacrifice and his eloquence transformed the nation. but i'm one of the people that remembers that he was first and foremost a man of faith. he was a workman approved rightly able to handle the word of truth. and with that word he challenged the conscience of a nation and drove us toward a more perfect union. and that's been the role of faith throughout our history. and as we go into this
campaign, i will tell you, we are deeply committed as you will hear donald trump reflect today, to ensuring that the voice of faith in america is free again to speak into the life of this nation. he will describe those policies. but a commitment to, as he has already described in that great speech in detroit torks a new civil rights agenda of safer communities, of economic opportunities and jobs. and making it possible for parents to choose where the their children go to school, whether public or private regardless of their income of their area. school choice will be at the center of this administration's agenda. i've gotten to know this good man. i haven't known him nearly as long as michael cohen has -- or paster cohen has. but i've seen in him a heart
for the american people. an impatience for leaders and policies that fail to open the doorway to the american dream for all of our people. and i can assure you, this is a man of faith. he has faith in the boundless potential of every american with a good education and a good start in life to achieve their dreams, regardless of race or creed or color or gender. and he's also a man raised on a foundation of faith in his life. it's something that we shared early on. and in these challenging times, i can assure you, donald trump is a man who knows that there will always be more in these united states than -- unites us
than will ever divide us.chief among those things is faith that we have and ever shall be one nation under god indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. and also we both know and believe in these challenging times with heartbreaking headlines and division that what has been true for millennia is still true today. that if his people who are called by his family, who have humbled themselves and pray, he will again hear from heaven and he will heal our land. [applause]