fort washington, that's right. it was commanded by captain dyson, a young man, and he held a conference with his people, and they said, i think we'd better surrender. we better leave the fort. so with the utter shock being fired, they retreated from the fort, left it to the british. the british couldn't believe the good luck. they just couldn't understand this. they thought it was a trick, but they destroyed the fort. naturally, and at a moment when the flag should have been flying, it was in the darkness as the judge advocate general later said in the court marshal. dyson was convicted, kicked out of the military, and they didn't want anybody of that caliber. he said, what's the point of flying a flag if we're going to be overtaken anyway? it was the worst kind of commander that you wanted to turn out, and they took the fort and nothing between them in al exandrea and virginia. they sailed upstream, and they laid siege to alexandria. nour, just about everybody, alexandria had been called up and gone to other place

perhaps the solitary block on george washington's character, in fact, washington, d.c. was one of the greatest evils the people of the united states suffered. it should be destroyed and annihilated. [ laughter ] that's all from the house debate. members of both sides of the issue indicated their awareness that the decision to come south to the potomac had been a matter of barter. a north carolina representative threatened that if the removal bill passed the house, he would immediately call for the repeal of the 1790 funding act. after a week of consideration, a motion to continue debate failed 51-35. on august 24th, 1814, british general robert ross burned several buildings in washington. [ laughter ] americans at the time, and as pointed out this morning, british after the fact considered it retaliation for the american burning of government buildings at york, canada. perhaps only one government building and perhaps not the american army after all. this provided the burning of the public buildings provided opponents of the location with an opportunity to argue for remo

washington." and you will also notice this evening that there are c-span cameras around. v broadcasting those of you who are watching on c-span will be no stranger to anthony pitch. many of his lectures and programs have been broadcast for them before. we're lucky to have him tonight. ladies and gentlemen, mr. anthony pitch. n÷ >> thank you veepjz much for coming. just put that down. it's raining outside and so i'm very flad to see a lot of people here tonight. i want to tell you that a few years ago i escorted somebody into the white house, and his name was major ed ross, the same name major general robert ross who burnt the white house. he was a descendant. and he wanted to see the scorch marks that i told him were there. they are under the front door and there's a big stone archway where you can see massive scorch marks from the fires set by the british in 1814. and#@ñ the pastry chef who has offices close by couldn't stop giggling. he thought here's a man who's come to finish the job. i li

more than jefferson, more than washington? adams. this apparent contemptment was certainly not due to want of grievances, the internal taxes pushed hard upon the people. but no portion of the country seemed pleased that a fourth virginian should be made president. and here is the real reason why madison is someone other than that flat nerdy caricature of popular history. that hopy changy thing we associate with president monroe and the era of good feelings, that cascaded from his nearly unanimous election in 1816, it was generated by his predecessor, little gemmy madison. a political revolutionary, life long student of government, forth coming, open minded, honorable, who lived to enlarge the boundaries of human knowledge, no less than any of his more storied contemporarcon. hail frodonia. thank you. [ applause ] >> the obligatory q&a begins. we'll just take a little bit of time for this because i know everybody wants to get to the refreshments. [ inaudible ] -- >> -- between madison about nullification. there are those that say madi

why can't washington do better? >> i think washington doesn't do better by them because washington isn't trying to do better by them. if you look at washington as a whole, i think this is the fundamental problem in our system right now. washington works for those who can hire armies of lobbyists, armies of lawyers, and get just the rules they want. it doesn't work for families. raise the minimum wage. nobody should work full time and still live inpoverty. minimum wage nationally hasn't been raised in over seven years. we need to make sure we have real rules on equal pay to equal work. we need to lower the interest rate on student loans. in every case, we, in the united states senate, have a majority. all of the democrats have voted in favor of this. occasionally, we even pick up a republican. the republicans have filibustered in the senate. they won't even bring things to a vote in the house of representatives. this is really a case where one party has said the usual rules of governing, you know, we'll come together

washington. well we have a history of doing that i mean the government we saw that pre two thousand and three with saddam hussein and iraq saying he had weapons of mass destruction he didn't we invaded anyway and now all of the rest of the world wonders about our credibility however we had an attack on nine eleven thirteen years ago that killed more than three thousand people and nobody wants to be the person in charge in a government who turns a blind eye to something like that rules out a potential threat and then comes to regret it later so certainly politically the pressure is on to always take these things seriously and then if they turn out not to be so bad to dial it back this may not be a case where we can dial it back if we keep stepping up the military action ok that's interesting joseph if i go to you in london but i mean i suppose if you could just get the chicken or the egg here of course no politician wants to be held responsible for not being vigilant enough here but if you continu

indeed, the years that she reigned over washington. it was not dolley madison as a hostess or a conciliator of political factions or as the arbiter of fashion. it was dolley madison as the

retaliation did not bring the british to washington. this gentleman, admiral george co burning brought the british to washington. he was a really one of the most remarkable figures in all of the war of 1812. as andrew lambert mentioned yesterday, he was a protoge of nelson. he got his start in 1793, just when revolutionary france declared war on great britain. and he would rise high during the two decades of war that followed. and early in his career he was assigned to a squadron where his -- he was commanded by young captain named horatio nelson who took a great liking to coburn. "zeal and courage" which are conspicuous. at age 24, coburn served as a senior captain in nelson's squadron and nelson actually trusts him with command in his absence telling him that, quote, we're so -- we think so exactly alike on points of service that if your mind tells you it is right, there can hardly be a doubt, but i must approve. so in 1812, at the relatively young age of 40, coburn reaches flag rank. and the admiralty in london, looking for a new ass

he devotes washington from that says, i and washington know, i cannot come to all of you. but if you could come to me. stoic man. a this is the leader, the father of our country. be tears on ims to that evening. atthis -- that happened here this at fraunces tavern that you done today and it's set up as it would have been in the colonial times. the room at o rent fraunces tavern at private have tallies of what was served. if you had a party of 10, there bottles of rum, beer.n number bottles of you paid for your candlesticks and the playing cards. also what they served would have oysters. they claim in the hudson river t the time in the 1700s, the oysters were a foot long. hese are roast beef-sized oysters, pewter ware from china. public education so not everyone could read or count numbers, so they would use playing cards with symbols. everybody knew this was four because this was four hearts. have number four, it would have four hearts. if you were these a jeptleman in the 1770s. after he sold the tavern, in the 1800s, it had many owners and anagers, a boarding house, a gr

bowling, george washington university history professor and author of "the "reation of washington, d.c. he spoke about the debate and compromise of the location of the capital at a symposium marking the 200th anniversary of the burning of the capital in the war of 1812. this is about 30 minutes. >> the first speaker this afternoon is kenneth r. bowling. kenneth received his phd from the university of wisconsin. -- specialty is the creation is all about the creation of the federal government during the revolution. he has been active and interested in researching the location of the seat of government. he has been the author of many books and articles. throughout most of his professional life, he has been the co-editor of the documentary of the history of the first congress. classicis books is a now, published back 1991. ow, that's the creation of washington, d.c., which is published back in 1991. if anybody wants to know about behind the scenes and proceedings and meetings and all the things that went on in terms of the location of national capital, this book is a must read. i'd like yo

in washington. if the army came under counter attack, then having the royal navy squadron coming up the potomac would relieve pressure on them and perhaps they could carry out some of the army forces down the potomac if they were to get trapped at washington. beyond that, there were some important targets still up river from where they stood. primarily, this included the city of alexandria, which was then -- although in virginia, in the state of virginia, it was then part of the land making up the district of columbia. this was a very wealthy port on the potomac. and they also could pose a threat to other targets in washington that hadn't been taken by the british army. though they don't know this at this point. georgetown had been left alone by the british and there's an important foundry that makes weapons for the u.s. navy that is still sitting untouched. in any event, they were proceeding up river when they're hit by the huge storm. the remarkable storm that comes through washington on august 25

washington, even the british on their ships called it ft. washington. so my question is, how prevalent is the use of the white house? >> it's not prevalent. i only know of three instances. but it's the point -- the point is it was known as the white house before. >> sure. >> and it really didn't become popularized, as you know, until much later, until the 1930s. >> us ba the real white house was down on the potomac. >> okay. i think we're going to cut so we have enough time to have lunch. thank you all very much. [ applause ] >> to all the presenters from today and yesterday, if you will meet with leslie in the back -- oh, right over here. and finally, we've heard a lot about benjamin henry latrobe, let me as a teaser read this short quote, something he wrote less than two years after the burning. "a greater benefit could not have accrued to this city than the destruction of its principle buildings by the british." well, we'll find out this afternoon why he said that and be back in your seats by 1:15. thank you. >>> live coverage here on c-span 3, confe

he was talking about the washington team. the washington team. and then midway through the fourth quarter, a slip up. >> couple things that we even talked about the start. can the redskins, can their washington offensive line hang in there? >> okay, so he accidentally called them the washington redskins and he changed it. he says, phil sims does, he's not taking sides on whether the club should change its nickname, but he was sensitive to complaints. jim nance, also in the booth with him, said it's not my job to take a stand. so he kept referring to the team as the washington redskins, which is the name of the team. >> you don't have a problem for your entire life, but now you have a problem because others have a problem with it. dan on facebook says this: it is the choice of whether or not to use that, what many people deem to be a racial slur. if he can call the game saying washington, it's up to him. he has no problem. >> from andy, phil sims needs to take his pc world to another venue. maybe he can cover the 2016 democratic convention. >>> sh

when the british occupied washington. it's interesting he chose the title, "the burning of washington." if you look at the right hand side, this is a book not as well known, but also an excellent book by carol and it was published in 2005. the title of it is "august 24, 1814: washington in flames." you can stee burning of the white house. well, there's other books as well and i can't go into all of them or we'd be here all morning. it's interesting if you go to andy tully's book, "when they burned the white house," that was published in 1961. and then "the man who burned the white house" which is essentially a biography of george coburn, who we have already heard a lot during this particular symposium and this was 1987. here are two books where they don't talk about the burning of washington in the title. they talk about the burning of the white house. just in case you haven't had enough of that, there's the most recent book by peter snow, when britain burned the white house. all of these books are great but the question

and washington. this was a fort that george washington, who lives across the river had urged be built, it's at this strategic point of the piscataway creek and the pa tomorrow augustd2xx river. the fort is built here in the early 1800s isn't that works, platforms up there on the high ground, but this -- because of the channel coming so close to the shore line here those guns from that height would have an enormous effect on any ships trying to sailhs by. it could have been a much stronger position if the u.s. government hadzrjy done more t fortify it, recommendations had been made that the fort be rebuilt into a stronger, more affected position, that hadn't been done. even so, it's an obstacle that british officers estimated it would cost them at least 50 men would try to take. it would cause some damage to some of these valuable ships if there had been a fight here. and the british, gordon and his men were expecting to have a real fight on their hands to get by this port they had just lobbed the fi

railroads came to washington in his time. hotels became numerous in the town had many visitors on business. political business, mostly. this trend would continue through time calling for a different requirement to suit different political circumstances and philosophical ideas. the white house never lost its association with president washington, but moved beyond that, gaining greater fame and respect and legend when madison pulled it back from ruin and monroe emphasized it with his grandeur. as time passed, the building's symbolism gained a less abstract presence and more substance through the lives of those who lived there by the succession of presidents. each with his own story, each with his own achievements and occasionally failures. it was increasingly seen that a president lived his life as president entirely in that symbolic place. and became a part of his history, as well as that of the house. all presidents that have to ask themselves what do i do about the white house? even doing nothing to it is subject to interpre

he should have burnt washington. he got in trouble for not burning washington. admiral cochran was exceptionally greedy. not only did he hope to get a ransom for burning washington, humiliated if it surrendered. cochran petitioned for ransom in lieu of burning the public buildings. in other words, you know, the money we should have got from washington give it to us and the british government said no. >> thank you. question? right up here. >> i have a question for peter snow because i know you do a lof of tactical analysis of battlefields. we talked about america militia and that failure of the militia but is it more of a failure of the american command, you know, particularly looking at the final stages here where winder orders that withdrawal of the third line and without a rallying point and then we have barney continuing to hold an artillery against infantry is usually a massacre. so if we hadn't had that left flank breaking would this not necessarily have been such a defeat that it was? >> two things about that. first thing is in9g6u fairness winder, to be f

when the british occupied washington. it's interesting he chose the title, "the burning of washington." if you look at the right hand side, this is a book not as well known, but also an excellent book by carol and it was published in 2005. the title of it is "august 24, 1814: washington in flames." you can stee burning of the white house. well, there's other books as well and i can't go into all of them or we'd be here all morning. it's interesting if you go to andy tully's book, "when they burned the white house," that was published in 1961. and then "the man who burned the white house" which is essentially a biography of george coburn, who we have already heard a lot during this particular symposium and this was 1987. here are two books where they don't talk about the burning of washington in the title. they talk about the burning of the white house. just in case you haven't had enough of that, there's the most recent book by peter snow, when britain burned the white house. all of these books are great but the question

retaliation did not bring the british to washington. this gentleman, admiral george co burning brought the british to washington. he was a really one of the most remarkable figures in all of the war of 1812. as andrew lambert mentioned yesterday, he was a protoge of nelson. he got his start in 1793, just when revolutionary france declared war on great britain. and he would rise high during the two decades of war that followed. and early in his career he was assigned to a squadron where his -- he was commanded by young captain named horatio nelson who took a great liking to coburn. "zeal and courage" which are conspicuous. at age 24, coburn served as a senior captain in nelson's squadron and nelson actually trusts him with command in his absence telling him that, quote, we're so -- we think so exactly alike on points of service that if your mind tells you it is right, there can hardly be a doubt, but i must approve. so in 1812, at the relatively young age of 40, coburn reaches flag rank. and the admiralty in london, looking for a new ass

perhaps the solitary block on george washington's character, in fact, washington, d.c. was one of the greatest evils the people of the united states suffered. it should be destroyed and annihilated. that's all from the house debate. members of both side indicated their awareness that the decision to come south to the potomac had been a matter of barter. a north carolina representative threatened that if the removal bill passed the house, he would immediately call for the repeal of 1790 funding act. after a week of consideration, a motion to continue debate failed 5 1-35. on august 24th, 1814, british general robert ross burned several buildings in washington. americans at the time, and as pointed out this morning, british after the fact considered it retaliation for the american burning of government buildings at york, canada. perhaps only one government building and perhaps not the american army after all. this provided the burning of the public buildings provided opponents of the location with an opportunity to argue for removal without having to did he mean the city.

>> fort washington. >> fort washington, that's right. and it was commanded by captain samuel dyson, a young man, and he held a conference with some of his people. and they said, i think we'd better surrender. we had better leave the fort. so without a shot being fired, they retreated from the fort. they left it to the british. the british couldn't believe the good luck. they just couldn't understand this. they thought it was a trick, but they destroyed the fort. naturally, and at a moment when the flag should have been flying, it was fold up in the darkness as the judge advocate general later said in a court marshal. dyson was convicted, kicked out of the military, and they didn't want anybody of that caliber. he said, what's the point of flying a flag if we're going to be overtaken anyway? it was the worst kind of commander that you wanted to turn out, and so the british took the fort and there was nothing between them and alexandria in virginia. so they sailed upstream, and they laid siege to alexandria. now, just about everybody from

he should have burnt washington. he got in trouble for not burning washington. admiral cochran was exceptionally greedy. not only did he hope to get a ransom for burning washington, humiliated if it surrendered. cochran petitioned for ransom in lieu of burning the public buildings. in other words, you know, the money we should have got from washington give it to us and the british government said no. >> thank you. question? right up here. >> i have a question for peter snow because i know you do a lof of tactical analysis of battlefields. we talked about america militia and that failure of the militia but is it more of a failure of the american command, you know, particularly looking at the final stages here where winder orders that withdrawal of the third line and without a rallying point and then we have barney continuing to hold an artillery against infantry is usually a massacre. so if we hadn't had that left flank breaking would this not necessarily have been such a defeat that it was? >> two things about that. first thing is in9g6u fairness winder, to be f

indeed, the years that she reigned over washington. it was not dolley madison as a hostess or political factions or as the arby tor of tags. it was dolley madison as the hero of 1812. in 1834, we have now skipped 20 years. in 1834, she finally got her chance to prevent her interpretation of events. the occasion for this was that she received a request from margaret smith, the wife of the editor of the national intelligencer and also writer and novelest, to supply smith for material for a bigraphical sketch of mrs. madison for the third volume of the portrait gallery for distinguished americans. dolley seems to be ambivalent. she sent smith little about her origins and of that, some was intentionally incorrect. she was concerned about her privacy and that of her husband and she instructed her niece, mary cuts, not to give smith, quote, anything of importance in my own eyes. dolley stalled, leaving smith largely to write from her own memory. but in one particular matter, dolley mailed margaret smith a letter. the letter she told smith sh

even washington. of course, he never lived there. it comes to us like a stage production with its characters, its ups, downs, few joys, amazing triumphs, many tragedies and sudden -- sad end. lincoln seems to have had no particular interest in the white house but respected its history. two times he referred to it as this damned old house, revealing it was an expensive headache. and then this big white house once when he expressed his respect for it among some young soldiers, symbolically as a house to which in american might appear to live. it was lincoln's residency there that intensified the symbolic house and gave it power it had never had before that protected it from the ambitious and indelible victorians who followed. actually, i think there might be no white house today symbol or not in lincoln's melodrama had not played out there. building experts lay in wait. the corps of army engineers suddenly eager to please the president with a new house stepped forth as the enemy of the whole white house and they would carry that great

who needs washington? dysfunction left congress with all-time low approval ratings, the president not far behind. away from washington, american cities are growing and revitalizing rapidly under the leadership of some dynamic mayors. my colleague kevin tibbles now on how many cities have put p t partisanship aside to put people over politics. >> reporter: there are cities across this nation pulling themselves from the depths of desperate economic times. by rolling up their sleeves and going it on their own with little of washington's help or dysfunction. from houston and its rebuild houston plant, 200 projects to improve quality of life with quarter billion of mostly taxpayer dollars. to seattle, which voted to raise the minimum wage and detroit where private money is revitalizing a moribund motor city. in oklahoma city, what used to look like this now looks like this. all designed to jump-start city economies. scenes us bureau figures now show many urban populations are on the rebound. >> how desperate wa

it was not that far from the washington navy yard, and in order to get into washington from more direct approach, the british would have to cross the river at this bridge, and the american commanders had set up r bridge ready to blow it when the british approached. ross opted tontwç;vq÷ cross the couple miles up river from where we are now. and august 24th at noon after%se sends forces across the river, first ones cross on the bridge which the americans neglected to blow in the chaos and confusion of the moment, and led by colonel william thornton, one of the brigade commanders, they hit the maryland militia head on, quickly were able to envelope the americans, get around them, and force the militia to retreat pretty quickly. the militia retreated to a second line of defense, and the british kept oncoming. they also had concrete rockets, a relatively new weapon at the time. coburn used them with quite a bit of effectiveness in the campaign, but most of the american militia troops had not seen them before, and these rockets were notoriously difficult to aim, but they were really weapon

anna payne cuts was also in washington. she wrote a quick message. it was undated but probably also composed on august 24th and her tone was frantic. quote, tell me, for god's sake where you are and what you are going to do, she dispaired. quote, we could hear nutting but what is horrible. i know not who to send this to and will say but little. soon afterwards, william jones, we identify as the husband of eleanor young jones, also secretary of the navy wrote a memo outlining his actions on the 24th. presumably quite close to the events. he said he had left the navy yard about 3:30 in the afternoon, which is to say about a half hour after he had initially been due for dinner, with supreme court associate justice gabriel duvall and soon learned that quote, our army was rapidly retreating and that of the enemy advancing rapidly. he and duvall went to georgetown and picked up the jones and carol families as well as dolly, anna and anna's husband, richard cuts. jones then received word from james madison to go to the works west of georgetown. so, quote, a

in the meantime, a portion of this morning's "washington journal." washington, d.c. continues. >> -- "washington journal" continues. host: michael barone joins us. longtime political analyst from the "washington examiner" and the co-host of "the author of american politics." recently wrote the piece. "how the g.o.p. got this way" in the "washington examiner." but michael barone, what does the republican party stand for today? guest: well, the republican party stands more for markets than big government as compared for the democrats that stand more for big government than big markets. it stands to some extent for traditional values. both our political parties over our history have been somewhat ambiguous about what they stand for, because they are trying to do something that parties in parliamentary democracies don't have to do, which is get 50% of the votes. and in our highly, culturally diverse society. some people say we are suddenly culturally diverse, we have always been culturally and economically diverse in many ways. but it's something both parties struggle to

on the next "washington journal" washington examiner correspondent susan caruchi talks about u.s. efforts to identify home grown isis threats and the former chair of the joint chiefs of staff on the u.s. military strategy to combat isis. and a "the washington post" staff writer looks at the money . ovided by medicare as always we'll take your calls and you can join the conversation. "washington journal" is live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. secretary of state john kerry chaired a u.n. security council meeting friday on combating isis. he told members that a holistic, global campaign is the best way to destroy isis. this is about 30 minutes.

it relates to george washington. in may 1775, george washington puts on his military uniform and decides to go to the second continental congress. he's the only one that's going to be wearing a military uniform. he's making a statement. he thinks the war has already begun. and it has, we know, in retrospect. lexington and concord have happened in april. bunker hill is going to happen in june, which is actually one of the bloodiest battles in the war, but i know that chronology is the last refuge of the feebleminded, but it is the only refuge for historians. noticed this, it's underreported, under discussed in history texts. the war starts 15 months before independence is declared. it's going to cause, it's going to shake things in this explanation is that i'm going to offer you. anyway, washington is getting ready to leave mount vernon and he says to his -- what is that? >> [inaudible] >> flood warning,right. [laughter] biblical here. [laughter] somebody gave me that line. thank you, sir. washington said he was manag

the silver inkwell on the table is engraved with washington's coat of arms. the 1792 london newspaper article about the lansdowne portrait delivered to england claimed washington was standing in support of the 1795 jay "and inecommending, viable union between america and great britain." this unfortunately did not foresee hostilities 15 years hence in which the white house portrait would become an icon. the white house portrait was probably sold to the u.s. government twice. the797, stewart sold it for american minister to paris. but when the diplomatic appointee was not recognized by the french government, stewart did not deliver the painting but seems to have quickly sold it to a second buyer. later he would compound his duplicity by denying it was his work at all. during conservation on the white house portrait in 1978, all four examples of the lansdowne type were examined by our conservators who wrote we feel all four versions were painted in their entirety by a single hand. the white house portrait is believed to be the last of the four, the one least mar

pilotless drone of lies and deceptions that is coming from washington coming from london and we need some voices of sanity and reason they are beginning to come out in. foreign affairs and the retired intelligence officers open letter to medical from washington these are signs medical is being lied to faulty intelligence fake photos and so forth that are being presented by. government to justify severe nato sanctions and this is this is step wise move toward world war three and certainly toward a new cold war and that europe certainly doesn't need the world doesn't need it. thank you william thanks for your thoughts on a sense that when william angle a g.i. political analyst thank you. well one tragic development from ukraine is confirmation that russian journalist on the ice then in his stead we'll have more on that in a couple minutes time. cause. they all told him a language of war but i will only react to situations i haven't read the reports first so i'm not you know pushing the no i will leave that to the state department to comment on your latter part of the month to say get t

in that memoir he quotes washington from that evening, and washington says, i cannot come to all of you, but if you could come to me and shake my hand. and this is a stoic man, this is the father of our country, and there claims to be tears on that evening. so that happened here in this long room at fraunces tavern, which you can visit today. and it's set up as it would have been back in the colonial times. if you were to rent a room at fraunces tavern for a private event, we have some tallies of what was served at those private events. so if you had a party of 10, there would be about 10 bottles of rum, certain number of bottles of beer, and you would pay for your candlesticks, and obviously the playing cards. so also what they would serve here would have been oysters, they claimed in the hudson river at the time the oysters were a foot long. so these are roast beef sized oysters. you would use pewter ware, some china. if you came to fraunces tavern, not everybody -- there was no public education, so not everybody could read or could count with numbers. so they would use playing cards

washington. this is now ft. mcnair, the national defense university is head quartered here. it is still an important army.ñ installation, and this is also the spot where some of the conspirators in the lincoln assassination were hung. after the arsenal explosion and the storm that hits town on the 25th, the british made plans for pretty quick departure, and they never intended to stay for long. this is something that we have to remember is a very is small for est, and general ross was definitely concerned about the possibility of a counter attack, baltimo baltimore. and washington gave consideration of going from washington to baltimore, but ultimately the decision was made that admiral cochran wants them back at the fleet, and tha&lh5ee low on munitions. so on the night of august 21st, they covered the retreat by making some fires and ordering a curfew, but they left the city ship ships on the01opo s tos on the and they z31vlalqñreturned to f virtually every vestige of powez destroyed. one for

washington." and you will also notice this evening that there are c-span cameras around. v broadcasting those of you who are watching on c-span will be no stranger to anthony pitch. many of his lectures and programs have been broadcast for them before. we're lucky to have him tonight. ladies and gentlemen, mr. anthony pitch. n÷ >> thank you veepjz much for coming. just put that down. it's raining outside and so i'm very flad to see a lot of people here tonight. i want to tell you that a few years ago i escorted somebody into the white house, and his name was major ed ross, the same name major general robert ross who burnt the white house. he was a descendant. and he wanted to see the scorch marks that i told him were there. they are under the front door and there's a big stone archway where you can see massive scorch marks from the fires set by the british in 1814. and#@ñ the pastry chef who has offices close by couldn't stop giggling. he thought here's a man who's come to finish the job. i li

rules in effect that means you can jump in anytime you want ray if i go to you in washington we have the u.s. defense secretary saying the islamic state threat beyond anything we've seen is it really of this magnitude here because we've heard this before about other groups and the march toward go ahead ray in washington. well we have a history of doing that i mean the government as we saw that pre two thousand and three with saddam hussein in iraq saying he had weapons of mass destruction he didn't we invaded anyway and now all of the rest of the world wonders about our credibility however we had an attack on nine eleven thirteen years ago that killed more than three thousand people and nobody wants to be the person in charge in the government who turns a blind eye to something like that rules out a potential threat and then comes to regret it later so certainly politically the pressure is on to always take these things seriously and then if they turn out not to be so bad to dial it back this may not be a case where we can dial it back if we keep stepping up the military action ok th

washington, even the british on their ships called it ft. washington. so my question is, how prevalent is the use of the white house? >> it's not prevalent. i only know of three instances. but it's -- the point is that it was known as the white house before. >> sure. >> and it really didn't become popularized, as you know, until much later, until the 1930s. >> okay. because the wheel white house was down on the potomac. >> all right. okay. i think we're going to cut so we have enough time to have lunch. thank you all very much. >>> friday night on "american history tv" in primetime we'll show you more of the speakers from the symposium on the british burning of washington, d.c. and the war of 1812. including kenneth bowling, author of "the creation of washington, d.c.: the idea and location of the american capital." pamela scott, author of "buildings of the district of columbia." william seale talks about his book "the president's house: a history." history." and co-authors of "madison and captioning performed by vitac >>> it was really inspite of rathe

to "washington business report." forbes magazine describes your company as now the largest duty retail services company in the u.s.. how did it start out? , i came to washington and worked in finance. back then you could only buy cosmetics at department stores or drugstores. i had to travel 30 minutes to buy my lip stick. i thought there had to be a better way. the whole idea was the friendly neighborhood store where you could get expert, honest advice. e-commerce and quickly realized we were too early and needed to have stores. >> let's back up here in your path is an interesting one. you are a california girl at harvard business school and even at business school you love to make up, you loved products, you loved facials. there weren't a lot of peoplplee at harvard business school focused on makeup and cials?s? >> no. i hadhat passion because it was not profefessional to love makeup at that point. when i was growing up in california, i had facials before anyone knew what facials were. when i came to boston, i was l

and he and monroe immediately ride back to washington. this is a moment when a lot of people were urging complete capitulation, still has that second british force coming up the potomac river. and just as madison enters washington, there is a big boom coming from down the river. and that's where the british are starting to attack ft. washington, which soon blows itself up, so you have a continued assault on the capital, and at this point, madison and monroe, i think, show their finest moments in their roles and monroe effectively takes over defense of the city. and becomes more or less the acting secretary of war. and one of the good things they have the sense to do is to keep -- not interfere with the defenses of baltimore. and they keep winder out of -- from being inserted back in control there. and i think monroe's actions also in trying to trap the british forces, they're leaving alexandria were noteworthy. so, yeah, a lot of characters that we haven't been able to speak about that i think deserve more mention. >> could you elaborate

the gentleman from washington. mr. smith: thank you, mr. speaker. may i inquire as to how much time is remaining? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington has seven minutes remaining. the gentleman from california has 10 minutes remaining. mr. smith: i yield myself two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. smith: the issue here of negotiating with terrorists misses the fact that this happened on the battlefield. the five taliban commanders were captured on the battlefield, as was bo bergdahl. this was a prisoner exchange, as has happened never war that we have fought. now, it's a slightly difficult situation because it's the taliban who are now out of power. we are fighting a group of insurgents. but nonetheless bo bergdahl was captured on the field of battle as were the taliban commanders. this was a prisoner exchange. to equate this with negotiating with terrorists i think misses the point of that aspect of it. that we were exchanging prisoners. not dealing w