tv Road to the White House 2020 Mayor Pete Buttigieg at Washington Post CSPAN May 23, 2019 8:00pm-9:02pm EDT
>> good morning. welcome to "the washington post" like i'm bob costa and i appreciate you coming here today. you're kicking off our 2020 candidate series and appreciate your time. let's start with the news is it time perhaps for democrats to start impeachment proceedings? >> i learned as a young democrat to think cautiously before offering advice to nancy pelosi. but what i will say is that it's very clear the president deserves impeachment in the case for impeachment is being built at each passing day by the white house. what we have now is a steady process of taking apart any semblance of respect for the rule of law. you see it and we sought early on but now you see it in trying to block a private citizen from testifying and you see it in refusing legitimate investigative requests and if you look at if the preface to
the decision that came down recently citing james buchanan you see perhaps the first time james buchanan that a president has tried to assert that congress does not have any investigative authority at all. all of this is could you bidding to that case. as to when and how the house goes about launching those procedural steps to get angry up and running i will leave that to the house. i know that regardless of how that process unfolds we have a political job to do as well. >> you support impeachment proceeding at some point? but your concern is the timing. >> there is a sequence to be followed and house is not -- the house democrats are not going to allow them to say this was a knee-jerk action in their understanding unbelievable discipline even that were well past the time of what ordinarily would be tolerated in this republic.
they are still being methodical. we should hear from bob mueller and hear from bar and a lot of procedural things that should go on in the various investigatio investigations. my part of the puzzle is the political parts. at the end of the day we recognize impeachment as a fundamentally political not legal process and it comes down to the votes of politicians. what really will matter most is the conscience of republican senators. even that phrase conscience of the public and senators is a concept that has come under a certain amount of question. if anything will reunite them with their conscience in the long room, in my view, it's a decisive electoral defeat for republicans in 2020 which is what i'm going to deliver by running against the president. >> just to be clear you would support impeachment proceeding be launched at some point in
order to get witnesses to come testify and to get documents to capitol hill. >> yes. >> do you see cracks in the gop side with representative from michigan speaking out on impeachment? >> he was the exception to prove the role in that it seems the rest of the party closed ranks. there was a principal to stand not inconceivable there would be others but again i'm not sure absent an electoral consequence to put the fear of god into some of the republicans who know better and are now clearly acting in bad faith. it means they won't respond to a moral call but only respond to a political result. i'm not sure much changes until there's an election to remind them what the political results are continuing to be on board with something. it's not just our values but her own and it's in the medical. >> you don't want to give rise to speaker pelosi but is she being too cautious in terms of timing? >> i will leave to the house the sequencing question and this is something that gets a new sort of twist every couple of days,
if nothing else a fresh outrage but it's the white house itself is the main actor building the case almost methodically for impeachment. i trust the house caucus to find the right sequencing, especially because they're overlapping and adjacent. >> your leader in the democratic party's what the breaking point if you're waiting for that right sequence what the break you might get to that moment? >> again, we've got outstanding requests for information, for testimony and either they come in and deliver still more information that helps prosecute the case or don't come in the fact that they are being illegally or wrongfully withheld becomes one more thing to prosecute. look, i'm a 2020 candidate. best thing i can do about this is not a procedural issue in the house of representatives. it is getting the nomination and being in the present.
>> speaker pelosi for the president engaged in cover-up do you agree? >> yeah, the cover-up is in plane -- i don't know if you can even call it a cover-up because the cover-up is supposed to be not only hiding something but keeps itself hidden. [laughter] again, this is extremely important but it's also extremely washington. these are not the questions i get in iowa or south carolina most of the time the only reason this matters, including the whole reason the president malfeasance matters, is that the things cash out in our everyday lives. one of the many areas in which most americans agree with us on is the agenda to get more people and to protect people's healthcare and make sure we actually get on paid family leave and i hope are able to chew gum and walk at the same time as we do this because our agenda is a witty one in the
more were talking about him the less i feel like were talking about voters. >> mayor buttigieg you served this country in uniform and there are many reports the president trump is considering pardons for former soldiers who committed war crimes. u.s. soldiers. what's your view on that? do they deserve them? >> my view is it's disgusting. when you serve and take that oath the old is to the constitution. if you are convicted by a jury of your military peers of having committed a war crime the idea that the president is going to overrule that is an affront to the basic idea of good order and discipline and the idea of law, the very thing we believe we are putting our lives on the line to defend. remember, were talking about people who would be convicted by an american military justice system. the whole idea of the uniform code of military justice is as it is applied to everyone in uniform.
and by the way, to contractors under certain circumstances. another thing that makes this so dangerous and so insulting to people who served is we finally live in a time where americans have figured out how to operate the way they feel about policy and the way the half-truths. this is not the case for everyone and we now do a welcome home day for vietnam veterans in south bend and you talk to veterans many who were just drafted and did what they were legally required to do and got tears in their eyes talking about the way it felt when they came home because people cannot distinguish between how they felt about the war and how they felt about the troops. in my generation thankfully, someone who served in the afghanistan war or the iraq war is called to do so was strongly against the iraq war on the
beginning. i'm so thankful we live in a moment that we can honor the troops separately from policy. and even then there are some people i can see it every now and then in my social media feed who think anybody who served as a war criminal and that's a radical difference but sometimes they talk about it about veterans and troops. >> our firewall against that the fact that american law and american military law is abundantly clear on what you do and do not do in uniform and if you do something wrong in uniform you will be prosecuted and held accountable. if the president blows a hole in that he is blowing a hole in the integrity of the military and putting troops lives at risk. >> house so? >> because there's a lot -- [applause] when i was deployed i could feel a full-spectrum of american power keeping me safe.
yes that was the armor on my vehicle and armor on my body but it was also the armor of some level of american moral authority as complex as it is it is much as it had its ups and downs the basic idea that most people believed that the including our enemies believed the flag of my soldier represented a country that kept his word. if we lose that then we lose the fact that as i was driving my vehicle through the city of kabul and looking through the windshield for trying to spot the people who might present a threat to my life and that of the people in my vehicle knowing that for every person i could see through the windshield who really would kill us if he had the chance. there were a lot more people who had respect for our country but we lose that and nothing will keep a safe. >> become part of the campaign trail and i was on the trail in south carolina and many voters older democrats, some younger
say vice president biden is leading in the polls has earned the nomination because of his experience and work with president obama. has he earned the nomination? >> he earned the nomination by winning it. nobody has earned the nomination in 2019. the way you are in the nomination is to present a vision for where the party needs to go in country needs to go. the democratic party today the other way you are in the nomination is demonstrating you the one who can beat this president and went. i worry that even now sometimes because some parts of the country where the concept of the trump voter is tweeted as exotic that the likelihood or at least chance this president wins the second term is being underestimated in our parts. we need to make sure we nominate somebody who has the right
vision, right ideas, right direction for this country and can win. >> what about the right experience? >> absolutely. experience is one of the best things i have going for me. [laughter] i know i'm the last person in the race for the clearance of guiding a city of any seismic spirits you get is a mere and handling everything from economic development puzzle to a racially sensitive officer involved shooting and legally getting the 3m call to deal with national disasters and understanding the job is not just info many policy and managing administration but a moral element where you have got to figure out a way to call people to their highest values and bring them together especially and moments with strength and the exact function of the president we are most previously missing even though management and policy has been terrible, too. that is to the extent anything can prepare you for the oval office. not to mention the kinds of experiences you get when you realize what the presidency means because it ordered you into a combat zone.
those experiences are as good as any experience you can accumulate in washington to get you ready for the presidency. >> some voters may look at your expense compared his and say he appeals to the industrial midwest and has national variance and what differentiates your appeal when voters were looking for some to win over those trump voters in states? >> some of it is not just middling around the edges but fixing our system a presidency like we have isn't even possible under normal circumstances focusing on the tip or the election in the presidency and. the person in the white house today doesn't get within cheating distance of the oval office unless people, especially people in the industrial midwest where i am from, are completely fed up with the system. they will vote for someone they disliked us to send a message they want to burn the house
down. if we are perceived as replicating a system that let people down, economically and politically then we could very well lose the election. >> do you think -- >> i'm not talking about any competitor. >> but it's reference to abide in question. >> when it comes to the other 23 competitors or however many it is this week. [laughter] i'm not sure any or i am sure that none of them have quite the same account i do. where the country is headed and how we will change it. the bottom line is we have to -- the core falsehood of the trump message is the word again. the idea that we can fish greatness out of the american past when the one thing we most want to emulate from those who came before us is the fact that they are focused on the future. if we want to respond to that we
can be an equal and opposite response. it has to be something completely different. more than anybody in this field i would argue i represent someone completely different. >> you say you have experience and you detailed some of your experience but did not mention your time at mckinsey. how did that spirits. for the presidency? >> i learned how the private sector works and about data and a big part of my job. i think that it is useful at a moment like this to understand the productive power of capitalism and the abuses that could happen in the business world. having swum in those waters for some amount of time it does give you a certain perspective that you don't have if you've never been in the business. >> you released tax returns for ten years what will you be willing in the coming weeks or months to release your tax return from 2007-2008 when you are at mckinsey?
>> i think what we released would cover at least some of my time there. >> it stopped in 2009. >> yeah, i think it was -- anyway, i'd be open to that. look, you don't have to go back to far to find me being a graduate student and there's not much there. >> but in 2007, 2008 you are at mckinsey. >> yeah, i thank you can catch one of my -- i'd be open to going for the back. >> open to it or agree to it? >> i don't usually make decisions like that on stages but i don't see why not. i believe in being as transparent or more than my competitors. >> you run a very agreeable campaign in terms of going after your competitors and we decide you don't want to direct the target any of them in and expose weight but will be on the debate station next month so how you set yourself apart? >> the way you cut through and set yourself apart today is not by waving your arms and trying to be the loudest. i think some of it will be in the idea space and i talked more about structural reforms than
most perhaps any of my competitors and then again i think most of us agree to the tune of probably about 80% on what the big issues are and how to handle them. i think what people will be looking for as a scanner debate stage is who can i see as president but also who can i see changing the channel from the show we have right now in washington and there has to be a sense that we can generate something that will speak to people are completely tuned out or who are disgusted with everything they see that even though they are not under under no illusions that the president is a good guy they would rather disrupt the system to see what happens and see if you might make a better offer. >> people's records will be under scrutiny when you look at vice president biden's record is 1994 crime bill was that a mistake?
>> i can't get the impression there's more interest in one of my competitors than the other aflac look, i was not there for the crime bill debate but i was there but i was 12. [laughter] it was not a priority for me. overall from a south bend perspective the bad outweighs the good and i say that because there's a broad sense, maybe not total consensus but that bill contribute it to mass incarceration in a country that is the most previously incarcerated in the world and what were the now, a generation later is i'm dealing with the things that happen in somebody gets shot in a neighborhood in south bend today statistically it is almost always a young man of color and so statistically often is the shooter who was born after the year 2000 or someone between 1994-2000.
when you look at the circumstances that need to violence in other harms you look at the adverse childhood expenses that can insult someone back in life. exposure to violence is one and exposure to drug abuse is one. incarceration is one. the mass incarceration that made felt a knee-jerk way as a way to be tough on crime in the '90s is now one generation later being visited upon community today to the absence of parents. some of the very same people that were lamenting the breakdown of the family were breaking up families by incarcerating people for nonviolent drug offenses to the extent the money of the crime bill went toward building prisons. that is made us worse off. certain things in the package that the gun reform sending money to communities to enhance their access with lots of resources that we be happy to have but on balance i think the
incarceration did so much harm that i would think that even those who are behind the 94 crime bill which many of us would do differently if they had a chance to do it again. >> should they be held accountable. >> that is what elections are for. if nothing else we've begun to realize how we can be smarter about nonviolent drug offense. that's plain out in a way that's uneasy so you taking opioids really tough issue in new hampshire certainly claremont where he was a few days ago tough issue at home is often people i know have been lost to this epidemic. america has finally realized that this is a medical, not moral issue that we need to treat addiction not is something to become life but to be tweeted. as we have this conversation about how to deal with opioids there's people especially people in the back unity back home say to me it is great that you're
really enlightened and forward thinking now about drugs but where were you during the crack epidemic? >> magis opioids affecting the committees but postrecession 2008 credit card companies where they should be reformed. >> when you have these arbitration clauses that say you can't see them even if they caught ripping you off that is something that a great example of how democrats ought to get back into the business of talking about freedom. philosophically we been living ever since reagan became president and living with this on argued an incorrect assumption that the only thing that can make you one free is government. you are not free if some arbitration clause prevents you from holding a bank or credit card, your accountable when they are caught ripping you off. a richer, thicker, truer sense of freedom is one where consumers are empowered and that means part of our legal framework. >> will nothing. many credit card companies are based in delaware and senator elizabeth warren one of your
arrival said vice president biden "-right-double-quote on the wrong side of the credit card companies an issue right? >> i have a difference of opinion with anybody who favors credit card companies under consumers. >> we will leave it there. [laughter] i asked voters about you you say you will be on stage with president trump not just primary debate but onstage in a general election and he will be tough and take punches that you rhetorically are you ready for that? >> yeah look, what he will do and i have a fair amount of dealt with bullies. i am gay and i'm from indiana so i get it. he will try to get your attention and get on your skin and try to distract us in the challenge in confronting trump is that there are certain things
he does that you have to respond to and just morley when he lies you have to correct a lie which will keep you busy because he does it so often. when he does something wrong here to point to it. it can't be about him. any energy that goes his weight including energy the goes in the form of criticism turns into a food and he devours it. we have to learn how to use to farm them so it's almost like a sort of crazy uncle management. he is there and you are not going to disrespect his humanity but he thanks what he thanks is not much you can do about it. you can correct the outrageous but then we will turn the focus right back to the fact that we are the ones trying to get a wage and block and increases in wages were the one trying to get you healthcare and tried to take
away. were trying to make sure you get paid family leave but a woman's right to choose and these are issues americans agree with us on. it's getting harder and harder to find a policy of this demonstration most americans don't disagree with. we do exactly what they need to be about policy and strategy and insults that come with it. i don't have a problem standing up to somebody who was working on season seven of celebrity apprentice when i was packing my bags for afghanistan but at the end of the day is not about you. >> should he have served in vietnam? >> i have a pretty dim view of his decision to use his privileged status to fake a disability in order to avoid in serving been a. >> you believe he faked a disability? >> do you believe he has a disability? [laughter] >> at least not that one. [laughter] >> i don't mean to trivialize
this ability but that's what he did. i mean when you think about the way somebody can exploit the system and needless to say the way he has tweeted and marked disabled people is one more example of the many affronts to basic decency. this president has inflicted on this country. but manipulating the ability to get a diagnosis -- if you were a conscientious objector i did admire that. but this is somebody who i think is fairly obvious for most of us took advantage of the fact that he was a child of a multimillionaire in order to pretend to be disabled so that somebody could go to war in his place. i know that dredges up old wounds from the company at a
time or in a complicated war but i'm also old enough to remember when conservatives talked about character is something that mattered in the presidency. [applause] it deserves to be talked about. >> many rising democrats are self-described democratic socialists and you're not one are you, correct? smack i think of myself as a democratic capitalism although i think socialism loses its meaning every time it's used to describe literally any policy left of the far right by the current republicans and the aca. ach was most is everything you do to healthcare other than leave it alone. invented by conservatives, piloted by republican governor and the moment they tried to do it subtly that was characterized as socialism. there's a vocabulary game going on that we should not get sucked into. i believe in american capitalism as being incredibly productive
force in this country but has to be democratic. i think for previous generation someone democrats and capitalism make the same thing because america viewed itself as being democratic and capitalism. socialism and communism is the same thing. what we are seeing is there's a lot of tension between democracy and capitalism and when capitalism without democracy emerges as you have in many countries russia is was pointed out as the biggest example it turns into a crony capitalism which turns into an oligarchy. what should president putin expect from you if you were elected president of the united states? smack he should, first of all, expect a serious response if there's an attack on our democracy. >> what would that entail? >> we have a lot of tools are just military but diplomatic, economic and cyber tools at our
disposal. i think that some commission of diplomatic economic and cyber action, some commendation of over encoded would create a right to turns framework so that someone like putin would not be motivated to do that again. he can also expect a credible counterpart in the u.s. that would be willing to the extent that russia is prepared to be a constructive partner in global affairs or just prepared to take constructive steps in a european security framework like renegotiated inf. we would have confidence of their compliance they would have confidence in our stability. you can expect that too. bottom line, we need every country to be able to expect america to keep his word. outlaws and adversaries. or our entire position in the
global scene collapses. >> you solicited a few twitter responses. as a veteran, how did you feel when nfl players nil during the national anthem in protest to police brutality? >> i felt that i was watching americans exercise a right i had put my life on the line to defend the. [applause] >> the point of defending free speech is not that you will be perfectly aligned with every speech act affected but it's a fundamental american freedom and a huge part of what makes america america and when that flag, that same black, was on my shoulder i do not think of the flag is something that itself as an image was sacred but i thought it is something because
it what it represented. it represented a freedom of speech and that's why i served. >> staying with the race issue for a second you'll be at the democrats dinner in virginia next month and you believe governor northam should resign over the blackface scandal? >> i have called on him to do that. makes really concerned about the way that these kind of moments that reach out from our past reverberate and that's one of the reasons it's so urgent is the way that people are being tweeted today. we still talk about racism as a historical artifact when right now two people with identical resumes could put them in and if you your resume says your name is [inaudible] its way less likely to get a call back and if your resume says brendan or megan. there is a connection between everything that happened in the
past and where we go to the future. it did not help the way that the governor handle it because the left people were confused. i don't know the all in the mouth of virginia politics but from where i am sitting it seems extremely automatic that our party has someone in a position who has taken those actions. >> if it's problematic, why help the state party in virginia while he's in office? >> because i believe in democratic values. he runs a party in virginia. >> you want them to reside there still going to support the virginia democratic -- >> you don't support the state party as a favor to one politician and maybe sometimes you feel like that's what you're supposed to do but we are democrats because of what we believe in. democrats because we know what happens when democrats take power versus when republicans take power, especially now. what if i tell you i will not
take out the democratic activists and candidates all on the ballot in virginia because of the way i feel about one elected official in that state. and, it's also a really important thing i think for democratic 2020 candidates to do because we got to support and we've got to stop treating the presidency like it's the only office that matters. that got a hold of a lot of democrats imagination in the last one and we were so excited about the presidency that we did not understand how much it was going to hurt that hundreds and hundreds of state legislative seats were lost and there is so much power in the states. >> does president obama hold any response ability for that? >> it was a larger party issue and the party needed to mobilize in a way that really would into
her through various presidents. >> but who is responsible? you say the democratic party was eroded at the obama so who's responsible? >> i am responsible for fixing up it conservatives did this cleverly over 30, 40 years. they started by trying to take over school boards in the 70s and 80s. they work their way through building majorities and what i see now is an opportunity precisely because there's so much attention on the presidency because of what is going on in the white house that those of us running for president, and are so many of us running that we can model this, can use the visibility we have to lift up state parties try to get people elected to those local and state efforts and because of the timing in virginia and what they haven't 2019 is one of the best examples we will have to walk the walk of supporting others in is president trump a racist? >> i think so.
if you do racist things and say racist things the question of whether that makes you a racist is almost academic. the problem with the president is that he does and says racist things and gives cover to other races. it's not an accident that hate crimes rose disproportionately in places that his campaign visited which, by the way is another idea of why if the conduct of our campaign, not just outcomes that can affect what happens in this country. without having to examine his part there's no question we have to respond to the racism that is emanating from this white house. >> historically black churches of china barely know you down there is a coin as to how you fix that with african-american voters? >> we have to get over it part of it is the groundwork you got to do. >> is our policy you can offer
and say this is my way in? >> that the other part but i think the substance again is an area where we hope most democrats are aligned the way i talk about gender for black america is to look at the different ways in which we have inequity and be ready to tackle them head-on. homeownership that is entrepreneurship and that is health and education and of course, that is criminal justice reform. for all those who to get better we need to pay attention to democracy because when i talk about jeanine structurally reform our democracy part of what i'm talking about is systematic things that are happening like voter suppression that of course, are targeted mostly to black and brown communities. until we have a more equal voice will have problems getting these outcomes. we have an agenda for black america that i think is going to be compelling for voters but tactically we got work to do just to get known. in south bend the black voters
who know me best contribute it to very big reelection number for me but we spent years building that relationship. the challenge for a candidate in 2020 is we have to do it in months and the fight you'll see a lot of me in south carolina. >> you detailed policy and the politics at times personnel can be policy, senator booker, senator harris, stacy abrams, former minority leader in georgia, could you commit to having a person of color on the ticket if you are a democratic nominee? >> i believe it's appropriate to say something that would rule someone in or rule someone out. >> why the inappropriate? >> it's the first presidential decision you make even though you president. i don't thank you make it in a political process a year in advance. you are making a decision that in the event that you get elected is a decision about american [inaudible]. the main criteria is who will be best able to be president in the
event your killed or incapacitated. having said that and bleeding their many people in my party who made that test i think it is appropriate for me to say as i said personnel is policy and that it's important especially in these times that the next administration be the most gender balanced and racially diverse ever. that you would see that reflected in all my decisions, also inflecting my running mate. >> whether personal color, women, they are looking for that if you're the nominee so could you give me any clue as if you would lead in the direction or maybe you can't offer them that? >> i will certainly lean in that direction but i will not make a declaration to may 2019th that would rule or count them out. >> one more question, you talked about the firing of the first african-american police chief in south bend and come the details about this case and as a reporter one thing i keep coming back to is this question.
comment in early 2012 to be mayor of the south bend and federal investigators come to you and say mayor buttigieg we have investigation of the police chief. couple was later you ask for his resignation. what i don't understand is why did you not just let the magician play out and why did you feel as a mayor who had to ask for his resignation? it was in your response ability was it, to step in at the time and could not you left the u.s. attorneys deal with it? >> without getting too much into the guts of the case that's being litigated even now we got a pretty strong signal from federal law enforcement that even we could take care of it or they would take care of it. >> why not let them? >> i thought it would tear our community apart. even then, early with a lot to learn green was new in that
office and i knew my first important response ability was to keep the community together. what i saw was it's going to be divided one way or divided another way but if i own the decision did not have a faceless law enforcement authority to it but owned the decision about where we were going to go as a community i believe in my destroy my career but it was the right thing to do for the city and having done that and having said that there are moments as we went through that a lot of things we learn the hard way just how much pain there is and how much credit in the relationship between communities of color and police department, especially in a city like ours that racially diverse. police department is not as racially diverse as the city. >> to resent the federal investigators put you in a position as a young mayor that you come in and quietly say you have to deal with this -- it's
totally outside your room on duty as mayor for the most part. >> part of the mayor and this is something i learned the hard way is managing things that you don't control and controlling things you don't own. in learning to all things that you don't have official power over that's where you earn your paycheck. management stuff you can hire someone to do. where you earn your paycheck is when there is no answer that isn't damaging in some way when you're choosing between one package of right and wrong and another. there is no formula or handbook and no consensus. that hits your desk and to the best of your judgment in good conscience you have to figure out what to do. did i resent being in a
position? >> i do not appreciate being in that position for that site we have human beings in elected offices. >> turning to faith, secretary state mike pompeo said on tuesday talking to [inaudible] it was letters of you to call vice president peds homophobic this position on gay marriage and other issues related to that. what is your response and use them by calling the vice president fanatical? >> if you believe any number of things that the vice president believes fanatical. i think we've covered that ground a lot. i'm not interested in pointing -- >> what is most alarming out of that list to you? >> latest think that salami out of the administration is same-sex max couples are being told that from a different nationality for their own children and there's an adoption process abroad. latest policy that is a step backward in this country and i'd like to know what the secretary of state has to say about that because he's presiding over the department that changed the rules. i think it is shocking that the quality act that sailed through the house of representatives is not feeling his way to the death of the president who claims to be forward-looking on these issues. i would love to know whether the vice president history to find
but whether it ought to be lawful to disseminate against people in this country. i think most americans think it shouldn't and he's on the wrong side of that. at the end of the day it's a policy disagreement. i have personal misgivings, too, mostly about the way the sheen of evangelical christianity has been used to justify the conduct of a president whose personal style and behavior and choices at least on my reading the bible are not biblical. the conversation about lgbt equality is one about policy. policy that hurt people. policies that need to change. >> what you mean evangelical sheen? >> many evangelical conservatives, some democrats in the south, support the president on these issues and feel like he's nominating the judges they want and affecting instituting rules they want in the federal government. >> if you make a cold, political calculus that a president who
does not embody your values personally still going to want or do the things you want politically then i don't agree with it or like it but at least i get it. how do you unravel that cold political calculus because it certainly out there? >> in the case of some of the people in this ministration you ask at what point do you say this far, but no further accepted a lot. >> exactly. i don't think they should have it by this is not worthy of criticism from the beginning. when i read the bible there's an awful lot about hypocrites in there. frankly, neither priest nor government officials come off very good in the new testament. in particular there is a lot about hypocrisy. i'm old enough to remember conservatives who said this but i will say it. the presidency is not just a policy position but a moral position. you got to ask of somebody,
whether bp or anyone else, who has repeatedly professed fidelity to biblical values, even to the point of being able to impose it on other people, then it says it's absolutely fine for somebody who is caught boasting about abusing women or caught sending hush money check in a way that's probably illegal to someone he had an affair with ought to not just be -- >> they may agree with you on those points but on the issue of reproductive rights they are not with you. that's what is holding them with president trump in many respec respects. what is your argument to them on reproductive rights if that is their issue enough right there sticking with him? >> my argument is to ask them to join the majority of americans who believe that this decision ought to be made by the woman. look, there are -- i say this as someone who is a democrat in
office in indiana so people like i know the people i love and even some who support me politically don't view this issue the way i do. but for those who have a strong view about some of these almost unknowable questions around life the best answer i can give is that because we will never be able to settle those questions in a consensus fashion. >> to think be unknowable questions. >> is unknowable in the way that lined the questions are answered and is a moral question. the question is not how do we politically decide where the line ought to be drawn but it's who gets to draw the line and who gets to decide mark should there be any light? >> as part of the framework of roe versus wade. early in pregnancy, the reviewer sections. late, very few exceptions.
for all its complexity and controversy roe versus wade is widely popular in this country because it allowed us to negotiate that and now the drive to overturn roe versus wade is something that flies in the face of what americans want and by the way, a decision to end abortion but to end the legal abortion and precisely the memory of just how many arms that caused the mediate the case back in the 70s and 80s, a great number of her publicans were pro-choice. >> was heavy lightning round. start with one from twitter. bob from albany, oregon asks what would you do are they want to address the climate crisis? >> first of all, indicates they will rejoin the paris climate accord. also, lay the groundwork for new structures in federal policy to cope with permit and thank you can do right away through
executive action is restore the epa rule on carbon. that's just the beginning and there's a ton of work that needs to be done but those are some of things you do right away. >> president trump has jeered custer and ivanka trump on his staff in the white house and is there any potential role for [inaudible] in the white house? >> he make an amazing first gentleman as he has suffered spirit not just but -- [inaudible] >> i've never hired a family member. again -- >> ruling out hiring a family member? >> i guess i never thought it that way because -- >> jared custer is there, ivanka trump is there, seems the norm. >> i only -- family situation but i will say is that in south bend and even on the campaign trail cheston has done an amazing job, in my view, my late with the first spouse can be like. >> we help you govern in the way circuitry couldn't help
president clinton? >> he helped me govern right now. he helps remind me what is at stake in the issues that come up in our community and helps connect me to my conscience and asks me to questions. when you have especially all the noise that happens in the political space marriage is one thing that keeps you in touch with who you are and who you always were. i think it makes you better at your job. >> if you come into office would remove the tariffs on china or not? >> yes, tariffs are counterproductive. we might launch a new conversation with china and what we do on tariffs might be in that context but i would not put up these tariffs in the first place. tariffs are taxes on american soil and we talked that that's not the case and forget that americans are paint -- i actually think we do need it away that maybe not everyone in my party agrees that we need to be more on the front but standing with china but not with
tariffs? >> look, terrorists will not get china to change the fundamentals of their economic line nor get them to change their regional strategy. if we want to be serious we got to invest in american -- figure out how to have a more orderly this entailment of things like 5g technology where we are where there are establishing technological superiority and build a global framework where we compete with china on our terms instead of their. >> many democrats feel the border wall part of its been constructed and the barriers down to the border by president trump that is a moral issue and if you were elected president would you tear down any of the barriers built by president trump? >> no, building them was a waste of money and tearing them down would be another waste of money. we need conference a pipe artisan border security can be part of that but we need -- the reason is morally important is the way walling which is being
used as a symbol for keeping and other group out. secondly, it's a waste of money but are not the good money ou out -- >> will they rejoin the iran nuclear documents. yes. >> rv saber rattling it all with iran and you support troops? >> i'm extremely troubled with the saber rattling with iran. right now you got people getting ready to take an oath of enlistment were not human life on 911. and if we learned anything from the last decade and a half of endless war it is that you do not casually threaten military involvement and it is mystifying to me that john bolton, one of the architects of the iraq war, greatest american policy disaster of my lifetime is allowed anywhere near the situation room. especially by a president who says falsely but says he's against the iraq war all along. it is unbelievable. to see the same people taking
some of the same steps and appear to be prosecuting a case and as though we had not seen this movie before. possibly in terrifyingly for domestic political purposes it makes me think about my time in service and wanting to believe that everybody above me in the chain of command new overdoing or never came by a decision lightly makes me think of the high school students i was just within south bend we celebrated because they're getting ready to go to the academies or list and just thinking that for all the political noise here we are talking about life and death and not a show. this is not a game. this has to stop. should. >> should facebook be a utility? >> in some ways it is. >> but should it be a utility, federally regulated? >> it is clear that facebook and other companies are having to make -- they are making decisions is a company that
amount to public policy decisions and the reason they are is that policy world has failed. we've had the spectacle of legislators making it abundantly clear that they don't understand what they are regulating. and we can't expect anything different as long as we don't create the boundaries in the policy space for how these tech companies are supposed to behave. >> manage it like a utility spirit i'm not sure i understand what that means. >> relegated like a telecom company smack basically you. >> you control the prices and definitely pay a price for using facebook. the price is in terms of your retention, data and privacy. not in terms of pain to use the service. we got to regulate but in a smart way. what does it mean to regulate how much of your attention or your data the company -- i like the metaphor of a utility but the question is a lot deeper
than just to be slapped the same kind of controls we would and i run a pegylated utility because we do wastewater and water. it's similar in some ways but different and fundamental issue is for small monopolistic behavior which means the sec needs to be the power to block or perhaps reverse consolidation and separate but related, what we do with data security and privacy whether giant company facebook or small one i still want you to be protecting my data. >> asked you about president putin so what should prime minister benjamin netanyahu if you're president and should he expect the same level of support and alliance he sees with president trump? >> you expect america to be a friend and ally to israel. >> but to him? >> one that is loyal to the terms of our alliance and concern about israeli security interests but also not loyal to him -- be support a vein of
israel patriotic and pro- american does not have to mean you are pro- chop. being supportive of israel does not mean that you are on board with the agenda of the israeli clinical right wing. i am not but i believe that this move to walk away from peace will harm israeli interests and of course continue to contribute to the commiseration of the passing people and what israel can expect from the u.s. is any front ought to be able to expect is that when they take a step to be humble you put your arm around your friend and try to guide them somewhere else. >> when you think about global human rights -- [applause] would you have any test or visiting for a leader to advocate for gay rights abroad? [inaudible] would you make gay rights at the front of your
foreign-policy? >> it certainly got to be part of a serious conversation and is that the only thing or kill switch on any given number station? no. these are always complex but progress on lgbtq rights is important as our women's rights and racial justice and economic justice and all political speech and the things we care about when we are promoting values abroad that we believe are not just americans but universal. we have moral authority and soft power as a country but when we are convincingly advancing those rights but it only works if we actually have our own house and water so from human rights to democracy issues to climate we had better be walking the walk before we go out into the world stage and push other countries to do the same. >> final question. if you win the election in 2020 president trump will still be around and could be facing investigations and you will be
try to move the country in a different direction, fresh direction, there will be perhaps greatly of president trump is still in would you consider pardoning president trump to help the country move on? >> it is one thing to pardon let's say someone who had a ridiculously harsh and long sentence for a nonviolent drug offense in order to send a message about sentencing and equality for this country. it is another to look the other way on an assault on the rule of law from the highest levels but now, we're talking hypothetically about a situation where the american justice system has rendered a decision. overruling the decision -- >> what about if they haven't ongoing investigations? >> even easier. no. no. look, the rule of law matters.
you know, in the same way preemptively pardoning troops who are being brought up on war crimes charges could create generational harm to the integrity of the military and preemptively pardoning a public official who is corrupt will have an unbelievably corrupt effect on our democracy. >> president for dead in that same ballpark. >> yep. i went around for that but what i know is -- look, we've had situations where someone prominent maybe is up for, i don't know, some kind of enforcement action and not that it's exactly the same but the principle is at the same. it is you treat everybody no better and no worse. nobody should be targeted because of their political profile and no one should be
excused because of their political profile. our fidelity is to the law and oath is to the constitution and that's what you can expect from my presidency. >> mayor buttigieg, thank you for your time. [applause] thank you for joining us. if you have any more information will go to washington post .-dot live .com. [applause] [inaudible conversations] >> c-span's washington journal live everyday with news and policy issues that impact you. coming up friday morning author discusses his book about the rise and fall of socialism.
and its recent resurgence in american politics. democratic socialists of america national director talks about the growth of socialism and what it means for legislation and the 2020 election. be sure to watch c-span's washington journal live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on friday morning. join the discussion. >> c-span's newest book the president noted historians rank america's best and worst chief executives. it provides insight into the lives of the 44 american presidents. true stories, gathered by interviews with historians. it is explore the life that shapes our leader, challenges they faced in the legacies they have left behind. order your copy today thomas expands, the president, is now available as a hardcover or e-book at the .org -- the presidents.
>> wants to be with simply three giant networks and a government supported service called pbs. then, in 1979 a small network with an unusual name rolled out a big idea. let viewers decide all on their own what was important to them. c-span open the doors to washington policymaking for all to see bringing you unfiltered coverage from congress and beyond. in the age of power to the people this was true people power. in the 40 years since the landscape has changed. no monolithic media, broadcasting has narrowcasting, youtube stars are a thing. c-span's big ideas is more relevant today than ever. no government money support c-span and nonpartisan coverage of washington funded as a public service by your cable or satellite provider. on television and online c-span is your unfiltered view of government so you can make up your own mind.
>> the national oceanic and atmospheric administration presented its protections for the 2019th hurricane season. at a news conference in washington dc. they forecast a near-normal hurricane season begins on june 1. this is half an hour. >> doctor jacob black i welcome you to the podium. >> at this time, it's a distinct honor and pleasure to introduce the secretary of commerce, mr. wilbur ross.