tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN August 21, 2016 10:12pm-11:01pm EDT
premium on allies and our values with countries that are also democratic. here is a range in terms of tone and substance a stark contrast. the biggest thing to emphasize her experience and knowledge compared to his lack of experience and his poor judgment. demonstrated that several times in the last few issues, andumber of i think there is a real choice here for america when it comes policy.ign >> as a national security senior fellow at the center for american progress, what do you as the biggest threats there the u.s. right now issues that we're not talking about in this election as much in part because donald trump has downgraded the quality of our election. instead of debating whether
president obama created isis or hillary clinton we should be talking about the next step in the fight against that. but some of the other threats that we're not talking about cybersecurity, with the hack of the democratic national committee. last couple er the of years, on a regular basis, either states sponsored entities or individuals against national that's institutions, one. obviously, global climate change. july was the hottest month on seen and t we've ever it comes on the heels of a decade of very high temperatures obama, hink president secretary clinton, have recognized this as a factor. donald trump denies that it's factor. so that's another challenge, where we're not having as much to do bate about what next. >> phone number is on the bottom of the screen for our guest. center for american progress. cap, action fund at the center security national
senior fellow. we look forward to your phone calls in just a couple of and we'll take a look at a pest of tape here from donald rump speaking about hillary clinton's foreign policy. >> in short, hillary clinton america's angela merkl merkle. disaster know what a this massive immigration to germany and the people of germany. risen to levels that would ever, t they ever see. it is a catastrophe. we have enough problems in our country, we don't need more. bill ald trump hitting clinton on racial policy. what's your reaction? >> again, this is a great trump of how 2k07b8d offers some sort of vague criticism without any reference actual policy her
would be on immigration and efugees, and then he doesn't offer an alternative. it's similar to what we've seen on other fronts. e has a secret plan to defeat isis, but he never tells you what it is. so again, when i talked about downgrading the quality of our ebate, and many of my friends who are republicans agree with this point, we have some real issues with keeping america do we do next in the world? we're just not debating them donald trump offers a bunch of conspiracy theories or craig criticisms. you here gives us a chance to dig into details on hillary clinton's policies, on what is she saying? what's her policy? that, ink she recognizes from an interest standpoint but also a value standpoint, that something we need to do to help refugees either from places, but it shouldn't solely be about us. i think her position would be,
look at this period of time that we're in, in the of wayand find some sort where americans can accept a limited number of people who are to come here, people who are experiencing threats to their lives. i would highlight people like the translators in afghanistan, who served with our risk.ary, who are at so i think she would have a much would asured approach, certainly abide by strong vetting of those individuals. emphasis would be about getting partners and allies also and i pt some of these, think the last thing i would say is that, when you hear her talk questions, gn policy the biggest resolution, i think, theses is tow solve conflicts. working with our partners and allies to make those places more they don't feel like they need to flee those places would be a key element. has a masters
degree from princeton in international affairs, and also been advised as a policymaker on foreign policy. worked at the national security council, and at the state defense department during the clinton administration. your 's here to take calls. first one coming from author. y the way, before we go to arthur, do off direct role in the clinton campaign? informal e of many advisers who offer their views. but i'm here speaking in my own with the center for american progress action fund. what we've seen over the last is because she has uch a strong record and knowledge, there are a lot of people who want to join, a lot about le are concerned trump but i'm-up an informal adviser. >> got it. thank you for waiting, democrat, brian.on with
>> about who i think is more qualified as far as foreign policy. clinton is more qualified. she had the experience, she's there. donald trump has never even held service, r been in the period. to other thing i would like say. as far as him telling african-americans to vote for a , this man is a racist and bigot. and he wants us to vote for him? that he's got in his campaign are racists. point blank on live african-americans were inferior and they were superior, nothing -- and he's top man for the -- for
campaign. i think, any african-american for donald trump got to be just sick in the head. anything you want to r. ct katulis: a lot of the things has said aboutmp various communities and how people from those communities feel about that here in america, part of our engagement with the world. i travel maybe once or twice a overseas to the middle east, to europe and other places have been watching closely how donald trump talks about us as a nation. secretary clinton has been strong on is talking about inclusivity and pluralism. comes from the diversity that we represent and how we engage with other is tries, i think, essential. donald trump, when he vilifies
like muslim nities american communities, he undermines our ability deep americans safe. agencies andcement others have been working for years and it's nearly 15 years the 9/11 attacks. to detect threats and work with closely and ties when donald trump vilifies some undermines actually our ability to keep america safe. >> let's try a republican norman, karen, from oklahoma. you're on the air. last man talking about blacks want a better life, he says , wow, and trump is a racist? know, they don't claim that trump doesn't have a he has a e refugees, plan, and that's to vet them and they come in,ever that they will go according to the american way. bring more ng to people in, we're $20 million in
debt and you're bringing these thousands and thousands over with no job, no home, no let's take care of our vets to where 22 of them a day re committing suicide or our old people. let's take care of them where they are not deciding between take their ving to medicine. she's up there saying about if she gets to be president, there -- she's not going to put any boots on the ground in syria. withoes that make the ones the boots on the ground in syria feel, do you think? the only thing she can teach us is how to lie steal out upted and of the white house before you and they had an old man at a trump fundraiser and where on that, the democrats, beating up old people? >> all right. calling.hank you for karen has other priorities other than refugees. what do you make? atulis: i think la lot of her
priorities, her campaign, if you look at the speech she gave in clearly, and quite strong focus, top priority is creating jobs for americans. infrastructure. doing these sorts of things that i think are essential, to making america strong. we need to be strong at home to be strong abroad. uncoupncouple of things important, aid are honor the service of our veterans, how we talk about think many who i are facing a difficult situation lost e, some who have their lives, in fact. as we saw from donald trump, we didn't see the level of respect soldier that had fallen in our wars over the last month or comments made by donald trump. honoring these vets is essential say he last thing i would about what karen said overall, is that i think it points to a
we have as a country, and if hillary clinton matter ed president, no what, america needs to try to come together and build a about us here at home what's the right way to strike the balance on foreign policy? when do we send troops and when we?t and having a much more considered dialogue, republican havemocrat, and we used to this in different periods, and try, something i personally try ofdo, too, is work with some my friends who are more tanks, try tothink build an argument of common sense and purpose is essential for keeping us safe here at home. me get the reaction to the lead story in the "washington post," with write, ble lead, they clinton starts refining an agenda. immigration overall, connect immigration, if you can to the discussion, even to the security discussion. atulis: one area where immigration is important, some of our economic strength at
home, some of the more skilled workers that we've had in our high-tech industry have visas, on specialized people with skills we currently don't have, reminding ourselves a lot of the googles and others of the world, actually ounded and created -- they created many jobs, by individuals who came to america a ause they saw america as beacon of innovation. so i understand why people feel they do today about immigration and how it's been linked politically to a lot of concerns. we're in a different era. we need to manage it wisely, we people take care of our here at home. but i think we need to be open o the idea that we need to reform the system. donald trump, when you look at proposals, it's not clear the practicality of it. of his foreign poll clear if ay, it's not
he could implement them. it in a way that doesn't undermine our economy, do it in safe that keeps america and she has a more detailed proposal to look at how you right balance. >> let's hear from -- mort, a democratic caller, good morning. morning.good i'm 89 years old. and i have been in two wars. i served all over the pacific in iran four times. hear people calling into these people iof --ieve [inaudible] mediterranean -- the gulf.an i just want to say a few items.
is donald is where trump talking about $400 billion? you pay taxes. he people who are calling in, they pay taxes. -- we still didn't get have a man talking about $400 illion, our money, iranian money, and banks in europe everything is going to be fine? in america, ds taxes. trump does not pay you are paying taxes. over a ading you down ditch. and believe me, the ditch is smaller.igger, not because he went down to
louisiana. what did he bring? toys? they have no tables to put the toys on. from nks for calling florida. brian? katulis: thank you for service in the wars. again, we need to recognize and honor people like you who have our country in such a way. -- what , what i would i was saying earlier, donald trump has brought our level of policy bout foreign issues to a much lower level had i think we would have nominee was a different for the republican party. i think your comments help crystallize that. we have some serious issues in persian gulf and we have some very serious challenges a nuclear espite deal, one of the most important of the obama s administration. getting a from
nuclear weapon. iran still plays a very important part, whether it's a yemen or in syria. i think secretary clinton has pragmatic vision where we would push back against he negative role that iran has and plays in funding terrorist groups. in weakening the state in the middle east. the u.s. shouldn't invade and occupy hundreds of thousands of issues.to solve these we need to build partnerships. i think secretary clinton is able to do d to be that. >> we'll caulk with brian for another 25 minutes or so ational security senior fellow at the center for american progress action fund. ames wants to know who are the largest contributors to cap? katulis: we have a range of contributors. i only work on the foreign issues. o i know we have range of foundations.
we have some corporate -- corporation that is provide support but the key is there is mix. i as an analyst, i have been there for 11 years. like anyone lt could say to me, this is what your position should be on a issue. it's great. i go out into the world. offererview people and we our own analysis. give or take. whatever people want to hear. an important question but you can look on our website and see who is offering support. > let's go to david, vienna, virginia. hi. by er: i was fascinated brian's comments on think tanks and institutions coming together to find common purpose. i did mate me think about the common purpose once there is an administration in office, once narrowed down are to a president-elect. purpose in the isional security environment
provided by intelligence. i'm curious your thoughts on the unpress kepted attention on how each candidate will use intelligence even in the campaign briefings and how you think that might play out during the campaign and then during the campaign and during the transition itself? guest: this is coming from a man like you who just has written a book about this and who would know more about how this will impact or shape our dialogue. i think there are obvious concerns given his express affinity for russia, given many advisors making millions of dollars working with russia and ukraine and other places, about how he would use the classified intelligence briefings he just started getting last week.
he is getting something that i think helped him understand what is going on in the world. it is on par with what secretary clinton receives as well. i think the biggest concern many people have is that donald trump seems to be operating at such a deficit of knowledge and a base of knowledge about what is happening in particular quarters of the world, he has a lot more homework to do then secretary clinton. i think it is unfortunate that the intelligence community works very hard to get the best information possible to the commander-in-chief, the president of the united states and members of congress, and i think many times be issues get caught up in our politics. it is risky, trying to preserve their neutrality in their independence. it is essential to help our current leaders and possible future leaders make the best decision available to them. host:im him him
tell us more about what you are writing? caller: i wrote a book about the history of the presidential intelligence, the president's look of secrets. by think it was interesting the take on political aspects of this, during the campaign beyond the intelligence, which cannot about explicityly, but the fact that the candidates are even talk in about the intelligence briefings is unusual. guest: and that is one of the things i was trying to say, any time there were these sensitive issues -- it is not a good thing for the broader interest of trying to keep all of our -- all americans of different backgrounds -- it is essential to keeping it strong. host: let's talk about hillary clinton's plans for dealing with isis. mrs. clinton: over the past year, i have laid out my plan for defeating isis.
we need to take out strongholds in iraq in syria by intensifying the air campaign and stepping up support on the ground. we need to keep pursuing diplomacy to end syria's civil war and a sectarian divide because those conference are keeping isis alive. we need to lash up with our allies and ensure intelligence services are working hand in hand to dismantle a global network that supplies money, arms, propaganda, to the terrorists. we need to win the battle in cyberspace. [applause] and of course we need to strengthen our defenses here at home. that in a nutshell is my plan for defeating isis. host: can that work?
guest: we are seeing it already work. that is cut from the same cloth of the strategy that president obama has outlined and then reiterated just earlier this month after he got his briefing from national security officials. what i think you hear from secretary clinton is a sophisticated, multilayered strategy that is not solely about how many boots on the ground or what americans can do, but is at its core about how do we defeat isis? i know this for my work in the middle east and travels there quite regularly is when we have our partners, jordan, egypt, countries like this that are on the front lines like this, we see in northern syria some recents against isis in
days because of the partnerships we built with the kurds. quite clearly, every time an administration changes hand and a new president comes in, they write off and build policies on what the predecessor did, even when you had the party change from george w. bush from brock -- to barack obama, he picked up where bush left off and i think secretary clinton will do that. her strategy is quite similar. a little bit of a more robust view of what they might do insert certain areas like syria, she called for a no fly zone, but made it clear would not just an american no-fly zone. it would be one that is to be built in partnership with a coalition. we cannot do it ourselves. a no-fly zoneized
in syria would not be in the entire entry. to try to actually keep syria safe, going back to the immigration question, so you do not have a flood of millions of refugees. one lesson americans learned is we cannot do it all. we need to have partners. we need to reinforce the partnerships with some of our traditional allies, whether it is israel or egypt or jordan. that is an essential part of the game plan going forward. host: i want to get our guest's reaction to this washington post -- "washington times" piece. they write that donald trump is not the only front runner whose foreign policy views are sparking anger around the rest of the world. because of the four-year record, hillary clinton, the level of vitriol does not match the comments regarding the potential republican rival or her republican rival. this is from a couple months ago. the critiques are not always
consistent. a continuation of the obama foreign policy that has foreign debts fallen short. she will break markedly with mr. obama. while trump's foreign policy seems random and unpredictable, and he actually bragged about this, it is hard to see how clinton's approach towards much better. any reaction? guest: my first reaction is it is not a surprise that what the president's's looks like is a major source of debate. for all of the people in america, including donald trump, saying america is weaker or does not matter, all the people overseas who say america has seen a power decline, i have seen this all the time and when we travel abroad. people are deeply concerned about what the current and next president might do. we are seen as the unrivaled
global power despite china's rise and despite russia in the last year or two. america is seen as the standardbearer of all of this. it is not surprising to me and not having the benefit of hearing specific criticism, that people are raising concerns about whatever president clinton's foreign policy might look like. we are part of the debate and that demonstrates american foreign-policy matters for all of those including donald trump who says we're weak, or not as strong, i think the key is how do we use that to build partnerships around the world. host: ohio, independent caller, thank you for holding on. caller: i am just calling to say hillary clinton's policies, she cannot even take care of the united states. she makes deals and you all just
let her go on and go on. she is making deals around the world and we don't know nothing. you all keep everything in secret. y'all won't tell anybody. used to have cats running around and you do not even see cats running around hardly anymore. why is that? y'all don't bring them in here yelled don't assimilate them, yet you want to go take care of they country. our country is falling apart. guest: i hear your concerns and your anxiety. i think many people feel the same way. i think if you look carefully at what hillary clinton has been saying about our role in the world, it is to try to get others around the world to pull their weight. that the united states is a key to all of this, but our allies need to take care of a lot of these challenges. i think what you are saying there is felt by americans all around saying what about the
burden at home? if you look carefully at the agenda you get from hillary clinton, you have an approach that is complete, it puts the forefront strong here at home andreviving our economy continuing the process of trying to expand prosperity so more 2008 and 2009 -- we have a revival. i mentioned what she given michigan earlier this summer, they she has a template that is not about solving the world's problems. america is stronger and safer when engaged in the world. what i said about continuity between the two administrations, she left her position as secretary of state in 2013 and a lot has happened with russia and russia's dangerous actions. at her core, she is a pragmatist trying to work with russia when and where we can. as i was trying to explain with the isis fight, she probably would have a more robust response, whether in the crimea peninsula in the ukraine, her
response in syria would be slightly different. one thing i am besides especially the summer, i talk about this being a big issue. things i the biggest would talk about besides this summer about being a big issue would be russia. many analysts trace that back to moscow and russia and we have seen what happened right in advance of the democratic convention this summer, i think one of the biggest issues globally is going to be cyber security and clearly, evidence demonstrates the trail to a lot
of problems we see here at home and in the world with cyber sick cybersecurity come from russia and a little bit from china as well. she has learned from the experience of sitting across the table from russian negotiators to negotiate a nuclear arms agreement that led to a reduction of arms, she knows how to deal with these guys in a way that i think her opponent clearly does not demonstrate. host: from charlotte, north carolina, democratic caller for brian katulis. at the center for american progress. hi, steve. caller: hillary's foreign policy is the reason i am not voting for her. i want to emphasize a lot of us out here are quite disappointed. negroponte,we can go on and on seeing the
neo-realpolitic -- guest: what particular issue or part of the world or country, what are you seeing? caller: the continued intimidation of both the chinese and the russians, you know, i understand they're trying to keep the excuses, try to keep it open for commerce, it feels like it is complete intimidation. putting the missiles in poland. we can go on and on down the list. this is strong arming, real, neo-realpolitik. we're basically we just say one thing and then beef up the military. it is getting pretty old for a lot of us out here. host: thank you for calling. guest: i know a lot of democrats share that view and we heard that especially in the primary fight. again, my personal view is i don't think hillary clinton is into the category of neoconservative. i think especially in the last couple of years and if you look at her record as secretary of state, her record has been trying to elevate diplomacy
first. we saw that with iran. i think it is the best example where there are a number of voices, including within the democratic party, that were saying we might have to go to war with iran. she was the chief diplomat that initiated the diplomacy and not only the diplomacy with iran but importantly, with global partners like china and russia to oppose a sanctions regime that got iran to make a deal. so, the other thing i would say is when you compare the alternative, hillary clinton versus donald trump, as a progressive, someone who is a liberal who believes diplomacy should be first, and the other
tool of national power, i think you have got a better choice when you compare to donald trump, his close alignment with dictators, and others. you know, i understand a lot of the mistakes made under the bush administration and even some of the moves under the obama administration. i think in hillary clinton, you have got a potential candidate who could strike the right balance. host: let me add to that the voice of reuters commentary appeared must not revert back to the u.s. foreign-policy status quo grounded in the theory that military force in intervention hold the key to prosperity and has brought little in the way of either peer the u.s. forces have been engaged in military action in the middle east, militancy and instability have increased, not decreased. with the word hawk apply to hillary clinton? guest: these labels, i think, are a little archaic and outdated.
even liberal interventionist or neocon, things used to describe the foreign-policy camp. we are in a different political moment and the best demonstration of this has been the republican party on national security, fragmentation just did not occur with donald trump winning his nomination. it began earlier and i think it started with mistakes of the iraq war and the different caps that emerged even in the bush administration. i do not know what people mean when they say hawk. i think they are implying something about the use of military force that does not apply to what i understand hillary clinton as a president would operate. as you see in her speeches and statements. in the iran case when she was secretary of state, she quite clearly was hawkish about diplomacy as the first tool. quite clearly, if you look at other cases, in some cases succeeded and in some cases did not, with diplomacy first. when i talked about the need to build a new global consensus, and also a consensus at home about u.s. engagement in the
world, we need to have a much more considered debate and dialogue that i think we have been able to have with donald trump as an opponent. host: jerry, democratic line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i do not think steve is a democrat. is, does he think -- ws he think europe would look like without nato? again rid ofonce nato and hillary clinton wants to strengthen it. i cannot imagine what europe would look like with donald trump and putin in control. and the trump and so forth, they want to say they want to take their country back and make america great again, but what they really want to do is oppressed people again. the gop is the new kkk in my
opinion. that is my comment. host: first of all, what the you hear from donald trump in terms of nato? guest: i see a voicing again of a very vague criticism and a ties with allies like nato in a way that has rattled them, that has actually made them nervous. events of the last couple of years, russia's action in the ukraine, support for far right wing political parties in some of the countries of europe, they are really disconcerted a lot of our nato allies. i do not think donald trump has offered a clear formula the lot -- beyond we might not stand by you. that is what his alignment with putin israeli a very dangerous thing for american interests
because for decades -- during the cold war and after, the u.s. worked, whether it was a republican or democratic president to strengthen the transatlantic relationship with our european allies. areeuropean allies today under severe strain, first economic and now refugee and now russia under putin, that is anding the buttons presenting new security challenges. to have donald trump come in as president and even a candidate, ine damage has been done terms of the heads, the nominee of a major party of the united states aligning himself with russia and putin and basically degrading our allies who have an with us for decades. different moment and that is why anyone on the fence , one concern i have a lot of my friends in the republican party who have
written letters, signed letters, and said donald trump is actually dangerous, and yet they are sitting on the answer now. that is bad in the long run even if hillary is in is elected president because we need to build the fabric of internationalism here at home in not a militaristic way. if those people sit on the fence, and we have seen, paul ryan, speaker of the house, issued his own national security plan. it is an attempt to distance themselves from donald trump, and from their own record on certain issues. i think what needs to happen is to try to figure out, to rebuild at the center of why partisan support. guest: -- host: brandon, good morning to you. caller: what i'm interested in hearing from you about is the strategy for iraq after isis is defeated.
that seems like a more critical role and i have not heard hillary or donald trump's solution for what will happen after isis is defeated. guest: that is a great question and we have been looking at it. i know a lot of think tanks have, one of my colleagues issued a report that you can find on our website based on research in the region and also with our military. we look at these factors because it is clear to me and a few you look at the facts of the last year, blows,s been -- military a big problem will be in the northwest city of mosul, but the main point of the report that my colleagues but out was to look what happens after the military campaign and i think a key part of it is how you actually help iraqis feel stable
in their own communities so they are not running in europe, and that entails working with iraqi partners, in their government to make people feel like they are safe. did not succeed under george w. bush, cannot do that at gunpoint. it is trying to get parties there either in iraq and those right around it, those countries that are engaged in a syria, toin iraq or in essence use their resources not to destroy but to try to build and make the country itself more stable. sadie from silver spring, maryland, independent caller. go ahead. think: yes, i don't aslary clinton would be good
president. i do not think she was good as secretary of state. guest: how come? caller: bad judgment and having that server in her basement and using a separate e-mail. i to be a contractor for the federal government. even i had to go to a cyber security training and a record -- record-keeping training. everyone does, whether you are a contractor or a government employee. so i know she did. judgmentnk she has bad and i think she will continue with the same foreign policy zest for -- as president obama. i think on trade, donald trump would be better and would at least renegotiate the trade agreements, whether it is nafta or the transpacific partnership and on illegal immigration, i think donald trump would be better.
would bring back jobs to america. i do not think he is dark and dangerous, ok? i don't believe that it i'm african-american. i am independent. and my vote is for donald trump. we need real change. host: thank you for calling. she began with that ad judgment line, the same one donald trump uses. what is your defense of that? record is the her best defense. when she sat in the situation room with president obama and the other members of the national security team and they about what decision to do with osama bin laden, she made the right call. you'll get asia and the policy to attempt to rebound the u.s. priorities, away from other parts of the world, i think she
has got the right template. you look at the fact, the transpacific partnership trade deal, you look at the details of core, she wants to keep america strong at home, create jobs here, and again, she wants to figure out if there is a better way to help america's workers first before we expose them to a lot of the challenges that might come with the asian trade agreement there. obviously entitled to our own field but i respectfully disagree. whatever you think about together aspects of the e-mail or other things that people bring up, if you look at the big picture, i think she has demonstrated strong judgment and a really great record as secretary of state. lynn, republican from texas or good morning. caller: a few things to say.
i noticed your gentlemen their new pretty much where he thought trumps money was coming from and how troubles getting money from russia and all his advisers were getting money from russia. but he did not know where his own money was coming from. seems to have a stumble when you asked about that. second thing, president obama and clinton had messed up the middle east beyond all comprehension. -- as ifabout iran and this were something to be proud of. it was never a good idea even when reagan was a republican. they will continue. you just call it a different name. it still thinks no matter what you call it. everyone is so trait -- afraid of donald trump and what he may or may not do and all of that. i'm old enough to remember
,ainly peace and prosperity which ike eisenhower and ronald reagan. whenever the russians would rattle too much, he would threaten them with nukes. in the world we in it is sometimes good to have people well armed andre about half crazy. it makes some sense. thank you so much. i disagree with that perspective. donald trump has been so far out of the mainstream, you have seen so many republicans that -- to effective from the party. when i hear the comparison between donald trump and white eisenhower and ronald reagan, it is not even a comparison between apples and oranges. it is apples and bicycles. it is so far outside the
mainstream way comes to support for russia, downgrading our close allies, and then the lack of consistent good judgment. we have a real choice in this election and we have not had generations,n where you have a candidate essentially saying we need to strong in thend world with restraint and you have another one that says we in essence need to turn our back on our closest partners and allies and cozy up to dictators. think the choice is clear and i think we will see in november what happened and after november, that is when the work really begins. our guest has been brian katulis pair you can read more at american
announcer: c-span's washington journal. live every morning with news and policy issues that affect you. president of judicial watch talks about hillary clinton. then, we will look at millennial voting and which presidential candidate millennials are likely to support. journal" livegton every morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern. joined the discussion. announcer: costa rica and president in washington, d.c., at the wilson center next week. we will be there live monday at 3:30 p.m. eastern time on c-span2. >> now, q&a with historian and professor nancy isenberg.
then a conversation about a man who served time after being wrongfully convicted. in how summer using religion to address race and politics. ♪ announcer: this week on "q&a" louisiana state university professor and historian nancy isenberg. talks aboutenberg her book "white trash: the 400 year untold history of class in america." ♪ mr. lamb: nancy isenberg, author of "white trash." you talk about a professor in your preface, your doctoral dissertation advisor.