they are plenty of opportunities to engage on these issues in the air and academia think tanks. so i think it's simply a matter of remaining current in the literature coming to events like these as being mindful of unexpected opportunities that will present themselves and as an alteration of that i can offer my own background as an example. i started working on these issues by accident. i was a young lawyer fresh off of a clerkship year in washington d.c. with a federal judge when i got hired to work on administrative law issues at the justice department in august of 2001 and three weeks later administrative law seemed like it was a bit less importance that we all had to get very smarter national security and counterterrorism issues pretty quick. it was just that happenstance of eating their in that moment of time that i began to develop an interest and a focus on these issues. of course we pray that there is never a comparably cataclysmic career ship for anyone watching on television but there are opportunities or opportunities not like that to move into a space that you find i

there are plenty of opportunities to engage on these issues in the private sector and academia and think tanks. -- like the hudson institute. i think it is simply a matter of remaining current in the literature, coming to events like these, and being mindful of unexpected opportunities that will present themselves. as an illustration of that, i can offer my own background as an example. i started working on these issues by accident. i was a young lawyer in washington, d.c. with a federal judge when i got hired to work on administrative law issues with the justice department which was in august of 2001. three weeks later, administrative law suddenly seemed less important. we had to get very smart on national security and counterterrorism issues very quick. it was that happenstance of being there at that moment of time that i began to develop an interest and focus on these issues. of course, we pray there is never a comparably cataclysmic career shift for anyone who is in this room. me of your -- remind second question. >> the long-term capabilities, there has been quite a bit of innovatio

there are plenty of opportunities to engage on these issues in the private sector and academia and think tanks. ofis simply a matter remaining current in the literature. coming to events like these. being mindful of unexpected opportunities that will present themselves. as an illustration, i can offer my own background as an example. i started working on these issues by accident. i was a little -- i was a young lawyer. i got hired to work on administrative law issues with e justice department which was in august of 2001. weekthree later, administrative law suddenly seemed less important. we had to get very smart on counterterrorism issues very quick. it was that happenstance of being there at that moment of time that i began to develop an interest and focus on these issues. we prayed -- we pray there is never a comparably cataclysmic career shift for anyone who in his room -- in this room. reminds me of your second question. capabilities,rm there has been quite a bit of innovation and our government -- in our government. we have an anonymous amount of talent and expertise in our civilian

in the early 2000 there was very popular in academia, for obvious reasons, there was an over focus on trying to find ideology behind the putin regime. it took ideology i think much too seriously in trying to understand how the kremlin, now there hasn't been in the mainstream enough interrogation of these deceased mentalities, what they need come with a russian pastels ask him to believe about certain things and now it is publicly propagated s and pumping them in to institutions answer network institutions, from the whole secret service world, there really is a world of ragged schools and private hunting lodges and in the bureaucracy and enter the military. i think that when we talk about russia, a comment that one receives from russian officials and myriad, myriad top of it you're talking about fragments, fragments remains of the 1990s. there is a point here which is that certainly the discussion in the media we get is an over focus on a generation of ambitious 1990s oligarchs, heavily criminalized but have the sort of western global financial ambitions. there isn't enough discussion

brian: i want to ask you about academia. one of the funders, nicholas brady, was a senator and secretary of the treasury. [video clip] mr. brady: i will support the constitution of the united states. i come from 30 years in the banking business. and though you don't hear the term anymore, i was always taught the best loan you could make was a character loa one that looked beyond hard numbers and took a leap of faith and counted on the character and strength of the individual involved. brian: do your students pay any attention to the fact that this man comes from the republican party, paid money for this course, does that matter? has he tried to steer you in a certain direction? mr. gaddis: no. we had one piece of advice from nick when the money came and the endowment was set up. i asked him, mr. brady, thank you for your generosity. what should we do with your money? he said, teach common sense. that is all he ever said. it was wonderful advice. so that allowed us huge leeway in setting up the course. he has never tried to t

bloom, compared the tyranny of feminism in academia to -- he was writing at a time when women accounted for 10% of college tenured faculty. it is worth looking back at what was considered annoyingly outrageously politically correct in the 1980's, the last time we have this debate. having to -- not being able to call indigenous people " indians" or use terms like african-americans. adding women or people of color to the western curriculum, not making gay jokes are using "retart" as the next set. new words stick in your throat the way we are used to talking and thinking natural and normal. by definition, and then the new terms and concepts that have social utility stick and those that don't fall away. if you go back to the 1970's, ms stuck around and women with a y didn't. i hope that someday we will look thatand marvel gender-neutral protons ever seen like an existential threat. i also don't think it is clear that that might not happen because, there are plenty of places that have indeed dialed back cosmopolitanism and reinstated patriarchy in the name of staving off chaos. they seemed l

a pleasure to see all old friends from the intelligence community, from the think tank and world of academia and other agencies around town. and even some media friends i have made over the years, so thank you for having me today. in the interest of time i'm going to cut right to the chase, and try to identify a core question. and give you my thoughts on that core question and hopefully frame the discussion that we have on the panel, but also during the q and a. so, the core question i have been thinking a lot about is what exactly is putin going to do in the next six years, now that he has won reelection? does have a strategy? what does he really seek to achieve during this timeframe? i'm not even going to get into whether he is running again in 2024. some of you may have seen that story out of of chechnya. their already floating balloons for a story that somebody might want to put in the constitution for 2024, that is a whole -- what's to amend the constitution for 2024, that is a whole subject unto itself. i'm going to focus on the next six years. so if i look -- by the way, i think every

in the early 2000s it was very popular in academia, for obvious reasons there was an overfocus on trying to find ideologies behind the putin regime. it took ideology, i think, much too seriously in trying to understand how the kremlin worked. now there haven't in the mainstream enough interrogation of the besieged fort tress, what they mean, what the russian establishment has come to believe about certain things and how it's propagating ideologies and pumping them into institutions and network institutions from the whole secret service world, it really is a world of private schools and private hunting lodges and into the bureaucracy and into the military. i think that when we talk about russia a comment that one receives from russian officials and then media, media, media sock puppets is you're talking about fragment remains of the 1990s. they do have a point here which is that the -- certainly the discussion in the media we get is an overfocus on a generation of ambitious 1990 oligarchs heavy criminal lysed, but you have these sort of western global financial ambitions and there isn't e

law enforcement, academia we could go down the list, science. as general hayden said, all of the fact-based institution this is country has built its foundation on over the past several centuries. and i wonder if you do have to be a psychiatrist to figure out that that's donald trumps intent. >> i don't know if you have to be a psychiatrist or just a political analyst. he is going for the jugular. he's fighting as hard as he can to save himself and his presidency and he's attacking targets that let's be honest the public has had some suspicion for. the idea that there's a cabal of elitists in washington, that's something americans have felt for a couple centuries, this suspicion toward washington and central pow er. it's the cynical way that it's being exploited that i find disturbing. we depend on these agencies for our security as a country and bashing them everyday the way the president does causes harm. and to bash the news media -- it was only a decade or so that the arrival of cnn to cover a demonstration or protest in eastern europe and g

icebreaker from places to meet with so much on the meet me in their stud saying of any please please academia. something that is it's never a mason a good one there shouldn't be a death in the us with one of these societies and i was getting stiffed don't measure their stiff them and then you're. going to odds with one heart on the other just give up on an offer on the kind of him not to end on live. human like than i do said the innocent but he's been passed on so if he didn't stand in this b.s. to some intervening yeah the thing i'm with i have yet i would also have to ask if you have told me. of if indiscreet i'm sure it's him. what would you say is the best thing about being here at the broth academy i think is. very lax in their newness you see anything you have time to practice that sometime is what you need. to be really focused on what are doing and you have for so great teachers that they take calm and then guide you they stretch a soldier they way to go and then you have time to develop yourself what's it like here when everybody's practicing at the same time do you have a favorite

reporting around this informant said they were involved in many administrations, a long-term career in academia, it is natural they would be on the list. maria: house republicans want a second special counsel to look deeper into hillary's personal server on the ongoing russia investigation, that is another thing devon nunez is looking at and we are looking at hillary clinton's first email. >> a special calls for additional special councils to wander around town to follow that up. and it will be on the hill in those committees. maria: next johnston coming from the white house to a screen near you, a production deal with netflix could have him on some shows producing others. we will tell you about it. and elon musk's human is closer to reality. he is showing up incredible images. back in a moment right here. [music playing] (vo) from day one, we always came through for our customers. it's how we earned your trust. until... we lost it. today, we're renewing our commitment to you. fixing what went wrong. and ending product sales goals for branch bankers. so we can focus on your satisfaction. it's a

i love academia. that's where i'll leave it. but no plans to consider coming here? i have no plans. but you're not ruling it out? look, all i can say is i'm very happy with my currentjob. joining us is trevor greetham from royal london asset management. quite a lot of interesting stories in the papers. we picked out one from the washington post, we mentioned it earlier, the french oil giant total threatening to pull out of its gas project in iran. this is the business response to the political tensions at the moment between the us and iran. this is because america has talked about secondary sanctions. sanctions on companies that do business with iran. total is doing business with iran. total is doing business with iran and they have made a big deal of the fact 90% of their financing comes from us banks, but it shows you how difficult it is in business to deal with these uncertain to these, these what you might call trumpian uncertainties. if total pulls out you could feel the card is crumbling. it will affect other countries aside from iran in a big way. classic trumpet, go in with

i love academia. no plans to consider coming here? i have no plans. but you are not ruling it out. look, all ican you are not ruling it out. look, all i can say is i am very happy with my currentjob. later today president trump's business team, led by us treasury secretary steven mnuchin, will host the vice premier of china, liu he, for trade talks in washington. it is the second round of talks aimed at heading off a damaging trade war between the two sides following their meetings in beijing two weeks ago. the us has threatened to impose punitive tariffs on up to $150 billion in chinese goods, demanding a rebalancing of their trading relationship. the bbc‘s robin brant reports from dongguan, in southern china, which could be hit hard. if the trade war comes, this is where china will feel it — really feel it. dongguan is near the south coast, a place once dubbed the workshop of the world. in this factory, oil, lubrication, is everywhere. the smell of it is in the air, the feel of it under your feet. they make precision metal parts here, and they reckon up to 300 could be hit by

almost everybody i have talked to -- democrats, republicans, people in industry, people in academia -- they say this is years away. what i think a lot of these companies are looking for is two things. the first is standards, how good does the ai need to be? what does it need to do? the other thing they are looking for is to understand the current regulatory environment. spencer mentioned health care, things like hipaa, the health care privacy law, how is that going to apply if ai is making decisions about your health or aiding in a diagnostic? i think what the industry wants to know is how exactly to think about those issues before they look at any kind of new, broad-based ai regulation act. emily: you know so much about how much these companies are lobbying congress, what they're asking for, and what kind of money they are spending. talk to us about how lobbying efforts have changed or evolved over the last year under the trump administration. ben: i think you see this interesting aspect of lobbying in the trump administration. there are a lot of people who go straight to the white h

that came from government, academia, business, working together for how it evolves. i think you see the same thing in ai. reporter: today a select committee at the white house was formed across government agencies. the head of r&d for those government agencies to figure out how to use artificial intelligence better. the head of the white house science and technology office said this will increase productivity. artificial intelligence will help in health care and possibly save lives. it will mean displacement and some job losses. on that front industry leaders want to see the white house and this administration put money forward for training. already the trump administration has put in $200 million per year for stem and computer science training. the industry come on top and behind that added $300 million a year for that. with all the privacy concerns mostly at the white house they're concerned with the loss of possibly non-tech jobs. melissa. melissa: he wardlaw recognize, thank you for that. david: tensions escalating between israel and iran to say the least. is the

your thoughts about what's going on in academia and why republicans don't take seriously about achieving ideological diversity. >> i work for turning point u.s.a. and this is what we are confronting head-on. i think ought reason democrats and republicans alike don't take it seriously because they don't understand how bad it has gotten. conservative thinkers are under attack. you have students against white supremacy that shout down student for capitalism. they are socialists. they refer to people who wear blue blazers as the symbol of white supremacy. i was at a campus in minnesota that said somebody wearing a blue blazer was the costume for white supremacy. lou: that is stunning. that's one i hadn't heard before. there is so much that's being ginned up by the left in this country. watching the dimms at gina haspel's confirmation hearing. those are some of the nastiest people i have ever seen. utterly disgusting. >> it's so typical unfortunately of democrats in the last 10-15 years for them to turn something so crucial and important as this nomination into a stupid partisan fight in whic

in the west in the halls of government academia and the media which will echo they continually talk about russia and sometimes china as revisionist or revanche just powers against they don't there's two different world orders we're talking about they refer to the liberal world order not to the un stablished world order they're talking about the world order that they believe started with bretton woods and continued up through the collapse of the soviet union and came to its biggest height of union polarity of u.s. led western hegemony during the one nine hundred ninety s. and what they're talking about is russia and china returning to positions of great power status in the world are blocking their control of the world whereas russia and china and i'm not going to stand for it k.k. from a realist perspective and of course from a relativist position of weakness little to the us prefer the rules bound system in one thousand nine hundred five established by the un. whereas the us regards the principle un prince of the security council principles un charter principles of sovereignty and non int

this animal planet and all of my academia and we all smile quick to rattle off a list i have had to. bring in and it seems to me from singing by having someone come to hear anyone is going to let in what was going on is really. they're trying to run out. in a good drive to hide how dishonest you. are to get out of the shoulder not a five year wish doesn't alter you know you and i have a very good for them to be. near. a good measure it's one of the sure little most lovely and was. and then what about our. teams. really of. the militias which matters. when little as in i literally have. had a facility that they have an image i knew i was going to get attacked the girl was sure that there's a man. six absolutely when most. of. the reddish telegram by the in that name was that he had started when most. in the mob wives an iranian it must have been and it is. wide in the raffle for we don't have the lot of the mob i've been home. but if it is such a hole is interesting never. where the haitian i never liked. least let's hear the. react to the national mood market crashes. was alive the i

in the west in the halls of government academia and the media which all echo they continually talk about russia and sometimes china as revisionist or revanche powers against they don't there's two different world orders we're talking about they refer to the liberal world order not to the un stablished. world order they're talking about the world order that they believe started with bretton woods and continued up through the collapse of the soviet union and came to its biggest height of the union polarity of u.s. led western hegemony during the one nine hundred ninety s. and what they're talking about is russia and china returning to positions of great power status in the world are blocking their control of the world whereas russia and china and i'm not going to stand for it k.k. from a realist perspective and of course from a relativist position of weakness they'll to the us prefer the rules bound system one thousand nine hundred five established by the un whereas the us regards the principle un prince of the security council principles un charter principles of sovereignty and non interf

said, i would issue one caution, and i do think that we've become a little bit more closed-minded in academia than in the past and that's probably not the students. students are always think they have the truth. look at the three of us, we're all bald, which means we went to school during the vietnam war times and there was no -- you're a little younger, ben, sorry. but -- >> don't get him mad. >> class of '68. >> no more tumultuous time than. that while we thought we knew earth, people pushed back and that was true among the faculty and media and intelligentsia, and i think right now the one thing i would say we have to worry about is those other three groups are not pushing back perhaps as hard as they should. >> thank you. mr. secretary, and then mr. chairman. >> well, i think the -- if we're optimistic, it's got to come from the young people, because all the issues we talk about today were about whether it's the national debt or the political system or some of the issues we didn't talk about, like climate exchange environmentalists. these are generational equity, and the thing that concer

and it's just -- you now, it's time, once you're finished in government, you ought to go to academia and not to try to play the same role. lou: by the way, do we have the president talking about john kerry today? do we have that sound? can you bring that up? it's worthwhile for all of us to see that. it's terrific. let's turn to these remarks today by the president at the nra. great speech. >> very powerful. lou: we referred to love in the room there. i mean, there was a mutual admiration society at the nra -- between the nra and this president. >> very important constituency. and what he challenged them is to get out and use all of the powers that you have in the midterm elections and that's very important that they do that. they're powerful across the country because they've got a lot of active members. lou: and the trump economy, 34.9% unemployment, the lowest unemployment rate since 2000. the lowest hispanic and african-american unemployment ever. and jarrett is trying to take credit for it today. >> again, she should have left the government a long time ago too. at the end of th

become ak that we have little more closed minded and academia that we were in the past. that is probably not the students. students are always -- they always think they have the truth. look at the three of us, we are bald. it means we went to school during the vietnam war times. you are a little younger, ben, sorry. terrence: don't get him mad. ben: class of 68. edward: there was no more tumultuous time than that. the difference was where we thought we knew everything, there were people that pushed back. that was true among the faculty, among the media, and intelligentsia. i think right now, the one thing i would say we have to worry about is that those other three groups are not pushing back perhaps as hard as they should. terrence: thank you. mr. secretary than mr. chairman. , if we areink optimistic, it has to come from the young people. all the issues we talked about today were about whether it is the national debt or whether it is our political system, or some of the issues we didn't talk about like climate change and environmental risks. these are generally -- gene

including insurers, pharmacists, pharmacy benefit managers, academia and medical practitioners. in a few moments we'll have a pharma ceo with a sponsored conversation betwe conversation. and i'll object on stage to introduce our editorial panel led by politico's health care reporter onhe pharmaceutical beat and shel have a state of the pharmaceutical supply chain and what can be done to better control costs. join me in welcoming steve to the stage. [applaus [applause]. >> well, thank you, marty, for that kind introduction. and i want to thank politico for the important covering of health care topics. one of the most important parts of my job i get to travel the country and meet with researchers and member companies and get a chance to see what's next in the science of saving and improving lives. we ask one question more than any other, what if, what if we could bring the blind out of the dark or teach our bodies to fight the cancers within them or make cures as unique as every single one of us. well, now, we have a gene therapy that has the potential to treat childhood blindness

a lot of these things are being worked on by funding and academia companies get involved in the later stages we went through that with zika there are ones funned by the government we haven't gotten across the finish line yed yet, west nile, we haven't seen that across the finish line either in a more immediate sense, they need to do mosquito control and go out with folks who are spraying today to get a sense on how that is shaking their business >> do miscoy tos occupy any e ecological niche >> i like this story, they are a food source for birds and other animals. >> you don't get rid of bats because of mosquitos you want bats around, a little place. >> the bat cave. yeah no, not like michael keaton. yeah >> and they didn't think he would be, either you know what i mean. >> he's my fate, michael keaton. >> better than talking about skeevie bedbugs. becky, that's her -- ooh everybody hates bedbugs. all right, we got to go. a big show big, big, really big show coming up on "squawk box" tomorrow, becky will be live at the berkshire hathaway annual meeting the lineup of ceos, including be