The Rise of Conservatism: Crash Course US History #41

Episode 41: Rise of Conservatism Hi, I’m John Green, this is CrashCourse
U.S. history and today we’re going to–Nixon?–we’re going to talk about the rise of conservatism.
So Alabama, where I went to high school, is a pretty conservative state and reliably sends
Republicans to Washington. Like, both of its Senators, Jeff Sessions and Richard Shelby,
are Republicans. But did you know that Richard Shelby used to be a Democrat, just like basically
all of Alabama’s Senators since reconstruction? And this shift from Democrat to Republican
throughout the South is the result of the rise in conservative politics in the 1960s
and 1970s that we are going to talk about today. And along the way, we get to put Richard
Nixon’s head in a jar. Stan just informed me that we don’t actually
get to put Richard Nixon’s head in a jar. It’s just a Futurama joke. And now I’m
sad. So, you’ll remember from our last episode
that we learned that not everyone in the 1960s was a psychedelic rock-listening, war-protesting
hippie. In fact, there was a strong undercurrent of conservative thinking that ran throughout
the 1960s, even among young people. And one aspect of this was the rise of free
market ideology and libertarianism. Like, since the 1950s, a majority of Americans had
broadly agreed that “free enterprise” was a good thing and should be encouraged
both in the U.S. and abroad. Mr. Green, Mr. Green, and also in deep space
where no man has gone before? No, MFTP. You’re thinking of the Starship
Enterprise, not free enterprise. And anyway, Me From The Past, have you ever
seen a more aggressively communist television program than “The Neutral Zone” from Star
Trek: The Next Generation’s first season? I don’t think so.
intro Alright so, in the 1950s a growing number
of libertarians argued that unregulated capitalism and individual autonomy were the essence of
American freedom. And although they were staunchly anti-communist, their real target was the
regulatory state that had been created by the New Deal. You know, social security, and
not being allowed to, you know, choose how many pigs you kill, etc.
Other conservatives weren’t libertarians at all but moral conservatives who were okay
with the rules that enforced traditional notions of family and morality. Even if that seemed
like, you know, an oppressive government. For them virtue was the essence of America.
But both of these strands of conservatism were very hostile toward communism and also
to the idea of “big government.” And it’s worth noting that since World War
I, the size and scope of the federal government had increased dramatically.
And hostility toward the idea of “big government” remains the signal feature of contemporary
conservatism. Although very few people actually argue for shrinking the government. Because,
you know, that would be very unpopular. People like Medicare.
But it was faith in the free market that infused the ideology of the most vocal young conservatives
in the 1960s. They didn’t receive nearly as much press
as their liberal counterparts but these young conservatives played a pivotal role in reshaping
the Republican Party, especially in the election of 1964.
The 1964 presidential election was important in American history precisely because it was
so incredibly uncompetitive. I mean, Lyndon Johnson was carrying the torch
of a wildly popular American president who had been assassinated a few months before.
He was never going to lose. And indeed he didn’t. The republican candidate,
Arizona senator Barry Goldwater, was demolished by LBJ.
But the mere fact of Goldwater’s nomination was a huge conservative victory. I mean, he
beat out liberal Republican New York Governor Nelson Rockefeller. And yes, there were liberal
Republicans. Goldwater demanded a harder line in the Cold
War, even suggesting that nuclear war might be an option in the fight against communism.
And he lambasted the New Deal liberal welfare state for destroying American initiative and
individual liberty. I mean, why bother working when you could just enjoy life on the dole?
I mean, unemployment insurance allowed anyone in America to become a hundredaire.
But it was his stance on the Cold War that doomed his candidacy. In his acceptance speech,
Goldwater famously declared, “Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.”
Which made it really easy for Johnson to paint Goldwater as an extremist.
In the famous “Daisy” advertisement, Johnson’s supporters countered Goldwater’s campaign
slogan of “in your heart, you know he’s right” with “but in your guts you know
he’s nuts.” So in the end, Goldwater received a paltry
27 million votes to Johnson’s 43 million, and Democrats racked up huge majorities in
both houses of Congress. This hides, however, the significance of the election. Five of
the six states that Goldwater carried were in the Deep South, which had been reliably
democratic, known as the “Solid South,” in fact.
Now, it’s too simple to say that race alone led to the shift from Democratic to the Republican
party in the South because Goldwater didn’t really talk much about race.
But the Democrats, especially under LBJ, became the party associated with defending civil
rights and ending segregation, and that definitely played a role in white southerners’ abandoning
the Democrats, as was demonstrated even more clearly in the 1968 election.
The election of 1968 was a real cluster-Calhoun, I mean, there were riots and there was also
the nomination of Hubert Humphrey, who was very unpopular with the anti-war movement,
and also was named Hubert Humphrey, and that’s just what happened with the Democrats.
But, lost in that picture was the Republican nominee, Richard Milhous Nixon, who was one
of the few candidates in American history to come back and win the presidency after
losing in a previous election. How’d he do it?
Well, it probably wasn’t his charm, but it might have been his patience. Nixon was
famous for his ability to sit and wait in poker games. It made him very successful during
his tour of duty in the South Pacific. In fact, he earned the nickname “Old Iron Butt.”
Plus, he was anti-communist, but didn’t talk a lot about nuking people. And the clincher
was probably that he was from California, which by the late 1960s was becoming the most
populous state in the nation. Nixon won the election, campaigning as the
candidate of the “silent majority” of Americans who weren’t anti-war protesters,
and who didn’t admire free love or the communal ideals of hippies.
And who were alarmed at the rights that the Supreme Court seemed to be expanding, especially
for criminals. This silent majority felt that the rights
revolution had gone too far. I mean, they were concerned about the breakdown in traditional
values and in law and order. Stop me if any of this sounds familiar.
Nixon also promised to be tough on crime, which was coded language to whites in the
south that he wouldn’t support civil rights protests. The equation of crime with African
Americans has a long and sordid history in the United States, and Nixon played it up
following a “Southern strategy” to further draw white Democrats who favored segregation
into the Republican ranks. Now, Nixon only won 43% of the vote, but if
you’ve paid attention to American history, you know that you ain’t gotta win a majority
to be the president. He was denied that majority primarily by Alabama
Governor George Wallace, who was running on a pro-segregation ticket and won 13% of the
vote. So 56% of American voters chose candidates
who were either explicitly or quietly against civil rights.
Conservatives who voted for Nixon hoping he would roll back the New Deal were disappointed.
I mean, in some ways the Nixon domestic agenda was just a continuation of LBJ’s Great Society.
This was partly because Congress was still in the hands of Democrats, but also Nixon
didn’t push for conservative programs and he didn’t veto new initiatives. Because
they were popular. And he liked to be popular. So in fact, a number of big government “liberal”
programs began under Nixon. I mean, the environmental movement achieved success with the enactment
of the Clean Air Act, and the Clean Water Act, and the Endangered Species Act.
The Occupational Health and Safety Administration and the National Transportation Safety Board
were created to make new regulations that would protect worker safety and make cars
safer. That’s not government getting out of our
lives, that’s government getting into our cars.
Now, Nixon did abolish the Office of Economic Opportunity, but he also indexed social security
benefits to inflation and he proposed the Family Assistance Plan that would guarantee
a minimum income for all Americans. And, the Nixon years saw some of the most
aggressive affirmative action in American history. LBJ had begun the process by requiring
recipients of federal contracts to have specific numbers of minority employees and timetables
for increasing those numbers. But Nixon expanded this with the Philadelphia
plan, which required federal construction projects to have minority employees. He ended
up attacking this plan after realising that it was wildly unpopular with trade unions,
which had very few black members, but he had proposed it.
And when Nixon had the opportunity to nominate a new Chief Justice to the Supreme Court after
Earl Warren retired in 1969, his choice, Warren Burger was supposed to be a supporter of small
government and conservative ideals, but, just like Nixon, he proved a disappointment in
that regard. Like, in Swan v. Charlotte-Mecklenbug Board
of Education, the court upheld a lower court ruling that required busing of students to
achieve integration in Charlotte’s schools. And then the Burger court made it easier for
minorities to sue for employment discrimination, especially with its ruling in Regents of the
University of California v. Bakke. This upheld affirmative action as a valid governmental
interest, although it did strike down the use of strict quotas in university admissions.
Now, many conservatives didn’t like these affirmative action decisions, but one case
above all others had a profound effect on American politics: Roe v. Wade.
Roe v. Wade established a woman’s right to have an abortion in the first trimester
of a pregnancy as well as a more limited right as the pregnancy progressed. And that decision
galvanized first Catholics and then Evangelical Protestants.
And that ties in nicely with another strand in American conservatism that developed in
the 1960s and 1970s. Let’s go to the ThoughtBubble. Many Americans felt that traditional family
values were deteriorating and looked to conservative republican candidates to stop that slide.
They were particularly alarmed by the continuing success of the sexual revolution, as symbolized
by Roe v. Wade and the increasing availability of birth control.
Statistics tend to back up the claims that traditional family values were in decline
in the 1970s. Like, the number of divorces soared to over one million in 1975 exceeding
the number of first time marriages. The birthrate declined with women bearing 1.7 children during
their lifetimes by 1976, less than half the figure in 1957. Now, of course, many people
would argue that the decline of these traditional values allowed more freedom for women and
for a lot of terrible marriages to end, but that’s neither here nor there.
Some conservatives also complained about the passage in 1972 of Title IX, which banned
gender discrimination in higher education, but many more expressed concern about the
increasing number of women in the workforce. Like, by 1980 40% of women with young children
had been in the workforce, up from 20% in 1960.
The backlash against increased opportunity for women is most obviously seen in the defeat
of the Equal Rights Amendment in 1974, although it passed Congress easily in 1972. Opponents
of the ERA, which rather innocuously declared that equality of rights under the law could
not be abridged on account of sex, argued that the ERA would let men off the hook for
providing for their wives and children, and that working women would lead to the further
breakdown of the family. Again, all the ERA stated was that women and men would have equal
rights under the laws of the United States. But, anyway, some anti-ERA supporters, like
Phyllis Schlafly claimed that free enterprise was the greatest liberator of women because
the purchase of new labor saving devices would offer them genuine freedom in their traditional
roles of wife and mother. Essentially, the vacuum cleaner shall make you free. And those
arguments were persuasive to enough people that the ERA was not ratified in the required
¾ of the United States. Thanks, ThoughtBubble. Sorry if I let my personal
feelings get in the way on that one. Anyway, Nixon didn’t have much to do with the continuing
sexual revolution; it would have continued without him because, you know, skoodilypooping
is popular. But, he was successfully reelected in 1972,
partly because his opponent was the democratic Barry Goldwater, George McGovern.
McGovern only carried one state and it wasn’t even his home state. It was Massachusetts.
Of course. But even though they couldn’t possibly lose,
Nixon’s campaign decided to cheat. In June of 1972, people from Nixon’s campaign broke
into McGovern’s campaign office, possibly to plant bugs. No, Stan, not those kinds of
bugs. Yes. Those. Now, we don’t know if Nixon actually knew
about the activities of the former employees of the amazingly acronym-ed CREEP, that is
the Committee for the Reelection of the President. But this break in at the Watergate hotel eventually
led to Nixon being the first and so far only American president to resign.
What we do know is this: Nixon was really paranoid about his opponents, even the ones
who appealed to 12% of American voters, especially after Daniel Ellsberg leaked the Pentagon
Papers to the New York Times in 1971. So, he drew up an enemies list and created
a special investigative unit called the plumbers whose job was to fix toilets. No, it was to
stop leaks. That makes more sense. I’m sorry, Stan, it’s just by then the
toilets in the White House were over 100 years old, I figured they might need some fixing,
but apparently no. Leaking. Nixon also taped all of the conversations
in the Oval Office and these tapes caused a minor constitutional crisis.
So, during the congressional investigation of Watergate, it became known that these tapes
existed, so the special prosecutor demanded copies.
Nixon refused, claiming executive privilege, and the case went all the way to the Supreme
Court, which ruled in U.S. v. Nixon that he had to turn them over. And this is important
because it means that the president is not above the law.
So, what ultimately doomed Nixon was not the break in itself, but the revelations that
he covered it up by authorizing hush money payments to keep the burglars silent and also
instructing the FBI not to investigate the crime.
In August of 1974, the House Judiciary Committee recommended that articles of impeachment be
drawn up against Nixon for conspiracy and obstruction of justice. But the real crime,
ultimately, was abuse of power, and there’s really no question about whether he was guilty
of that. So, Nixon resigned. Aw man, I was thinking I was going to get
away without a Mystery Document today. The rules here are simple.
I guess the author of the Mystery Document, and lately I’m never wrong.
Alright. Today I am an inquisitor. I believe hyperbole
would not be fictional and would not overstate the solemnness that I feel right now. My faith
in the Constitution is whole, it is complete, it is total. I am not going to sit here and
be an idle spectator to the diminution, the subversion, the destruction of the Constitution.”
Aw. I’m going to get shocked today. Is it Sam Ervin? Aw dang it! Gah!
Apparently it was African American congresswoman from Texas, Barbara Jordan. Stan, that is
much too hard. I think you were getting tired of me not being
shocked, Stan, because it’s pretty strange to end an episode on conservatism with a quote
from Barbara Jordan, whose election to Congress has to be seen as a huge victory for liberalism.
But I guess it is symbolic of the very things that many conservatives found unsettling in
the 1970s, including political and economic success for African Americans and women, and
the legislation that helped the marginalized. I know that sounds very judgmental, but on
the other hand, the federal government had become a huge part of every American’s life,
maybe too huge. And certainly conservatives weren’t wrong
when they said that the founding fathers of the U.S. would hardly recognize the nation
that we had become by the 1970s. In fact, Watergate was followed by a Senate
investigation by the Church Committee, which revealed that Nixon was hardly the first president
to abuse his power. The government had spied on Americans throughout
the Cold War and tried to disrupt the Civil Rights movement. And the Church Commission,
Watergate, the Pentagon Papers, Vietnam all of these things revealed a government that
truly was out of control and this undermined a fundamental liberal belief that government
is a good institution that is supposed to solve problems and promote freedom.
And for many Conservatives these scandals sent a clear signal that government couldn’t
promote freedom and couldn’t solve problems and that the liberal government of the New
Deal and the Great Society had to be stopped. Thanks for watching, I’ll see you next week.
Woah! Crash Course is made with the help of all of these nice people and it exists because
of…your support on Subbable is a voluntary subscription service
that allows you to support stuff you like monthly for the price of your choosing, so
if you value Crash Course U.S. History and you want this kind of stuff to continue to
exist so we can make educational content free, forever, for everyone, please check out Subbable.
And I am slowly spinning, I’m slowly spinning, I’m slowly spinning. Thank you again for
your support. I’m coming back around. I can do this. And as we say in my hometown,
don’t forget to be awesome.

Opinion | Political apologies should not be this hard

-I let down my friends,
I let down the country, I let down our system
of government and the dreams of all
those young people that ought to get
into government but will think it’s all
too corrupt and the rest. -I have one major regret. I took a risk with regard
to our action in Iran. It did not work. And serious mistakes were made
in trying to do so. -And I do regret it, particularly where it may have
caused personal pain. -It is important to me that
everybody who has been hurt know that the sorrow
I feel is genuine. -The other night, Ashley
and my daughter, Liza, said their prayers,
AND Little Liza, all of 10 years old,
said to Ashley, “We should pray for the woman.” This whole two-week effort
has been a calculated and orchestrated political hit. -So, you’re saying there’s never
been a case where you drank so much
that you didn’t remember what happened the night before,
or part of what happened? -It’s — You’re asking about,
you know, blackout. I don’t know.
Have you? -While I did not appear
in this photo, I am not surprised by its
appearance in the EVMS yearbook. That same year, I did
participate in a dance contest in San Antonio,
in which I darkened my face as part of
a Michael Jackson costume. I had the shoes, I had a glove, and I used just
a little bit of shoe polish to put under my —
or on my cheeks. And the reason I used
a very little bit is because I don’t know
if anybody’s ever tried that, but you cannot
get shoe polish off. -Are you still able to moonwalk?
-Uh… -Inappropriate circumstances. -My wife says,
“Inappropriate circumstances.” -In my past, I said and
believed things that were wrong. -I can’t marry my sister
or my brother. -And I can’t marry Keelo.
-And I can’t marry my dog. -Don’t let homosexuals force
their values on the people of Hawaii. -And worse, they were
very hurtful to people in the LGBTQ community
and to their loved ones. Many years ago, I apologized
for my words, and, more importantly, for the
negative impact that they had. I sincerely repeat
my apology today. -Would you change your vote
on civil rights if you had to give it today? -Yes, I would. On the Civil Rights laws
of 1964, I would. I would change my vote. -I am sorry that I extended
confusion about tribal citizenship
and tribal sovereignty and for harm caused. Tribes, and only tribes,
determine tribal citizenship.

Impeach Trump? What do the polls say? | IN 60 SECONDS

In the summer of 1973, pollsters Lou
Harris and George Gallup began asking people whether President Richard Nixon
should be impeached. At that early point in the Watergate saga, most people did
not want to impeach the president. Public opinion turned against Nixon in the late
spring of 1974, and Nixon resigned in August. Now, Congressman Brad Sherman,
Democrat from California, has filed an impeachment resolution against Donald
Trump using language that is similar to the resolutions language used during
Watergate. The measure has only one co-sponsor, and is unlikely to gain much
traction at this point. What do the polls say? A July poll from Monmouth University
is pretty much in line with the small handful of polls we have on the subject.
In it, 41% say President Trump should be impeached and compelled to leave office,
while 53% say that he should not be. In our deeply divided political environment,
large majorities of Democrats want to impeach him; large majorities of
Republicans don’t. A third of independents say he should go. This is a sensitive issue with serious political ramifications. Let us know what you think
and let us know your comments. Also, let us know what other topics you’d like our
scholars to cover in 60 seconds, and be sure to subscribe for more research and
videos from AEI.

Opinion | Trump's impeachment would be a constitutional, not a political, question

-Impeachment is
a political question, though, not a legal one. -It is by design an inherently
political process. -Impeachment is sort of the
atomic bomb of political tools. -This has become the soundtrack
of our age, that the decision to impeach
is political, not legal, not moral,
not constitutional. Don't listen to this drumbeat. If you hear someone say
impeachment is a political question,
don't buy it. The framers of the Constitution
certainly didn't. See, the Constitution
is a legal document, and impeachment is
a constitutional mechanism. Therefore, impeachment
is a legal mechanism. It was designed by the framers
to permit the republic to hold the president
accountable for wrongdoing while in office. -Then it's time for new leadership for the United States
of America. -Yes, members of Congress,
politicians, must judge whether a president's
actions are treason, bribery, or other high crimes
and misdemeanors. -President Clinton
has been impeached. -But the Senate makes
its judgment on oath and under the presiding
authority of the chief justice of the Supreme Court. -The Senate adjudges
that the respondent, William Jefferson Clinton,
president of the United States, is not guilty as charged in the
second article of impeachment. -The view that everything
is just politics reduces the world to the cynical
pursuit of power over others. -If we don't get what we want
one way or the other, whether it's through you,
through a military, through anything
you want to call, I will shut down the government. -Okay, absolutely.
-This tactic will never build a healthy, prosperous society. The framers of the Constitution
created impeachment as a legal mechanism
to pursue the common good. That's how we should think
about it, not as a political tool
to serve one party's interest. -Essentially impeachment
is a political process. -Impeachment's
a political process. -Yeah, it's political,
but, you know, it's supposed to be high crimes
and misdemeanors. -Otherwise, we'll let this
insidious soundtrack corrupt us, too.

House Democrats Hold Mueller Report Hearing

the Judiciary Committee will come to order without objection the chair is authorized to declare recesses of the committee at any time we welcome everyone to today's hearing on lessons from the Muller report presidential obstruction and other crimes I will now recognize myself for an opening statement just over two years ago Special Counsel Robert Muller was charged with conducting a full and thorough investigation of the Russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election unquote including an examination of quote any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump and any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation close quote he concluded in his own words quote Russian intelligence officers who were part of the Russian military launched a concerted attack on our political system those officers used sophisticated cyber techniques to hack into computers and networks used by the Clinton campaign they stole private information and then released that information through fake online identities and through the organization WikiLeaks we now know that the Russian government linked that time to their operation to interfere with our election to harm the candidacy of Secretary Clinton and to benefit the Trump campaign separately the special counsel concluded the Russian entities quote engaged in a social media operation where Russian citizens posed as Americans in order to interfere in the election close quote using fake identities on social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter these operatives planned rallies in favor the president and spread lies about Secretary Clinton made to look like with Media again these activities represent a direct attack on our democratic process with respect to these two specific up with respect to these two specific operations by the Russian government the special counsel did not find sufficient evidence to charge Trump campaign officials with conspiracy against the United States he did however document at least 171 contacts between members of the Trump campaign and transition team and the Russian government 16 Trump campaign officials are known to have had direct communications with Russian agents representatives of the Trump campaign exchanged emails and phone calls and held face-to-face meetings with high-level Russian government officials Russian oligarchs and even some of the hackers the special counsel accused of working to sway the election there can be no question that Congress must investigate this direct attack and our democratic process I believe that ranking member Collins agrees that we must do so without delay in a letter he sent last month he urged the committee to call Robert Muller to testify during the Memorial Day recess if necessary both for the sake of transparency and quote for the American public to learn the full contours of the special counsels investigation close quote in a letter he sent last week the ranking member again asked us to examine quote the threat Russia and other nefarious actors have played and may continue to play in our elections close quote over the course of the coming weeks this committee will do just that we will examine the effects of foreign influence in our elections I hope that we will hear testimony from the special counsel as well but the country cannot hope to understand the Russian government's attack on our democratic system if we do not also investigate who stood to benefit from that attack and the extent to which the Trump campaign may have welcomed it similarly we cannot fully understand the special counsels work without also discussing president Trump's repeated attempts to undermine it in his report the special counsel describes 10 separate incidents in which the president attempted to change the scope of direction of the investigation or to end it all too at one point President Trump ordered White House Council Don began to fire the special counsel later he asked me Gann to write a letter stating that the incident never happened again said he would rather resign at different stages he asked Attorney General Jeff Sessions to Unruh cues in quotes himself and to step in to direct the investigation away from the president's conduct and of course the president's public statements about this investigation before and after before and after the results of the Miller report are at best at odds with the evidence laid out in the report itself there can be no question that this committee must investigate this behavior as well today's hearing is the first in a series of hearings designed to unpack the work of the Special Counsel and related matters we have a responsibility to do this work to follow the facts where they lead to make recommendations to the whole house as circumstances warrant and to craft legislation that makes certain no president Democrat a Republican can ever act in this way again our witnesses today include three former federal prosecutors each of whom has considerable experience weighing the kind of evidence laid out by the special counsel in his report and is in demand in his indictments of 34 individuals including President Trump's national security adviser his campaign manager his deputy campaign manager and his personal attorney our panel also includes mr. John Dean who served as white House Counsel to President Nixon and who became a critical witness for prosecutors and congressional investigators attempting to respond to President Nixon's attempt to obstruct the Department of Justice and the FBI we will rely on the expertise of these witnesses to help draw our own conclusions about the findings of the special counsel and other evidence before us today we will do so mindful of the house rules that prevent us from making inappropriate personal references to the President to members of this committee and to other members of Congress but the rules of decorum in the House of Representatives are a shield not a sword the rules are designed to focus the debate on the facts and the law and can therefore help us this that's the findings of the special council with the seriousness they deserve the rules are not however an opportunity to avoid discussing serious allegations of misconduct altogether I know that the ranking member and I disagree on any number of topics including on what conclusions we should draw from the facts laid out by the special counsel for example in his last letter he argued that President Trump has been quote vindicated unquote by the special counsels report I cannot agree with that conclusion either I believe with the special counsel given his insistence that his report quote does not exonerate the president close quote but I also know that the ranking member and I agree on the seriousness of the attack on our elections now and that we must work together to make it more difficult for any president to ignore the danger that presented itself in 2016 that work continues in this hearing room today and that continues that the Department of Justice later this afternoon when this committee will begin to review some of the document documents that Attorney General Barr previously denied us I am pleased that we have reached an agreement to review at least some of the evidence underlying the Mullah report including interview notes first-hand accounts of misconduct and other critical evidence and that this material will be made available without delay to members of the committee on both sides of the aisle as a result I see no need to resort to the criminal contempt statute to enforce our April 19th subpoena at least for now so long as the department upholds its end of the bargain but our arrangement with the department does not extend to the full scope of our request for the full model report and its underlying materials including grand jury information nor does it extend to our demand that done began a key fact witness testified before this committee our work will therefore continue tomorrow on the House floor when we consider chairman McGovern's resolution to authorize this committee to enforce its subpoena through civil litigation is my expectation that as a result of this authorization mr. McGann will testify before here before long between now and then we still have an obligation to investigate the deeply troubling evidence outlined by the special counsel not merely the portions that implicate Russian Nationals as some have suggested but the entire report including the volume that lays out some of the president's troubling behavior the committee's work is serious we should delay it no further we should conduct ourselves in a manner that is consistent with the rules of the house and worthy of this chamber and even if we cannot agree to draw the same conclusions from the evidence we should at least proceed with a common with the common understanding we were attacked we were attacked by a foreign adversary president Trump's campaign took full advantage of the attack when it came the descriptions of obstruction of justice and volume to go to the heart of our legal system if we can agree on this common set of facts as our starting place and agree to follow the facts of the law where they take us I believe we can make a great deal of progress in this hearing today I thank the panel for being here today and I look forward to your testimony before we proceed further I want to note for the record that the gentlelady from Pennsylvania miss Dean is unable to be with us today due to a death in the family she very much wanted to participate in today's hearing and I did not want anyone to misinterpret her absence it is now my pleasure to recognize the ranking member the Judiciary Committee the gentleman from Georgia mr. Collins for his opening statement Thank You mr. chairman and I appreciate especially the last and I would spend my prayers and thoughts to miss Dean as well I'm just a little over a little under a year in fact Monday this week will be one year from losing my mother so it is for all of us we go through that and it's an expression of love however I will come to this hearing today and say that we were continuing I appreciate the Chairman's understanding I appreciated the Chairman outlying a great deal of the Masek conclusion that was an affirmative conclusion from the Moller investigation that was a the foreign interference in the Russian part of this what is amazing though and I agree with the Chairman's assessment of being attacked and and there's something we've known the Russians were always a part for some of us we've been talking about the Russians for a long time in that but it's about priorities and here's my question about priorities and coming to this hearing and the question of priorities is is if we were attacked as the chairman just said then the priority should be to go to the battlefield on the attack where we were attacked on and not run by the sideshow to hear from the commentators we should actually go to the one that the the mr. Muller actually said was we have a problem here we're showing you we've actually inducing indictments here how can we firm up our elections how can we do away with foreign interference how can we do that it's about priorities and I think what has happened here is the Chairman is showing the priorities the priorities were from November 2016 it appears that we have an issue with who got elected president and we thought the Moller investigation would solve this for us and it really did not even after a lot of discussion we're gonna hear a lot about that today and in the discussion that we have but he goes back to priorities and priorities of bringing what we focus on and how we focus on it and if you look at the the witnesses today and you discuss what was actually just went on fro ha we're not bringing Russia front and center we're not bringing the the threats to our election front and center although I appreciate the Chairman reading the letters that I send him and understanding what we could actually be working on and I'm wanting to move forward there but however here we come with some folks that are great folks you're wonderful on TV I could catch your testimony on TV in fact by the way I couldn't this morning I'm a Republican I believe that you use everything that you've got there's much business you won't generate as much as you want to work for yourself I don't believe it's the problem of this committee to have to come in here from those who are not a part of the Moller investigation who are not a part of this pontificating on things that you can do on TV like all of us get a chance to do occasionally but not here on the hearing but then we get and I'm sort of reminded to rush the priority issue because just a few years ago it was brought up and one of our kin has talked about Russia being a threat and the former president mr. Obama said you know that the 80s are asking for their foreign policy by well guess what this committee is now hearing from the 70s and

President Richard Nixon – Address Announcing Resignation

good evening this is the 37th time I spoken to you from this office where so many decisions have been made that shaped the history of this nation each time I have done so to discuss with you some matter that I believe affected the national interest and all the decisions I have made in my public life I have always tried to do what was best for the nation throughout the long and difficult period of Watergate I have felt that was my duty to persevere to make every possible effort to complete the term of office to which you elected me in the past few days however it has become evident to me that I no longer have a strong enough political base in the Congress to justify continuing that effort as long as there was such a base I felt strongly that it was necessary to see the constitutional process through to its conclusion that the do otherwise would be unfaithful to the spirit of that deliberately difficult process and a dangerously destabilizing precedent for the future but with the disappearance of that base I now believe that the constitutional purpose has been served and there is no longer a need for the process to be prolonged I would have preferred to carry through to the finish whatever the personal agony it would have been involved and my family unanimously urged me to do so but the interests of the nation must always come before any personal considerations from the discussions I have had with congressional and other leaders I have concluded that because of the Watergate matter I might not have the support of the Congress that I would consider necessary to back the very difficult decisions and carry out the duties of this office and the way the interests of the nation will require I have never been a quitter to leave office before my term is completed is abhorrent to every instinct in my body but as president I must put the interests of America first America needs a full-time president and a full-time Congress particularly at this time with problems we face at home and abroad to continue to fight through the months ahead for my personal vindication but almost totally absorbed the time and attention of both the president and the Congress in a period when our entire focus should be on the great issue the peace abroad and prosperity without inflation at home therefore I shall resign the presidency effective at noon tomorrow Vice President Ford will be sworn in as president at that hour in this office

What Life Is Like As An Ex-President

there is nothing more pathetic in life than a former president these words and variations of them authored by former President John Quincy Adams show up in just about every major article on the subject but if you pay any attention to the news you'll see that's probably not the case today we're exploring what life is really like for an ex-president before we get started we have an executive order for you to subscribe to the channel and let us know who your favorite president is ladies and gentlemen the ex presidents of the United States even if you were young and vigorous before your presidency by now you feel like you're in danger of collapsing into a pile of dust the stress that transforms a president is a force of nature lucky for you there's really no need to recover from it to survive thanks to the 1958 former presidents at the US pays ex presidents a lifetime pension in 1958 it was $25,000 a year which works out to about two hundred eighteen thousand dollars a year in 2019 money today they actually get a little less the pension of an ex-president with a clean discharge from office is based on the salary of an active cabinet member two hundred and ten thousand seven hundred dollars a healthy sum especially compared with what the widow of an ex-president gets a paltry 20 grand now check this out those who make let's say less glorious exit from office Tricky Dick Nixon for example still have a shot at that fat pension but only if they quit before they could be a peach for the crimes provided they do resign in time they'll still get two hundred and ten thousand seven hundred dollars every year until they die which won't be for some time if they put their free healthcare and paid travel to good use doesn't matter what they did or didn't do to lose their job because their new job is to save face and Uncle Sam is happy to let taxpayers foot the bill bless his tiny little beard it's not all endless money and rainbow golf at Camp David being president means you never ever ever get to be alone ever ever again not even when you're done being president 2012 saw the passage of a law reversing 1994's 10 year limit on Secret Service protection for former presidents as of 2013 the Secret Service is tasked with watching over every ex president until death do them part as with the pension this protection does not extend to the family the children are inexplicably left on their own after they hit 16 and you know begin driving places on their own for the first time in their lives out in public on escorted bearing the surname of someone who still merits an armed guard at 91st ladies are punished with the removal of all rights to protection should they divorce and remarry regardless of how much the general public hates them or how their presidential partner treated them this is the very definition of a catch-22 shall we count the number of presidential divorcees no bad luck millennia you're stuck with him although there is that 20 grand to look forward to what with the pension the elite security detail and more things that seem just a little unfair in this economy or any other a library of your own is a luxury this country can ill afford right actually this one makes more sense than the rest but it requires a bit of background FDR known for applying a variable alphabet soup to reforms to American law books arranged for a library / museum to archive as many many many records we at weird history have benefitted quite a lot from that tradition thanks Frank public officials used to dump their old correspondences and junk into boxes and shove them into attics like good sane people this deviation and the normal scene on the part of politicians is a real heartbreaker for historians George Washington's nephew reported that his uncle's papers were very extensively mutilated by rats and otherwise injured by damn the world may never know what weird history was lost President Truman spent a great deal of time maintaining his library after departing the Oval Office which was a very decent thing to do considering how much time and effort those places demand there's a very good incentive on the part of the president his notes in good order as we'll see next let's face it it takes a very special kind of person to not only envision him or herself as commander-in-chief of a nation over 300 million strong decide to go through with it campaign for office win that office and stay in that office for four to eight years without getting into serious trouble most of us are not that person a lot of us would like to know what it's like to be that person decision points george w bush's book sold 1.5 million copies and earned him seven million dollars bill clinton got a fifteen million dollar advance for his book my life which sold over two and a quarter million copies and won a grammy in its audiobook form narrated by clinton himself by 2017 the Obamas had already received 65 million dollars in advances for their books Jimmy Carter and true Jimmy Carter fashion wrote not one or two but fourteen books whose flat broke when he got out of office according to historian James Thurber have you been all judgy about X presidents and their ranches hold your horses for a minute you'd probably run off to live like a cowboy too if the government took your car keys when your term is up your driving days are done unless you have say a big ranch out in the country where you can make some rooster tails and doughnuts in the backyard until your heart gives out if you're wondering how X prezi's get around off private property look no further than the guys and the happy snappy black suits that's right the Secret Service doesn't just hang around waiting for bad guys they also become your private armed chauffeurs for the rest of your life too bad no one told poor old Joe Biden that there are a lot of reasons to run for president he said in typical Biden fashion but there's one overwhelming reason not to run for president I'd like to get that poor vet zo6 from zero to sixty at three point four seconds Oh Joe someone has to tell him anyway we're really very ok with this rule keep those presidents vice or otherwise off our streets at 77 the current model is already too dotty to drive as it is this one's a no-brainer obviously a guy who spent the better part of the last decade getting death threats is not going to check his own mail especially when he's no longer sitting on four floors of the White House which brings us back to the men in black they drive they sort mail they do everything that for an average Joe as opposed to a Biden Joe is routine but never confuse routine for boring in this field the Secret Service has intercepted pipe bombs meant for the Clintons the Obamas and other big figures in recent years at the off-site facilities used to sort the X presidential mail a statement from the Secret Service made October 24th 2018 concerning the mail the packages were immediately identified during routine mail screening procedures as potential explosive devices and were appropriately handled as such both packages were intercepted prior to being delivered to their intended location in the olden days before 1958 when a man could do a day's work for a day's pay president's left the White House with whatever they had when they moved in no fat pension no guaranteed book advance deals just a suit and the best resume America can give and some of them used it we mentioned before that Harry Truman put in a lot of hours at his own library in Independence Missouri but we didn't tell you was that he had an office there where he worked for 19 years he'd had enough excitement for one lifetime it's not a shocker that he'd spent the rest of his life working in a library Grover Cleveland not having bombed even one country during his non-consecutive presidential terms decided to play chicken with a stock market George Washington turned down an opportunity to be dictator for life and set himself up in style opening a whiskey distillery at Mount Vernon maybe that's how his papers got all soggy life is strange for next president after the most incredible power trip available is over you have to go and live in a bubble for the rest of your days surrounded by people who won't let you drive open your own mail go anywhere on your own or say whatever you want on Twitter not a lot of people can relate to that only other ex-presidents really so it comes as no surprise that many former commander and chiefs and their former first families are friendly with one another even if they come from different parties George W Bush for example preferred to Bill Clinton as his brother from another mother in 2017 on top of the pension the healthcare bodyguards and paid official travel the government reserves an annual hundred and fifty thousand dollar budget for an ex-president to spend on their staff for the first 30 months that's two and a half years of their retirement after which they kick in ninety six thousand dollars a year because apparently they need that too if that was an excessive enough every office space is comped courtesy of us the taxpayers judging by the current president's preferences and predilections we can reasonably expect the furnishings and staff of his future office to be a solid-gold fountain filled with blondes former presidents can and often do choose to have a state funeral all well and good it says nice of funeral as anyone could ask for five whole days of aircraft flyovers gunfire salutes and parades and of course flags remain lowered across the country even if we didn't like you a lot to plan for and the prezi spend an extraordinary amount of time doing the planning for Richard Nixon it was a chance to die with dignity he chose to opt out and be buried quietly in his library as befits a disgraced ex-president who continued to draw a tax funded paycheck until his death not bad dick not bad considering how much of their job is talking it seems a little incredible that a present can do the bulk of his speech making after the job is done but it's true many speeches given by those who have held that high office are given outside that office take Bill Clinton he earned a whopping 104 point nine million dollars from 542 speeches between January 2001 in January 2013 I've never had any money until I got out of the White House he told Wolf Blitzer in 2010 but I've done reasonably well since then the former presidents act is added again we've touched on the travel budget and now we'll tell you just how things stand buckle up each and every ex-president is entitled to up to $1,000,000 in security and travel expenses each dadgum year with an additional half mil for his spouse the only catch is barely even a catch they must be traveling as officials of the United States government and the stipulation came ten years after the FPA was put into effect you've ruled the first world country for the last four to eight years of your life and you come to the question what next where do you go from the top and if you are unpopular is there a chance to make people like you again philanthropy the Nobel Prize that's the golden ticket to immortality the eternal love of the people and a better tomorrow or it backfires horribly and turns into just more politics and a lot of comedy sketches as Al Gore might be able to tell you Jimmy Carter founded the Carter Center to protect election integrity and democratic nations mediate diplomatic disputes fight disease and other awesome things or this he justifiably won the 2002 Nobel Prize Michael Duffy co-author of the president's Club said of Carters philanthropic work he's made it difficult for absolutely everyone who's come after him because who can keep up who indeed who's even trying except Michelle Obama if there's one thing we've learned today it's that an ex-presidents life follows him after the choices he made it's perhaps not surprising that when Harry Truman left the White House he went straight to his mother-in-law's and dear sweet gentle Jimmy Carter got a sensible 2-bedroom house in Georgia Ronald Reagan on the other hand returned to a 7,000 square foot Bel Air mansion the Obamas and Clinton settled down and some lavish lodgings as well Healthcare is a bit more confusing Jimmy Carter gets his health benefits from Emory College where he was once a teacher because he wasn't a government employee for the minimum of five years requisite to gain healthcare benefits but the bloated budget of the FPA allows for health care what gives its health care so of course is got to be archaic all former presidents and their spouses widows and children under 18 are entitled to treatment in military hospitals free of charge they can also enroll in private health insurance plans at their own expense if they want more than the occasional motrin and they can afford it ex presidents are getting wealthier between the pension the speeches the books and the little odds and ends we didn't have time to deal with and the only way to live and struggle like regular folk is to choose to do so Jimmy certainly did and we hope he gets a little more love for it because it was one heck of a choice to make so what do you think of a next presidents post presidential life let us know in our comments below and while you're at it check out some of these other videos from our weird history

The Legacy of All the President's Men

good evening good evening this small gathering tonight I'm Tom Staley the director of the Harry Ransom Center the home of the Woodward and Bernstein Watergate papers many other important cultural archives in 1976 two years after the publication of Woodward and Bernstein's book of the same name and the resignation of President Richard Nixon this film was released a great public and critical acclaim and 205 the Ransom Center opened to the public the Woodward and Bernstein Watergate papers since that time students scholars historians and journalists have visited the center to study these papers and learn about not only one of the most significant crises in presidential history but also First Amendment rights freedom of the press executive power and the limits of the presidency and other issues related to American politics the Ransom Center is pleased to renew a partnership with our colleagues at the LBJ library to make this program available to you we're deeply grateful to mark Updegrove the director of the library and we're pleased to tell you that he's going to be serving as moderator tonight and I'm now going to introduce mark Updegrove here he comes thank you Tom and welcome everybody in the 35 years since all the president's men made its debut it's become not only a classic film but a film for the ages and that's not only because of the remarkable narrative storytelling abilities from its producer and its star Robert Redford but because of the compelling story that he was able to tell that of Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein breaking the Watergate burglaries story which ultimately resulted in the resignation of our 37th President Richard Nixon at the center of this film at its core is a message no man or woman in the United States of America is above the law that message is as important today as it was in April of 1976 when the when the film debuted and it's just important as it will be tomorrow and for the ages I'm going to run two clips the first clip is the actual trailer that audiences saw around the time of the premiere of the film at 35 years ago and then we're going to see another clip of the intrepid reporters would-wouldn't bernstein going to the home of their editor Ben Bradley and giving him a shocking revelation in the Watergate investigation let's run those clips are we doing fellas not going to happen all right this is not anticlimactic at all because what I'm about to say is going to change everything and you're going to be very very excited ladies and gentlemen please welcome Robert Redford Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein that was terrific yeah you know what we saw and it was rosemary woods it was and all of a sudden has gotten erased and they got it okay Woodward Bernstein were this close to doing shadow puppets Bob Redford I'm going to start the question with you and that is I want to talk about how you got involved in this film and generally when a filmmaker gets interested in in a project like this he buys the film rights to the to the book does a screen adaption and embarks on the project in that manner it was very different for you you got interested in this project well before there was a book talk about how you gained an interest in what Carl and Bob were doing well it was a four year journey and we don't have time to tell the full story but the story is pretty interesting about how it came about I'll see if I can shortcut it I had finished a film called the candidate and we were promoting that film on a whistle-stop train right in Florida that the candidates always took as a ritual every four years and the idea since the candidate was about the message of the film if there was one was – that we are electing people buy cosmetics rather than substance and I was I was the guy and I hurried when it came time for the vote was a very low-budget film because Studios weren't interested in politics as the subject matter so we were trying to come up with a plan and and the guy had a plan said okay why don't you take this train right all these candidates took and that year it was muskie McGovern Lindsay scoop Jackson remember who and what they would do it was like a ritual that went all the way back to LaFollette where you stopped at these spots along the way and they would get out in the back of the Train they would make a speech and then it would pull off so the idea was to make the point that the film was making that we would see if I could out draw the candidates and so we did this and so the train started on the train was political press and entertainment breath so we were going to go from Jacksonville Florida down to Miami and there was a whole plot well if this really goes well then we'll go all the way in and had you be a write-in candidate it was really at a rate so I'd go out the back of the train and I had these stats with me that said how many people came for the other candidates and there was range from 500 to 750 maybe Lindsay 1500 and so forth so when I went out there they had done a whole advanced thing there was maybe three three thousand four thousand feet so I would get out of back in the Train I would thank everybody for coming and I said god it's such a pleasure to be here it means so much to me that you've all come I just like to tell you all that I have absolutely nothing to say and I do that the training class that was okay for about two stops and then I got uneasy with it I didn't enjoy it anymore so anyway I would go in between the stops and chat with the guys and that was the political press and they were this was July 9th I think there was the date of 72 of 72 and the break-in had been just a couple of weeks before so I like everybody else didn't know a whole lot about it and I they were gossiping they were buzzing about something with that event I said oh hey what what happened about you I said was that burglars with my were they Cubans I couldn't kind of went away what happened with that and they sort of smiled and looked at each other and rumbled around and I says that they knew something or suspected something and I say what's going on I kind of pushed it and what came out of it was that no they didn't think it was Cubans and it the inference was that it maybe has something to do with the White House since I already had issues with Nixon I was very primed to see something not go right with and so I said well what's going on and and then I said wait a minute you've got you're going to watch me make a fool out of myself here of this thing and you're not going to do anything about it then I got a lecture and I was telling these guys I got a lecture about how it works and they said look it's both parties do its dirty tricks both parties do it that's not new secondly my Gummer is going to self-destruct mix is going to win on a landslide and nobody wants to be in the wrong side of this guy if we've been going after him at that time third you have to go outside to run a story that it would take to run a story like that down we'd have to go to a magazine or something like that and most people of this summer are only going to be interested in weather Hank Aaron beats blade booth Rick so I thought I've got very depressed by that and I thought I went home and because of what they had said I was curious whether it was kind of a I felt it was kind of a cynical view and and so I hocked the newspapers at home I was going to start a film the way we were in New York and so I had three months before I was starting the film and I watched the newspapers and sure enough nothing and they were going to be right and then suddenly this little thing appeared and it had dual byline I didn't remember the name was just two guys and and it was a committee to re-elect a slush fund above and then it grew and it grew in every few days it just grew and it grew but it was always the same two guys so I got all excited and I thought ah somebody's doing something this is really exciting so I was like a cheering section of a public citizen cheering section of one okay and then it blew up big time in September in it blew Oakland and most everybody Utah yeah so anyway when it blew up and there was there was a glitch in the testimony that with the grand jury testimony suddenly these guys were wrong and Nixon did get reelected and just two weeks later he got reelected and I read a little story about a little profile the two guys were it caused all this trouble and and who are also wrong and so when I read the profile of two guys their differences really interested me I thought gee they're so different politically they're different they're you know one and we need to go into why they're different but they were different in many many ways and it also suggested the article but they didn't really get along that well but they had to work together and that's what got me and I thought now that is really I would love to know what that was like how do those guys work together so that's how it all started and I thought I would be really interested in making a really small little low-budget film black and white film two unknown actors that I would produce about their process what did they do how do they do it furthermore there had not been a film in my to my knowledge that was about investigative reporting there have been film about the journalism but they were like front-page or others but not one about investigative journalism and of course that interested me because I felt that it was through investigative journalism that we got to issues that were important like truth and justice so I wanted to find out if I could get permission to pursue that so I I called Carl first and I didn't get a call back and then I called Bob Woodward didn't get a call back I tried a couple of times and then I forgot about I started filming in New York and then I would remember and finally I got Woodward in what is probably in November late November of 72 and he was very chilly and wasn't too welcoming or friendly and I said hi this is Bob Redford and he says ah and I said I have an idea want to talk to you guys about what if I could meet with you excuse me he said we're busy right now not a good time maybe some other time so he blew me off I forgot about it then Oh a little while later McCord wrote the letter to judge Rika turning the whole thing back around again and they were right I call Bob again I said look can you just give me a few minutes I want to talk about this idea so that was the journey getting to Bob and I flew to Washington and he and I met briefly and he said look this not cool right now and he apologized he said we didn't know it was you we thought we were being set up because we were we knew we were being watched we knew we were under surveillance we were paranoid we were nervous and frightened so let's come up to we'll meet you after you're done with your film they came up and we met and I told them I what I wanted to do well but this time things were moving rapidly there was before the hearings I said I don't know where this is going to go and they said at that time we don't either we don't know where it's going to bottom out but it's still going on I said well wherever it goes I don't know where it's going to go either but I'm only interested in this little piece of the puzzle what you guys did that other people didn't do and how you did it and so that's how it all began and then what came back was they were going to go write a book the hearings then came on they said look we'll we'll make it possible because of our connection they said we'll make it possible that you can have the movie rights to this but the rest of it selling to a studio will be up to the publishers so I had to wait for nine months where they wrote their book in the meantime the whole thing escalated into this giant national event with the hearings and then ultimately the resignation of Nixon and so I I guess I felt that I had stumbled into this with the idea of a very small story about a certain about process and the character of these two guys against this frame that just got bigger and bigger and bigger so I basically stumbled into a pretty major event in history I was fortunate in that way and then when the BIC was but the book was over I went down to Washington and school and they were fortunate enough to I was fortunate enough that they were generous enough to give me time to really spend time with them to understand them and understand their character at that time the studio was not inclined to be too much for this because they felt this was now a national event that people want to get past everybody knew what the story was they didn't want to spend the money that Simon is Shuster was asking and the way I was able to push through that was to say but it isn't about Nixon it isn't about the national event it's about what these guys did that other people weren't doing underneath the story that everybody knows and so I see it as a kind of a detective story and I'm banking on the fact that that would be interesting to an audience but mainly it's a character study two characters involved in a process that I think people would welcome see because that's what it took it took hard work it took digging and to make that dramatic was going to be a challenge of course but anyway that was how it let me go can I say so yeah the back story the back story of this is that while he is dreaming up this grand thing we're covering this story and we're in rough shape covering a story we are at the nadir of the Watergate coverage in November of 1972 Nixon has won re-election as Bob said we have made a very small mistake which has been magnified in allowing the Nixon White House as you see in the movie itself to attack us very effectively and the last thing that we could ever have is the White House knowing that we were sitting down with Robert Redford to make a movie about what we were doing to go after Richard Nixon one because we weren't going after Richard Nixon we didn't see it that way we saw this is really what the movie is about the best obtainable version of the truth how you go about reporting and the last thing we also intended to do was ever write a book about us that we had signed a book contract right around this time in fact we signed it on the day that we made the mistake and so the publisher got a 10% discount right and we figured not only the movie forget about a book Ethan Wright was about our career we're thinking of resigning that day you'll see in the film there's there's a scene in the rain I don't know if you knew this but this was the day that we thought we were going to have to resign when we met with the publisher and sign the contract and meanwhile so eventually we did decide to write a book because we thought that even with the Watergate look that all of the truth was not going to come out so we started to write a book that was about kind of speculative in nature about things we knew and what they might have meant and then the Watergate hearings blew up and the truth really became known they had subpoena power and we had nothing left to write about no book no book in the net and 10% dislike then you do you pick up from here yeah and so the question is of what what we do and we did a draft of kind of about Nixon and his people and so forth and there was nothing new and one of the rules of journalism and filmmaking is focus on what you know so we did a draft of us is the characters and actually it bobbed in the draft of what is the first chapter of all the president's men but he wrote it in the first-person plural which was rather difficult to follow so it said weed it was like this two headed machine and and so I took it and I said it's got some possibilities and from all things from reading Norman Mailer's armies of the night in which Baylor called himself mailer I saw how it gave him a great remove to write about himself as if he were a character outside his own skin and so I then took what Bob had written and I made the two-headed machine Woodward Bernstein and suddenly they were they were like a little beyond ourselves and and that became and then each of us then would write more about what we image was in the conversations with you Bob you told you know this is what you want to focus on and it planted quite frankly the seed of okay let's write about the reporting of this story and I think if you hadn't been involved the book I mean maybe it certainly would have been different and maybe non-existent but that you're in it quite frankly your enthusiasm and your sense this is the story now we were we're not that interested in our personalities but what we're interested in is how you do it and you made it very clear when you got involved that you you moved into the Madison hotel across the street from the Washington Post and you you would look at notes you wanted the granularity of what it was like when we talked to sources when we dealt in the newsroom and so there was this convergence here that made it possible to tell the the story of what it's like to piece something together you know idea what the ending is going to be no idea whether there is even going to be an ending it I mean this was on the run and we were doing this simultaneously we did the first draft which is most of the book in six weeks the book was published before Nixon resigns right in the last what line of the book is it will be up to the Congress of the the United States to decide what will happen to this is his assertion I will never remember is that's right that's why you should go on but yeah that's why we ended the film without you guys really knowing what was going to happen yeah even though the public did yeah go back to something you were talking about earlier about then you were confident moviegoers would be engaged by this movie but that way well I think you mentioned that did you not mention early if I did I lied well you and Richard Nixon look at the the Watergate scandal rocked the faith the American people in together and traditionally you saw this during the depression movies have been a place for escapism so what made you confident that Americans would be willing to walk back into the mire of water gay less than two years after Nixon had resigned from that well I don't know that I was confident I was just I think I became at a certain point obsessed I was just obsessed with what I thought was a really good story I guess I've always believed as a good story well told will attract people whether how many people I don't know but I just felt that there was a story underneath the story that people thought they knew and but the challenges and the obstacles were huge and I won't go through all them but starting with the fact the studio did not want to put money up for that sale because they felt the the American public was didn't want to hear any more about it they were angry and humiliated and it made America look bad and you have out you don't want to go back there and and so I had to try to convince them it's not about that it's about something that they don't know and what it what it took to get to that and if they don't know it then it's fresh and new and then it's my job to make it exciting and dramatic and the other obstacle was there's no shoot up nobody gets shot but I saw that there should be an underpinning of potential violence that looks like it could erupt at any time but it would make it kind of mysterious and more of a thriller and then there is the the the other problem of getting access the the Washington Post understandably was very nervous I'm talking about the head honchos there there was Kay Graham and then Bradley talk to talk about that movement if you would Bob well they were kay Graham understandably was protecting an enterprise that she she mothered and she thought because Hollywood had a reputation of screwing things up and so forth of historical interest and so she didn't want the film made and so Alan Pakula and I had to go to her and try to convince her that we were going to do a good job and we were going to be accurate and as authentic as possible and she still couldn't she just couldn't go there so she begged me she said look I beg you first of all don't make the film but if you're going to make this film please do not use the Washington Post name don't use I don't want anything to do it don't don't talk about me and don't use the editors name I suppose everybody do call it the meanwhile there was a best-selling book did it laid out the whole thing that's right so that took a while and then Ben Bradley is a smart shrewd tough guy was intrigued by this but he wasn't about to let things go awry so what he didn't was there what he did well cool and I were across the street trying to get as much accurate information as possible and really studying The Washington Post he had the Style section do a piece on us and I thought what the yeah all right so ok I get it it's called transparency now there is a wonderful story about how you mentioned Bradley how you got Jason Robards to play Bradley and your kid looking for somebody to take that part because he's integral to the coverage of Watergate to the to our book and the movie and Jason Robards is as I understand this was a friend of yours somebody that you went way back with and it was a low point in Jason Robards life and so you called him up and said look we want you to play Ben Bradley come look at the script and we're going to pay you $50,000 to play the role and at that time for Jason Robards that was big money so Roberts comes in they give him the script he takes it home comes back to CL and Pakula the director and Bob the next day and I've read the script I can't play Ben Bradlee I said why not said I'm going to quote here said because all Bradley does is run around and say where's the story and Bob then says to Jason Robards that's what the editor of the newspaper does and Robarts is kind of de flaming that that's all and and then you you or Pakula say to him what you're going to have to do in plain this part is you're going to have to find fifteen different ways to say where's the story that in fact is the genius of Bradley yeah because Bradley had more than 15 I'm so glad the baby isn't here to hear this the other the other challenge the other challenge was the the amount of investment that were that were figurative about literal the the intention as he said he had as he said that all the time but that made it P R rating so we had to go through a whole strategy going to religious groups and educational groups to get them on board to say this should be treated as an educational thing that's the language he used that's the language used we might have to do the same thing here tonight by the way you know there's also not a single romantic interest in the movie which is another interesting thing about it there's absolutely that was the other part I didn't reveal your relationship with Bob the other thing that's why we were worried about the we because the opening scene okay the the other thing we want to say was that why I was in the movie I did not want to be in the movie I thought that would distract because these guys were unknowns and they should be played by unknown so when the studio finally said okay we'll buy the rice but then they said you got to be in the movie and I didn't really want that so but that was the deal so then then I went to somebody you know my level I went to Dustin Hoffman and that was that now the next thing the next difficult part was trying to find out as much as I could about Bob and let Dustin work on Carl Carl at least in those days was more more outgoing and Bob was kind of reserved and so I spent a lot of time with Bob and I said look I I want to try to get to understand you don't don't get bothered by that and he said Walt no and look I'm really boring I said you what he said no I'm telling you I'm not that interesting Carl's the interesting one I'm not that interesting I'm kind of boring I thought well that's great I get to play a boring guy so then I began to push to try to find out things about Bob and I did and we don't need to go into all that facility there was a couple of things he told me and I don't know Bob correct me if I'm wrong in this but one of the things that really impressed me I said what is it about Woodward that has him almost obsessively dedicated like a workaholic he was obsessive about working working he seldom slept he was always working always thinking always working and I thought well s how do you I said where does that come from any so well did that obsession with working so hard and then tell me five this really yeah but Russ said he said well when I was a student at Yale I took these comprehensive tests and I had messed around I didn't really study for the first one I got so upset with myself I went in and I realized oh my god I don't really know what I should know here and he kind of winged it and then he got so upset by that he went home and really studied for the next day and had it nailed he went in and took the tests and when the results came back it was reversed that he did well in the first one and not so on the second and he went to the professor and he said hold it you got this all wrong show me when the guy showed him this is the deal he said it was then that I realized I wasn't quite sure what good work was I was going to have to work twice as hard to know is that right in the other being generous when you said on the second day where I thought I'd done well I'd actually flunked it but on the first day when I'd winged it and kind of talked in written answers in general terms I got the highest grade you could get and so I had a perfect score in a flunk and you know that was painful thankful well well I can relate to that they fund everything I do drop out to Woodward going back to these guys going back to these guys and tipping my hat to them he was going to be very hard to break through the predisposition that Hollywood was going to screw this up and so we were going to work harder than ever to be as authentic as possible to be detailed as possible because I thought this is really a story where detail becomes very important but we didn't have the original draft had not worked the script and and that writer went on his way and so there was very little left of that draft that we could use so what what happened was that Pakula and I were trying to cobble together as much accurate information as possible had it not been for Bob and Carl being so generous they didn't have to be they could have shared the other view of the other people and said well we're not going to they they share their notes and in those notes are a lot of a script but no like the scene the bookkeeper yet better now at the Ransom Center and those exact notes but in the process you showed us the first draft and Carl and his then-girlfriend wife Nora afferent decided they will ex-wife and decided they would work on some suggestions and I said well you might as well do a whole script so you and Nora did a whole script and brought it over to you and you read it and you I think your comment to Pakula was gee Errol Flynn is dead because all of a sudden we've been reincarnated in Carl Bernstein everything but the sword we ought to explain though thank you about the Washington Post trepidations about about this movie because you came to us and and the two of us sat there for a couple weeks and well should we do this we really do a movie and people who knew it says said to us you guys always knew you were going to do it and that might have been true I don't know but we've said okay we'll do it we then went to the Washington Post and as you found they were bit horrified but from their point of view especially Katherine Graham the publisher of The Washington Post who had been the most courageous publisher probably in the history of modern journalism as a result of what had happened and you see it in the movie and you see this courageous editor they had just been through a two-year experience where the future of the newspaper was in doubt daily where the head of the free world was determined to bury this newspaper they had come out triumphant the President of the United States had left office in disgrace and she was standing atop an institution at the top of its game so the last thing from her point of view that she wanted at this point was why he'll take another big gamble on Hollywood we could screw it up after having done this thing and I'm not sure that is part of what was it was incident I understand and there was a scene that you were going to do that's between yourself and somebody playing Katherine Graham which is important in the book where she really says look I want you to get to the bottom of this story I don't care what the consequences and you were going to shoot it and she said no no absolutely I can't be in the movie and then she saw the rough cut of the movie and she said in her own way is it too late to shoot that scene yeah so I'll tell you just quickly about that scene I really like that scene a lot and because it she was part of the picture and and I did think she should have a role in it and so we wrote this scene that Geraldine page was going to play her at that time that was 35 years ago where we compress what was in the book to make it kind of tense and mysterious where were bob and ben bradlee go upstairs because she calls me and they seen and and she says as he walks in and Bob's nervous obviously and this is all right around this deep throat stuff she says what are you doing with my paper and bob says trying to get to the bottom of it get to the story she said yes what that goes on just for a little bit longer and then she says and this deep throat what what is that and he says to her that's my source oh and she says and do you trust this source yes I do if I asked you to tell me who deep throat are you telling and his answer was if you ask me I'll have to tell you then there's this long pause and she says well we all have enough burdens to carry around be careful with my paper so I really love that scene I thought it was a really good scene and it would have been very dynamic I feel on the on the say-so she begged me not to have her in the movie and then and then when we screened the movie the really sweaty moment was after all was done and we the film was made and the editing was a monster and I had to take it to Washington to show the Washington Post people it was really a sweaty mom and so they came in Bob and Carl came in they were nervous as hell they were sitting in the front row and Ben Bradlee what I there's a thing I loved about Bradley Robards yeah Robards and I had been together years earlier in the Iceman Cometh television and I was just starting my career and he was very generous with me we have to be from the same part of Los Angeles and we could connect to that I went to high school with his sister so we had that connection he was very generous with me an entire mandi didn't have to be so when it came around for this and he had a very serious drinking problem and had a terrible accident Solly disfigured plastic surgery I had to put him back together again but he couldn't work people wouldn't hire him so I felt this was a chance to return and I thought he just did a magnificent job and so he is been bred and Bradley is healed everything it's true interestingly enough after the movie came out Bradley became more like Bradley in the movie there was a moment there was a great Giavotella we screened the movie these guys get in the front row I'm in the back I'm sweating bullets Bradley Robards managed to spend enough time with Bradley to pick up some mannerisms and Bradley had a habit of putting his hands beyond his head and leaning back and rocking back and forth and and he wore these striped shirts a lot tie it stripe shirt so there's Robarts in the movie that I Scott and Robards and at that moment when Burke Robards comes on he's like this Bradley was like that in the audience and suddenly he sees on the screen he goes that was a great moment well this is a sweaty is this sweaty moment where it really was is is plains film talk about your reactions there are many unusual aspects of spellbook one is the fact that you're watching yourselves on film less than two years after all this happened what were your impressions of this stuff the first one after there also wasn't there a moment that Jack flew NT came through in tennis shorts and that really got me then I just want to make sure are they okay here and I remembered every whatever the case we're in here and they've been working on his film all this time and we're all terrified I mean really of what this is going to be and this film starts to play and I certainly started to gradually relax a little bit because it became evident hey this is about the process of journalism this is about the reporting it's about the institution this is not about Woodward his personal life it's not about Bernstein it's not about your personal life and you said thank God but but we knew you know we should call other movie here and done so so there was just we're gonna let you off the hook tonight but this great relief but also felt great about the institution I'll tell you about I think it was six years ago what was your reaction yeah well I let me give it a tell it this way by six years ago there was a screening at NYU and the movie and I hadn't seen it for 25 years and my wife and I took our seven-year-old daughter Diana and she's sitting next to me during the whole movie and she squirmy like you know I though this isn't a good sign and after it's over I said well what did you think of the movie now she's going to school in Washington so she talks like one of these policy people so and I said I said well what do you think of the movie shoot a the guy playing you doesn't look like you at all be boring boring boring you know how to wipe out dad's ego just like that now my reaction my first reaction honestly was cheap there's a lot of detail in here it is boring and it has that sense of you know names and amounts of money in rich and no and how does that how are people going to be captured and we saw a rough cut it wasn't as smooth there wasn't some of the parts were missing I think at that point or at least they didn't go from one scene to the next scene was not like you would see a normal move and I was I was worried that it was going to be boring for people but what is so interesting and I think you know the heading of this is what's the legacy here the legacy is when you're on a story like that you you go home with a lump in your stomach every night because you don't know you've got good sources you've checked you've tried to verify but you don't have the kind of certainty that leads to a good night's sleep and you are churning that you are living in a world of doubt and uncertainty and that is so captured and so that is is what newspapering in the end is about you are dealing with the government Nixon and right up through you know Bush Obama incredibly secretive it's very hard to kind of crack it and get inside and get the reality and so by telling the story of what happened to Nixon from the point of view of the Washington Post mix that no one plays Nixon no one play he's on the TV screen no one plays John Mitchell he's on as part of the brilliance of he's on the phone telling you the Katie Graham is going to get her tip caught in a wringer but that's you know all of these people are voices or images or pictures and so I have obviously heard comments from people who are in the journalism business for years and they say this is what it's like there was another thing to what we do have in common is when you talk about doubt every artist every artist I know of including myself lives with doubt constantly you never know what you're doing is good enough in fact you keep telling yourself it isn't you doubt things that you do but you do it out of passion out of instinct of whatever so I think we have that in common a couple of things I might add to this thing but that happened one was when the film was over we were rushing to to go into distribution and there was no time to do a trailer and so we couldn't and as you could see tonight I'm glad you showed it was it's a continue of the tradition but what happened we didn't we had a photographer who was a photographer that had covered the political scene named Stanley treading and he had covered the political scene he knew how to capture the feeling of it well he had done a lot of photography on the film we didn't have time to put together a trailer so what we did was we came up with a new idea where we take voiceover weekly do clips of pieces of dialogue from the film and run it over fast moving photo images so there was no live film footage and we use that as our trailer and that was kind of a new thing that was exciting because it worked second thing that that kind of excited me but eventually didn't work was I thought how are we going to start this movie I would love to find a way to as a jar the audience they came on this idea whereby is for those of you who've seen the film it begins when the typewriter keys hitting the paper in a macro shot June 17th bubble vote so I thought well what if we run some film and we run a certain amount of seconds of a film over white paper and and then we I will try to see how much time an audience would wait to see a blank screen before they get uneasy like come on let's go so the idea was that you would the curtains would be pulled back after intermission the audience would come in the lights are on and there's a blank screen from the time the audience got seated and the lights were coming down we were running film of just the paper but it looked like just the screen with nothing happening on it but it was actually film running so the cards pulled back beam there's actually film running on the white paper but to the audience it looks like nothing's happening yet so this thing and that the question was how long before we had to figure out how how many seconds would we would run film on this white paper so I would go to theaters and imagine an audience sitting there after the lights went down Bly sit down screen and there's nothing happening was at some point they're going to hey you start that stuff at that moment when they start that WHAM we'd hit we would go live the film would have been running so we figured that it would be 18 seconds from the time the lights went down and nothing was happening if the audience would start doing it so 18 seconds from the film running to the typewriter key it's always the Jay from June they just shoot you know and so like a cannon shot I always thought it was meant to sound like a book yeah but that was part of the idea was to give the power well that was but it was also meant to shock the audience so therefore the thrill I got was when we previewed the film Kimber where it was I think somewhere in Connecticut or something i sat there and sure enough the thing because we had to talk to the theater on to make sure they did the curtains and all that stuff so thing goes back the lights go down in just about 17 seconds in Hey what boom and the audience jumped I thought that's really good feeling problem with it is that that was about the end of it because theater owners didn't want to mess around with pulling curtains back and there's an interesting this has to do with Bradley as a manager Carl and I were on the Metropolitan staff and when we were first told that looks like the dimensions of this or greater that there'd been wiretapping maybe lives were in danger Carl said we've got to go see Bradley skip the chain of command totally and you called him it two-way am at home we have to come see you and so we go to his house and he comes to the door and his jammies or whatever bathrobe or something and then we say we you can't we can't talk in the house we have to come sometime no like we're totally crazy right and it was you know wet in the middle of the night you take me out on a lot of my underwear and we you know you kind of think is he going to call the guys with the white coats they have these guys hauled off and we start we tell them that this is all going to explode that the dimensions are much larger it involves parts of Watergate the intelligence community which we learned which came out later and Ben is kind of disbelieving and you know what the hell's going on here and we've totally circumvented the chain of command but in the movie after we're done he says okay you have to go go back take a bath and then get back to work we've got a lot and he said and he says in the movie version you know not much is at stake here just the future of the country and the First Amendment and so forth and I remember seeing that the first time and saying I don't think Bradley said I remember him saying something along the lines of a very private part of our Anatomy is on the chopping block that's right and you better get it right exactly right okay no he said no no see I thought we both thought he said that that was later or earlier and so I had this memory of the chopping block and then the idea every day we remembered yes and there's no mystery about the private part of the anatomy either and then this version about this speech about the Constitution in the future of the country so I went back and we kept notes to find out what he actually said and what he said after hearing all of this was not what we remembered and not what is in the movie which is incredibly accurate what Ben said is what the hell do we do now and if you think about it's exactly the right thing to say we were in a new realm pop talks about doubt and uncertainty in that he as a leader was willing at that moment to say I don't know what the hell we do now and it was all new and what's not in the movie is what happened the next day because it is that one day that all of us at the Washington Post went nuts yes we got to the office and the first thing we know is we were told to go up to Katherine Graham's office we went up to Katherine Graham's office and we were then taken up to the roof where there would supposedly be no electronic surveillance we have never been on the roof of the Washington Post before and we proceeded to have a strategy meeting on the roof of the Washington Post we decided we would get our homes swept that day for bugging devices and I think that might have happened once before and but it it was like science fiction it was so crazy and we were really paranoid because what what had happened that night was that that we had been told that the dimensions of this we understood the dimensions of this involved Nixon that he might well be impeached but what we didn't understand was how this permeated every aspect of what this presidency had been about about the anti-war movement about really what was Watergate Watergate was an attempt by a criminal President of the United States to violate the Constitution to try and determine who the nominee of the other party would be that's what those so-called dirty tricks were about so that the other party couldn't have a free and fair election in the United States to wiretap reporters to take the anti-war movement and undermine its credibility through a whole campaign of Lies and distortion and as Bob said as as we were told that night it went everywhere it was like a toxin that went through every aspect of what was under the control of the President of the United States and you said stunning I cannot tell you it well and then you know even over almost every season there's a new batch of Nixon tapes that come out that show new I mean listen to him talk yeah it aldermen and Nixon talking about Teddy Kennedy how they've got somebody in the Secret Service who's reporting on what he's doing in his Noli no file drawer no office no telephone what as far as Nixon was concerned they had to spy on everyone and find out what they were doing and get the dirt on them that's what this was about we now know how egregious water did was Bob Redford has said that what water getting the less of what it is that again no one's above the law and that we can now question the morality of our present no it's no longer unamerican to question the morality of our present but there had to have been times during the investigation you felt downright unpatriotic in fact the clip that we should have seen shows Ron Ziegler on on television playing the victim um how did you fit did you feel at some point during the investigation somehow unpatriotic or on American I certainly didn't I thought in fact what we saw was that the President of the United States was on American and that one of things it there's also one other thing that's not in the movie and it's not in the book and that is that and we should have put it in the book and we did and it's that till late right so about eight weeks after the break-in we had discovered this slush fund that paid for the undercover activities at Watergate other undercover activities would be controlled we knew then by among others John Mitchell who had been the Attorney General of the United States was the person closest politically to Nixon and every date would word now would go into a little vending machine room off the news room floor and prepare for our meeting with the editors it was a good cop bad cop routine and as I said earlier that you can imagine who was the good cop who was the bad cop and on this occasion I put a diamond in the coffee machine and we were talking about how we were going to handle this Mitchell story and the secret fund and what it meant but the dime machine felt literally chill go down my spine my neck turn the wood really said oh my god this president is going to be a peach would return this oh you're right and we can never use that word impeachment in this newspaper office because somebody here might think we have an agenda I mean we were really there to cover the story it was not about animus to Richard Nixon or anything else yeah in direct answer to your question I never felt unpatriotic I felt just the opposite deficit that the idea that some admitted some people took a position oh my god we can't stand to know this my attitude was we can't stand not know yeah and that it's exactly so there was never that question there also is the question of risk and if as we've thought about it and talked about it over the years the real our careers were at risk but they were just beginning the real risk was Bradley in Katherine Graham they had to be absolutely right they had to be careful and what they did because they supported us we lived and operated in a bubble we were it was that newsroom it was going out to meet in underground garage or to go out knock on doors or go see the bookkeeper or Hugh Sloan the treasurer and there was never any sense that I mean they they absorbed all of the risks we didn't feel endangered the way they did yeah yeah that's right because they were going to close down Kathryn Graham's newspaper we learned later one of the secret strategies was to get people to challenge the FCC TV licenses that the Washington Post Company owned and they did a bunch of Nixon people did this in the stock which had just gone public was in the toilet because of that is there was a business side jeopardy and journalistic peril in all of this for them and they're kind of going and what urn allistic peril Beyond The Washington Post yeah because of that you had had the great precedent of the Pentagon Papers this same administration in which it had been shown they the Nixon administration had shown how far it was willing to go to suppress the truth even about previous presidencies in Vietnam the press had won and the claim in Watergate once again was that we were endangering national security Kissinger was getting up every other day and saying we were endangering with embolden enemy in in Vietnam yeah and the Socialists had they succeeded had they succeeded the effects and that's why that piece of Bradley's speech is so great in yeah it is because it's gold absolutely brilliant oh yeah back to a movie you just you talked about earlier Bob which is the Canada and Canada takes a very dim view of politics clearly you can't look at politics in a very bright way with with all the President's Men you recently said that your view of politics is so dim it's it's almost black I'm wondering has there been a time between the middle 1970s when you did those films and today where you were optimistic about our political system I felt that um maybe I'll just say this in summary here to put some things together what drew me to it was something that was bred much earlier in my life I was saying earlier today that I grew up in a lower working-class neighborhood in Los Angeles and my out was through sports and art and I remember there was a lot of it was at the end of the second award just after there was a lot of sloganeering and the big one that hit me there was a lot of sloganeering which I understood you know was there in a very patriotic mode we were winning the war just won the war people were coming home all the sloganeering it was a red white and blue time and I remember being told it isn't how whether you win or lose it's how you play the game that support and through my own experience in sports I realized that was a lie that everything mattered in this country as to whether you wanted it was a country that was really kind of obsessed with winning and so as a kid I would have these they would give these tests I don't know what they call them now I guess maybe SATs or something like that but it was called the Iowa Test when I was a kid and they had that they would go through you had geography you had this yet that you had science math and one page was dedicated to what's wrong with this picture and it was and I couldn't wait to get to that and I always got it because it was they would show you a picture that was so perfect there was a woman standing on a porch with a broom talking to a mailman two steps down the house was on a corner across the intersection was a school bus part everything was perfect he just looked at nice and wise nothing wrong with this picture everything's fine but when you when he really looked at it and you dug deep into it you realize she was only wearing one saw or there was only one Oh in the word school and I used to get so excited about that why I don't know but you put two things together being told certain things where the truth was maybe underneath that and also that the picture you were given you is that really the picture that's true so I think that led towards this this film that what's the story underneath the story we think we know and as I as somebody asked me not too long ago they said there was a anniversary of all the President's Men the book and I said well for me now that I've grown older and I I can look back over my life and time and look back at history I guess I can say I feel sorry that America doesn't seem to learn from its own history it doesn't have enough of an interest in its own history to learn from the mistakes that's made to correct them as a result we keep repeating and these repeats keep happening and so therefore in my lifetime we came out of the Second World War and my memory had the first scandal being the McCarthy hearing and then came the assassination of our president the shock to our system our belief system the shock of the quiz shows that were ripping the entire country off for the sake of money then came Watergate then came around Contra and then the last several years so I look at that from a tree top position and ice this keeps repeating itself and it's always the same reason so is a greed factor self-interest something like that and what gets threatened is the very staple of our country the Constitution the rule of law and so forth well when this came I didn't I say this now I mean I was just obsessed with making this film but but now I look back and I say well they say how do you feel about that and I say well I feel very privileged to have stumbled into something that became a national event that I could be somehow part of but it was a moment in time now this is going to sound cynical to you guys and I think Bob and Carlton correct it but to answer your question I said that was a moment in time I never dreamed that it would slide so far off the back end after that I I had some notion that this would lock into position the value of journalism and journalism had its own ethic for getting to two people to go on record before he could prints them and to see it evolve so fast shocked me and then to see the results of it that suddenly I had gossip passing for fact you had competition where money was the issue and therefore people were competing just to get the story and forget whether it was true or not or right or not and I saw that I thought something has fallen off here so when you ask the question I guess that's sort of my answer the perspective of how valuable journalism is and how valuable good journalism is and how much we need it now we're in a whole different world a whole different condition of the internet creating a whole other change is the only thing that really is going to happen so we were in this big change my hope is it the Bob and Carl's I don't think this I can make this film today because everything's sort of known already the candidate you couldn't make today because we know what happens behind the scenes so my hope would be in this new generation coming which I have very high hopes for and the new condition we're living in that we can bring back what Bob and Carl The Washington Post did had a very key point in our history that your film is very important this story is so important because it shows the importance before the state as another check and the balance of power so Mike my question to you Carl Bob are we still talking about how the landscape of media has changed is the Fourth Estate still in a position to do that or in as strong a position to do that as it was in 1972 through 1984 I think that what has changed is the landscape of the United States and that means the people of the country as well as journalism but particularly the culture itself that to a terrible extent the what Bob Redford is talking about is people in media in quotes giving readers viewers consumers what they want and what people want more people want today I think in this culture instead of real news instead of the best obtainable version of the truth instead of traditional standards of what's important and what's relevant and what's contextual and what's truthful too many people want and we supply too much of information that is merely intended to confirm what people already believe the ideologies and prejudices that they already bring to the national debate or to the local debate so that truth which really what what is reporting good reporting really about the best obtainable version of the truth is devalued in the culture itself and you can't separate journalism from that because because we're somewhat reflective of that culture and at the same time there are great reporters all over the place in newspapers even with the stript condition of the print press today in magazines on the internet in new institutions like ProPublica which just won the pulitzer prize the question in my mind is if this story watergate broke today how would people receive it and my tentative guess would be in a very different way because what happened in Watergate was the American system worked the press did its job the Congress did its job the judiciary did its job the Republican Party did its job and insisted that a president of its own party had to leave office would that happen today so I didn't those are the questions that come relevant but here's I think that real quickly to answer the remedy for people in the business of journalism book writing whatever you're doing to try to find out what happened is to just stick to absolutely I'm a my my there just been too many times over the decades where I realized you know we just aren't so smart we don't we miss all kinds of things we we could have missed what happened in Watergate at 25 points in the story the evolution of it the threat of disclosure could have just been cut you didn't didn't go see the book the book keeper I didn't meet mark felt in the White House when I was working in the Navy all kinds of things might have happened and you get things fixed and I want to tell it quickly this anecdote 30 days after Nixon resigned Ford his president some of you may recall Ford went on television early on a Sunday morning announcing he was giving Nixon a full pardon for Watergate now of course Ford went on television early on a Sunday morning hoping no one would notice but it was noticed but not by me I was asleep in a hotel room and knew York and my colleague here called me and woke me up and said have you heard and I said I haven't heard anything in Carl who then and now has the ability to say what occurred with the fewest words and the most drama said the son of a bitch pardoned the son of a bitch he got me maybe yep that I even figured it out I figured to decode about this and we fell I think like lots of people in the country who was there was evidence of it there was something dirty about the pardon there'd been there's evidence of the deal the question of where's justice why does the person at the top get off and 40 people go to jail hundreds of people literally have their lives wrecked with this and I thought that and I take it we both did and then I zone doesn't part look at mark rich yeah yeah that Leonard Peltier was still in prison yeah Marcus yes it was the money follow the money always but I then 25 years later decided to look at the legacy of Watergate in the presidency from Ford to Clinton and I called Gerald Ford up and said I'd like to interview you about the pardon figuring there is no way he would agree but he agreed and I interviewed him for hours in New York his home in Colorado his main home in Rancho Mirage California I had the time and again this is the time against the problem to read all the memoirs get the legal memos about the pardon and talk to everyone who was alive and then do a draft and then go talk to four and go talk to everyone again and it was it was Ford who convinced me he said look I didn't pardon Nixon for Nixon I didn't pardon Nixon for myself I really pardon Nixon for the country we had to get Nixon off the front page into history we had if there'd been more investigations which were ongoing an indictment of Nixon a trial jailing of Nixon we would have had two or three more years of Watergate and he said plaintively said I needed my own presidency I wrote this in the book shadow about the legacy of Watergate Caroline Kennedy the daughter of John F Kennedy called me up said she and her uncle Teddy Kennedy had read this and think that's right that in fact it was a gutsy thing for Ford to do and we're going to give the Profiles in Courage Award to Gerald Ford for pardoning Nixon and so they're at the Kennedy Library months later his Teddy Kennedy saying what we all as human beings hate to say I was wrong this was in the tradition of a leader going against the grain connecting his office in duty to the larger purpose of the country and pre-empting a process acting aggressively taking immense political risk because I wants to be present it probably cost him the presidency but he did the right thing now so Berean for the journalist is to think it's this way be so sure this is dirty this is a deal this is unjust and then you subject it to the test of history and time in neutral in-depth inquiry and it turns out to be the exact opposite happens time and time again and it puts you in the mode of not judging things too quickly not judging things until you've done a real extensive examination and is when I talk to George Bush about the Iraq war remember at the end asking how do you think history will judge Iraq war and Bush throws up his hands and says history we won't know we'll all be dead sounds like George Bush to me exactly but he's right we don't know unless he's right we'll be dead yep no he's right we don't know how history is going to judge all of these things I think we do know how history is going to judge Watergate because there's so much evidence in the tapes and quite frankly Karl and I and Bradley and Katherine Graham owe you a big debt of gratitude for what go back to you talked about the part let me go back a month to the climax of the Watergate story which is August 9th 1974 and the resignation of Richard Nixon the first president to resign in the history of this country what did that feel like you know kids throw around the word my kids awesome all the time and I remember feeling this incredible law and Bob and I were in the office and we watched that speech in the intelligent ended up bologna sandwiches for those who wanted to stay that far member chattering the first thing Katherine Graham came downstairs and she said no gloating let me tell you there was no reason to gloat it was a moment of such awe that that that the system the system had worked and we had been a part of that working and the right thing had happened I would think it would make you it would make you rejoice and be sad yes that's absolutely right that's absolutely and also one of the things I think that led to the to the next book which was the final days which is about mixing Nixon's last year was a sense of empathy for Nixon that this was also the next part of this story and it continues today is a great human story about this tortured man and bob was just we both been to the Nixon Library bob was just out there the other night why are you telling me well no but but what that day of that he went on television on August 8th and said I'm resigning and then did it on the 9th and he had in the East Room of the White House his staff and friends and cabinet officers and so forth and some of you may recall seeing this because it was live on television he had his two daughters to son and law's wife standing there and there was no text it was Nixon raw free association Priya talking about his mother his father people and the staff were sitting there in the front row we just you know really worried that he would be the first person to go off the edge psychologically on live national television because he was just he was churning it was emotional but then and this Nixon should get some credit for he kind of waved his hand the way he would do that like here's what I called you all here to say and then he said this always remember others may hate you but those who hate you don't win unless you hate them and then you destroy yourself now think of that's the code the piston in the Nixon era was hate it was driving everything in the day Nixon had to leave amazingly the self-discovery the discovery of what happened to me and to be able to get up and tell the world don't hate it will in the end get not your enemies but yourself Bobby you talked about the great antipathy you've had for mixing for many many years well before he entered the White House he doesn't appear in your film except on television did you ever have feelings of sympathy for this very tragic figure No no I didn't what Bob is saying I completely get and I think it's great but he never earned my sympathy because of he was so full of self-loathing and he carried that vibe with him reason I had a problem with Nixon was when I was a kid I received a Sports Award during boys week and I was about 13 and governor the governor was Earl Warren California and Nixon was the senator and I heard my dad talking at the dinner table he I was going to school with the son of this guy Murray chong'er who was the Halderman to to Nixon early in his life he was Thomas the hatchet man yeah yeah and Kenny the son was in my class so my mom was a friend of his mother's mother is very sweet nice my mom liked his mom my dad was railing against we're each other because of what he did designing the Helen Gahagan Douglas had to jump all that went past me I didn't care much about it I was too young I was too interested in other things but when I went to receive this award you walk across the stage like you do during a graduation at high school or something him and they were up there talking and I wasn't paying any attention and when I went in he would greet and give and greet and give and so forth and came upon he handed me a ribbon and he shook my hand he says well grow up and I I was struck by is such a dark Bible by God and it was nothing more that was purely visceral but it was it was really just who and what I felt was total artificiality and and something dark and something unpleasant about the guy that's all I could say I hope there's a photo of that of Nixon giving you the down-low anyway I'll bet there is some place in terms of what being on the civilian side of things these guys are reporters I'm not I was on the civilian side seeing what happened and how he treated people and and the self-loathing that was at the heart of this guy that manifests itself in so many of the things these guys have talked about because I was a citizen at the receiving end of that and and you could see through it I was not sympathetic and so I think that was a wonderful exit I I wonder if he really if he really felt that and he went to his grave or that then there's some retribution there that would be great but during his time my time I was not sympathetic well interestingly I mean the evidence available is it was a real fleeting moment of recognition because two minutes later he was like that getting into the helicopter and there ensued for the rest of his life a campaign to declare that no he everything he did was absolutely in the best interest the only time he ever talked about the best interest of the country was after he'd left if you listen to the tapes what's so extraordinary about the tapes is awful and toxic and poisonous as they are is what's not on the tapes not a single instance where Richard Nixon not to mention Henry Kissinger and some others around them at no point is one of them but especially Nixon say we ought to do what's best for the country not once we have outside of this auditorium number of pictures from that high points in the life of this now 40-year old institution and I can tell you I'm very eager to put up a picture of this evening of you all and the wonderful evening that you've given us tonight thank you so much you