20 Episode results for "Ash Carter"

Ash Carter Discusses the Business of Defense

Masters in Business

00:00 sec | 1 year ago

Ash Carter Discusses the Business of Defense

"At Fedex trade is their business with more than four hundred and fifty thousand team members. Moving fifteen million shipments daily Fedex helps people small businesses and enterprises around the globe. Look for better ways to connect and make a difference visit Fedex dot com slash trae to learn more. This is masters in business with Barry Ritholtz on Bloomberg radio this week on the podcast. What can I say secretary of Defense Ash Carter? You're on your Barack. Obama was in the studio for over an hour and we talked about everything from Iran to North Korea to China to Russia to to the procurement process to what we do right with the military and what we get wrong and what we areas. We really need to improve. This was a tour to force conversation from somebody who is not only brilliant. He's a Rhode Scholar Appear in physics But a historian who focuses on military history in the medieval times and that has colored how he looks at at the world how he looks at the role of government. I could talk about him for hours but instead I'm just going to say with no further Ado Mike. My conversation with former secretary of Defense Ash Carter. This is masters in business with Barry Ritholtz on on Bloomberg radio my extra special guests. This week is Ash Carter. He is the former secretary of defense under President Barack Obama he is the five time winner of the Department of Defense Distinguished Public Service Medal. That is the highest award to a civilian from the Pentagon he is a Rhodes scholar with the PhD in theoretical physics from Oxford. The author of almost a dozen books most recently inside the five sided box lessons from a lifetime of leadership in the Pentagon ash. Carter welcome to Bloomberg to be with you Mary. So let's Let's start with you rather or unusual academic career. You're a double major physics and medieval history. How did you end up with that? As a double major out turned out to be useful for more on that in a moment but for at the time it was just a right brain left brain thing I i. I was fascinated by history and particularly by I met evil history. Because if you think about it the Middle Ages was a thousand years long so if you call yourself a medieval est you've just gotten yourself a whole millennium of territory and I love like the languages Latin Greek French German To speak and it was the time time when the church Developed when the university developed the English Common Law developed when the nation state developed so a lot of things we live with today and I found later in life as I started working in the Pentagon in one thousand nine hundred eighty one and all the way I left in twenty nineteen at that was useful training. Physics is totally evil history useful training for the guy. Of course the joke is that I have. The perfect of my job was the perfect combination of medieval thinking and physics thanking right i. Physics was a totally other side of the brain. Let's clean logical And I liked that and then I had to make a choice for further training in the beginning of my career and that was that was for physics and then I got into the whole defense business business by by accident But how did that come about well. It was part it was -membered the people who taught me physics six. And we're the seniors in the field that I was starting out in which was elementary particle physics big accelerators at Fermilab Brookhaven. Outside of New York. Here here and so forth I worked those big laboratories those guys were all the Manhattan project generation and they had in their veins means the idea. First of all that. When you that that you should have a relationship with the government that doesn't mean that you you? They always did what you wanted to do. But it was natural to try to help out your country and second that With respect to technology and disruptive technology which the clear weapons certainly was that the people who built it had some responsibility to in to Uh essentially control the technology that we got the good out of it which was ending the war with Japan winning the war with Japan and keeping the peace for fifty years with the Soviet Union Union without blowing ourselves up so they taught me that we had some some responsibility so one day two of those seniors said to me. A guy was involved in satellite light reconnaissance and other guy who built designed the first thermonuclear weapon said to me. Ashleigh Away Lemme Lemme interrupt you right here because you can't just mention that and go by you referred to the Manhattan project. Are you talking about people like Edward Teller and Yeah I. I traveled to Europe with Edward. Teller the two particularly the tip. particularize people I was speaking was Richard Garwin with Edward Teller. But it was really Darwin's design designed the said the first thermonuclear thermonuclear bomb. That is one that that combined fishing and fusion and blew up an island in the Pacific Ocean it was very successful much much more powerful than the original thousand rams more powerful And the other guy was the person who was was very instrumental in putting the first Essentially F- cell phone type cameras digital cameras onto our spy. SATELLITES LIGHTS BE ARNOLD spy satellites in the old days would take pictures on film big rolls of film and then and when the film was all exposed they would separated from the satellite. Put a little rock it on it. The rocket would slow it down. It would fall down the earth deploy a parachute and we'd fly an airplane next to the parachute with a hook on it right and the hook would grab the parachute real in the film. We'd fly fly it to what those days the CIA did all of that station. Right outside of Washington Anacostia Washington. They fly they develop it and they'd count. How many Russian missiles thousands our so that was the guy who was instrumental attorney net film system into a digital system so they were the two? That's the to specific people are both pretty big technology. Yeah Yeah those to happen to be the two who said to me once you go to Washington for just one year turned out to be thirty eighty seven just one year and work on a problem. That was a big deal at that time berry which was a Cold War problem of where to what to do with the mix missile all. I recall that that was Under Reagan trying to figure out how we could hide and shuttle all these missiles underground to tide them from Russian satellite. Couldn't target them right so I think the original plan and I don't remember how much of this is from your book and how much of this is mel memory. That forty five hundred hundred silos win a shuttle five hundred missiles around pretty impossible plan It was certainly very unpopular because it would have paved over a a big part of the great basin area the southwestern United States I was actually the Carter Administration's plan. Reagan looked at it and said that looks at it. Looked like a Rube Goldberg thing. Right so that was a pretty pretty ugly baby this idea of of digging all these holes and then hiding missiles and so when he began this is all under the concept of being able to survive a first strike in order to make sure mutual assured destruction was in exactly because if we took the maximum we put them out where the Soviets could hit him. Then in a crisis they'd say well our only way of surviving is to go first and that would be incentive to for them to go first and we not seen them thinking that way would say well. We'd better get. We'd better launch these before they destroy them so one of the other of us is going to start a war under those circumstances it has his. We wanted to avoid that that situation so anyway that was the projects all pass now and that was effectively. Your first book Yes yes after I did this. I wrote a X.. Which is essentially a technical book on that subject but Two things happen to me. They're berry which I I think is is important to anybody who's choosing a career or at a crossroads in their career I found that in these Washington conversations. I had something to offer that nobody else in the room had namely I understood how all work technically and and the decisions were very consequential suffer a young person to be able to make a contribution to feel like they're able to make actually a contribution not not just watch and that the issues they're dealing with really matter that's a that's a wonder you know. It's a hugely inspiring cooperation. And so that's what got me caught the bug of of of defense and I've been devoted to defending our country and making a better world for our children ever since but but it could have gone a different way but for those two people who who inspire me. It's a good lesson to all of us to to now. I teach people at university diversity. That's my way of continuing to contribute. But you give them a little nudge and in the direction of public purposes and public spirits. Good thing let's talk a little bit about The Iraq war and you go into an quite a bit of detail in the new book inside the five sided box lessons from a lifetime nine of leadership in the Pentagon what made the Iraq war such a unique fight relative to previous us Military history while From a managerial point of view. The point of view that the book takes It was a counterinsurgency war rather than a war of one country with another asymmetrical warfare is that we had to Liz. Yes So the first thing is we had to learn that a by I should back up a little bit buried. Say of course at the invasion of Iraq in two thousand and three didn't turn out very well history says I have to say I didn't have the wisdom to oppose that at the time I believe I did not I count myself among them and I'm not proud of that but I can't say I had better wisdom than anyone else anyway. We found ourselves in in Iraq and of course when I became I the number three in the department and the number to the number one all during all that time we were still fighting in Iraq. And here's what we got out of it that was in a way useful to today's US very different. Strategic Situation We learned to stop working in the old Cold War mode which was that is was very however superpower versus superpower moreover the Soviet Union was the slow lumbering very predictable thing and so you could have many year programs programs where you slowly built the perfect thing when you're at war and people are getting killed or or kids are coming back with no legs and my wife and I are at the hospitals every weekend meeting with them and talking talking to them There then you're working day by day that's a very different pay salaam much better suited to today's competitive world because now as we turn back to China Russia as we much. Do we have if we did that and tried to compete with them today in the old mode that wouldn't work because people are moving faster today. Technologies Moving Patrick. So I again. Nobody likes to be a war for that long. Nobody likes to be dealing with Issues like reputations and prostheses p. t. s. all the things we had to learn but we also learned something about agility in the course of Iraq and then of course Afghantistan as well and I was all in when I was in the Defense Department. I know some people don't agree with those wars and we can talk about that later but when you're there and you're responsible for them I that was my highest priority. Every day I went to bed thinking about my woke up thinking about him either is no choice so let. Let's talk a little bit about some of the adaptations that some took place fast. Some took place slow. One of the things you write about are are the I.. D.'s and into really interesting issues. Come up in that. The first is the concept of drones versus blimps. Yup that some people on the ground unwanted drowns which really good at flying in circles for short periods of time. But you wanted full there on a lot of roads in Iraq you wanted full coverage of of where insurgents are bringing I that could hurt troops. And how did that process go from. Let's get these expensive drones. That'll take two years. Here's to get into place to know we could hang blimps. It'll take a really short period of time and have eyes in the sky on on everything it began one morning. When Bab- Gates was secretary? He was the number one. I was the number three at that time. And on the and we were having video teleconference secure cure video teleconference with Kabul and up on the screen. Was Stan McChrystal. Who was our commander and Stan says to Bob that AH needs? He has only fifteen percent of the drone coverage. He needs and Bob Gates looks at me with that. I was his top supply. Weapons buyer with that. What are you GonNa do about that Ashley and I thought to myself? How on Earth am I gonNA get? Seven Times number are drums so in a very short very short period of time. So I get on the phone and I talked to stands intelligence head at that time. who was general general? Mike Flynn this pre away before the whole issue with his pre politics right right and and he had a good reputation. I enjoyed working with. I don't know what happened later. I'd I'd lost touch with them but anyway when I began I said jeeze. He's what do you. What do you need all that? Coverage for that drone coverage and it turned out that it wasn't to get the kind of film that only a drone in could get only a drone can fly down along highway But they wanted persistent coverage over one base or one in town. That's what they really need. Satellites are going zipping by and they're over Australia when you really need drones you can do but you have to too much more expensive and you have to fly around in circles and you need a pilot. Even if they're remote island -FORNIA IT turns out but yeah a well trained pilot and Anna crew and somebody to make all the decisions very different way. We came up with the idea of just putting a balloon up and you put a helium filled filled balloon over the base. It's got a camera on it and the feed goes right down to the captain whose commanding that little outpost and the reassurance that those guys had that when they went out on patrol they knew what the loses video infrared the hall. That's exactly now. Why couldn't you just kind of cameras that are on the The the helicopters that fly looking looking looking at car accidents and traffic patterns. So why couldn't those just get shot out of the sky. Be It's they tried and first of all the pressure of of the helium inside is not very much on his not gonNa pop and so every once in a while you winch it down and so the holes that's it. It's says not to be but the enemy. The bad guys would win. It went up not knowing that. Take potshots at. We began to put microphones on. That could idea yes triangulate and so I took a shot at one of our balloons a mortar. Shell found you a few seconds. uh-huh later so the other question I have is in the beginning of the war in you mentioned Injured troops coming home. Lots of the Humvees were really very lightly armored. And maybe this is my memory. But the recollection of how long it took to get the Humvees up armored you and protect seemed like it took a long time and then later on the Anti A D. There's all sorts of interesting technologies to it detonate these things from a distance. Why did that seem to take so long as the process to identify what you want order it and get it delivered is is it really? That long part of it was the the bureaucracy was still working on that Cold War lumbering enemy mode where we'll deliver a the perfect perfect thing in five years even in the middle of a hot way. You'd be amazed. I would call people up when I was in the so-called acquisitions are and I would say do you realize that on on your desk is a contract that you're supposed to sign or all it and that I need that tomorrow and it would be in the stack this bureaucrat stack of papers and as soon as they became aware that this was a matter of life or death for for literally. Yeah they pull it out of the stack. But you'd be amazed at how much of that I had to do every single day even when I was secretary of defense to push the system but but we we did it. Let's take the rap which is the vehicle you're talking about When Emma wraps I started to be fielded there was another attitude? which was hey look? This is going to be Over in a while the only by something that's going to be good for the army will be around for a long time. We need to be thinking about what we're going to want twenty and thirty years and and I and I that's not hot war thinking that's not bureaucratic turf exactly right. There was a lot of that conscious and unconscious unconscious and you mentioned the two different types of dogs. In the book you mentioned there are bomb sniffer dogs and then they're attack dogs. It seemed that there weren't enough readers meters to get enough dogs quickly. And you guys went out and said let's go global and find these dogs that you guys could get very very quickly. Yeah it turns out that the the guy who is usually buying fighter aircraft and aircraft carriers and satellites and so were named me and drones and balloons and so forth ended up learning go by dogs and I learned a lot. And you're right in fact there's more than one kind of sniffer. Dog Right there are some sniffer dogs on leashes awfully on leash off leash Eh. Some that work better in confined areas and some that are comfortable with openers. In different breeds have different predilections. You learn that. And then you had to source them as our said and the United States has kennels but don't weren't enough Kennels to supply so we did globally source dog so we did a great job yes thousands thousands of dollars with a great great great and became. This was a good side and bad side of this but became really good friends of the troops. They love them as people tend to cook. Were able to take them back home with them At the individual but many at the sad case was were you are when the dog died which happened but especially if dogs were wounded or even if they were in the vicinity of an IEP D it was was impossible to use them anymore that they become very nervous at that point in their all their training would go out the window they had their own pto either have to to sadly put them to sleep or or take them home for them in the United States will they they certainly served Quite well and and I. I think there's a long history of Canine Corp in the military. Isn't there yet. I mean their their noses. I went to Darpa Are High Tech research arm at looking for better news is electronic. News is the dog's nose and the people who know about electric noses say don't don't they're not years away you're going to war to fight now just gratin. By herself a dog. Wow amazing you describe working in D. we see as being a Christian in the coliseum. You never know when they're going to release the lions and have you torn apart for the amusement of onlookers. How accurate is that description? And how frustrating is it to work in a town like DC. Well I got used to it after a while. I was there for thirty seven years on and off and associated with the department uninterruptedly since they never really released the lions at you know I went through four Senate confirmations nations which was really what I was talking about in that particular passage and that's a time of great vulnerability in Washington because anybody who doesn't like you can take his shot at you. Better try to persuade some senator to put a hold on you. Came up unanimously For Secretary of Defense but not many people that acts claimed there were two or three votes. Not Personal about me but nobody voted against you. They abstained or they voted for you. Not a lot of people. Dec- get that sort of love from the US Senate no but there. I mean I tried to earn it the old fashioned way. I A kept my nose clean and all those years I never had. It was investigated or or anything. I never that's the normal course. These these days that seems to be a little unusual but typically people working in the Defense Department tend to put their head down do their job and keep their nose yes and conduct is is really important the the the in the profession of arms honor and trust matter a lot. If you can't trust people in small things how can can you trust them and big war so for us. It was a big deal. When you're at the top you have to show example and so it was? Yeah I always watched over my conduct and comportment and tried to make an example giving let me give you a particular instance of that describing the book Berry When I and many many many times was in Iraq and Afghanistan and hot one hundred twenty degrees? If if I were secretary of defense you see the see far leaders you talk especially to our commanders of what we're doing and give them the direction that they needed and and then I'd meet with hundreds and hundreds of troops need shake their hands and so forth and I wear my suit Out in the desert suit and tie. Aw degree sweating like a wheel of cheese out there and My staff would say hey sir you know you can take take your jacket off and the troops would say. Hey it's just US sector. You can relax and I always kept my suit on. And here's why because every time. I shook one of those soldiers hands and we had a photographer take a picture right. That picture would be sent home to mom. MOM would frame it and put it by her bedside right it or on the mantle and I wanted to look the part. I wanted to look like you still do. I have my suit on my flag and I wear and I would wear the same thing out there because I thought it was important that their mother understand that I was the crecy. She doesn't know no me she doesn't she doesn't care she cares about her son right but no one looked like the guy who right deserves to be sending her son toward that was important to me. And that's a small example of how you behavior comportment conduct matter a lot. I think they matter and not only in the largest organization in the world the Pentagon but in any kind of organization and I obviously dismayed Times these days about Conduct I see And I help people to a higher standard then. I fired people for things that you see. Today we fired people for lying for having sex with subordinates. All of these things were were unfortunately unfortunately happened but there was no doubt I was harsh on people but they were even harsher on supports. Our rules are very strict about that. And and Our Ethos is one of their conduct. is a sign of character and character is an increasing an aspect aspect of leadership. And you can't give somebody leadership over troops if they don't have conduct of character so let me ask you throw to curve balls at you. The first is we. Ask Our troops to go in harm's way and we make extraordinary demands Of them and they come back home not directly into the Pentagon on but under the Va.. They haven't been getting really terrific Treatment we have a number of veterans in my office. And I've heard some pretty horrifying tails. What's going on in the Va.? And what can we do. Give our veterans the sort of care. They deserve well the. Va is a hey very very complicated. Bureaucracy it's separate from the Defense Department And in most countries they would be managed together but they're managed separately really that's interesting and it would be part of the defense budget but it's not part of the defense budget in this country but it's a separate cabinet department. Should it be. Should it be part of the the Pentagon the defense ends budget It it may be that if we could start over again. That would have been a better way to manage things. But now I think machine into or organizations can remember we tried that in the Department of Homeland Security and it took ten years or so began before it began began to show any results but any rate So the VA has a difficult job of taking care of what is largely a geriatric medical population and Whereas our medical system which is huge and the Defense Department's the largest in the country? And so you run the largest medical center in medical care system system and the country if you're the secretary of Defense but it's it's Has A lot of Pediatric Work Right. Because your people have children so they're completely different print populations and this is what we were doing. A bad job of I discovered when I started to run the place was. How's the transition from a soldier to a veteran which is very challenging transition? It is 'cause remember some of these people have never done anything else but be in the military. Some some of them are kids. That came out of high school went in for a few years. They've never had a civilian job. I discovered that our separation Russian program what we did was soldiers and sailors airmen marines before they left service was essentially to teach them how to get on welfare. Really yes and Chris revolted by that. And it's not good for the public that's paying for these things. So we designed a new transition program that folks that had three tracks one was a get a job track if you've never had to get a job. Let's tell you how to make resume. Let's tell you how to get on some of these social show media where you can describe what you're good at. Let's tell you how you can describe your in civilian terms the skills you got as a military person. Second Track Entrepreneurship. Like how do you run a McDonald's franchise and the third was continuing education. If you WanNa get on the GI. I built some further education so we turned it from a year. Life in the future is one of dependency upon the VA and getting benefits to Whoa. You're you've got a life ahead. Let us help you prepare. And of course there's still qualified to get the benefits. They sold them but just to teach them right away to get that. It's is all about social safety net. When they get out? That's no way to treat them. I will tell you from my personal experience. The veterans who work in my office our our secret weapons logistics excruciating. CFO It's amazing. And every time we look to hire somebody we try and say is person that veteran can Phil Perry. You know that's new and I always really well it is. It's only ten years I because I started working on veterans employment when I was the under secretary the number three job back in two thousand and nine and employers would say okay Ash. We promised to hire five thousand veterans a big company and they'd put it on their TV ads and everything and they acted as though they were doing us a favor by now. Most employers have the attitude you just describe well trained rain the smart disappear exactly Honorable yeah the the absolutely and go back even further to the Vietnam era. Well pills and I don't know what I would have done as secretary. I couldn't stand to see. Our people treated that way. Yeah I mean now you go to the airport near. They're boarded I on the plane and that kind of thing but some of that is making up for the mistakes of the Vietnam era. Yeah one of the the most moving things you can do as a current secretary of defense is to talk to Vietnam era veterans and a line that analogy I use but others including the president used was Just in case nobody said this to you when you came home the first time. Welcome home and you there. Tears in the eyes. Agit some of these guys because of the way they were treated that would've broken my heart At the time fortunately I need live in that era. I live near Mirror. Most people have the attitude that you do. which is these guys deserve a good job? I think we learn a little bit from our societal l.. Mistakes in the past that that war was problematic but then you know people who were And that was not a voluntary army. That was a People were drafted often. They should not have been treated the way they they were when they came back. But that was a very different time. Let me throw the other curve ball at you. which is what you just brought up some of the issues? We're hearing about people dealing with within the military within the Department amount of state just generally within the government moving away from the concept of honor and responsibility and truthfulness list. What does this say about us as a country? How have we gotten so far off track? I think that in part art it is a reflection of the attitude that some Americans have had that the government is the thing apart from them. And I've obviously been in Inada governed my whole life. I don't have that feeling but I can. Well imagine if I were someone who'd been outside of the government that that that idea that that's a thing apart a gaining ground in my mind but to me the government is just us. It is the way we do things that we that have to be done. That can't be done by individuals or by companies who's going to build the roads who's going to educate people who's GonNa fight for us and win against enemies unless we do it all together now. I learned that by associated with the Defense Department which which most Americans really understand. Okay that's a part of the government I really do. I really get but the other parts the regulatory parts and all that Nick there came to be an attitude that we took all the good for granted and we pick debt. What was bad? And there's plenty of things that are bad and I think the government ought to be as high quality as it can be a but there is a little bit of that in our society and then some of the people are in government today seem to be looking added added something to pillage at last Rather than a sacred trust. That's hard for me to Relate eight to let alone condone But I think it it's enabled in part by people taking for granted what the government does for them and also by government not living up to public expectations so both sides of the equation need to change their attitude because we do need a competent government. It's a competitive world. It's a dangerous world world and we need things That only government can do quite interesting. So let's talk about some some of the interesting things you go over in the book. I'm fascinated by the future of warfare. Is it just going to be drones. And robots what. What sort of battles are we going to be fighting? And how is the world's GonNa look different from a military perspective than it does today so let's take a few of the pieces okay I ran the F thirty five Joint Strike Fighter Program. Okay darted the new B twenty one stealth bomber her. And I think those are Once you get them under managerial control important things but bury their the last manned fighter and unmanned bomber will ever build last men air class. What I laugh? I think that's the last what about ships that we still have Shaked aircraft carrier aircraft carriers. Here's getting harder and harder to defend against countries like China and Russia and people ask me. Is the aircraft carrier going to go away way and I say no because an aircraft carriers good for a different kind of circumstance an aircraft carriers still good with the with respect to Afghanistan and the Counter Isis campaign environments in which. Nobody's GonNa sink the ship. They provide America of floating airbase. That's an important thing but I don't think will be trying to use them against China and Russia decades from now soldiers you just sit are robots soldier. Uh I think what will happen. I is an in an infantry squad. There'll be one or two robots that carry. Oh all the batteries. He's way down soldiers today. Have so much spare batteries for everything. the Electron IX. Also that if there let's say clearinghouse. The House is the first thing through the door of the house right. You see a little of that already. -cause what what disarms and I e D now composed little little years shredded. Yeah Yeah I worked I. I worked on them because we had people walking out in suits with a pair of wire cutters cutters right very dangerous thing to be doing and so why not have little robot so you see now. I think they'll be inch by inch more and more of that taking away some of the more mechanical and were dangerous jobs. But they'll still be squad. Commander I think making the decisions decisions about fire and maneuver and win to do things and when not to do Things one thing that's not going to go away for talking about things that are going to go away. I'm not GonNa go away or nuclear weapons right and let's think about that a little bit because that is something that because of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the fact that many people not myself among them but many people recognized too late that China and Russia were not turning out the way everybody had hoped the nineteen nineties. We hope they were going to turn out. Okay they didn't turn out okay and For both those reasons we Stopped improving or really just keeping up our own nuclear arsenal and in the meantime they kept building building building. These things aren't going anywhere. I don't think we need new types. I don't nuclear weapons or just brutally simple mom on Iraq right But I think we need them to defend ourselves and basically the only way you can defend and yourself against nuclear weapons is through deterrents and We haven't built any for twenty five years. I think I am a strong supporter of recapitalizing. Our nuclear nuclear weapons arsenal and anybody who thinks that's going to start at arms race. I would say well you don't have twenty five years of history on your side because we haven't done anything last twenty five years and and they've been raised in any way so we saw the cause of them so let's stick with nukes and talk about Korea. You're involved as a very junior person back in ninety three green ninety four with the first round of Korea trying to get a nuclear weapon. Why this is hindsight bias? Obviously but why don't we we just stop them back then twenty five years ago before they had the chance to retaliate. Well it's interesting I want. I spent about half the year. Nineteen Ninety Ninety four as an assistant secretary of defense. Meaning where is that in the higher that's like the third layer day okay Working on a how strike plan against the North Korean reactor which is all they have the reactor at a place called young beyond and it had the fuel rods that had plutonium Tony in them and the they had finished their fueling cycle and the North Koreans could if they wanted to take those fuel rods out extract extract the plutonium and they had enough in there to make one bomb right. We thought that was a cause of were right. And so I built that plan Dan to destroy that reactor which I was at the time Berry and this is just The the pride of the artist I guess proud of because it would have destroyed an operating nuclear reactor without creating radioactive plume But I I was pretty certain certain and now of course. I didn't want to do that. Because the certain resolve that would be the North Korean army streaming over the DMZ uh-huh and a war beginning which I was confident we would win but millions would die at Seoul would change hands twice i. It's an ugly baby baby war to contemplate. But I thought that was going to happen in Clinton was really yes and he was threatening that to. WHO's the grandfather author of the current guy that you see meeting with President Trump? His grandfather Kim Il Sung's was running the place and Kimmel Sung Song Rather unexpectedly. Said okay. I'll give up this reactor young beyond if you build me. Some real western react power plants that can air power plants. Don't have all the proliferation problems at these. And did we do that. And we signed that agreement and it stayed in force for five six years the North North Koreans under his son slowly begin cheating right and the whole thing kind of began to fall apart later than when we bought ourselves sort of five six years then we head talks again in the late nineties. I was part of them. then let's see Condie Rice and and Colin Pal. How had some more in two thousand and six so I've seen various cycles of this? And what about the current cycle well. That's not unfortunately going anywhere. I don't object to talking to the North Koreans as I said we've done it in the in the past No president that I worked for going back to Reagan League and would meet with North Korean leader unless until there was an agreement to explain why because they knew that to the North Koreans. That was a huge gift. A meeting with the American president because in North Korean propaganda that they can tell their people. Everything's Okay in in our system which is a disaster with green. People is actually successful because I got to meet with the American President. Look at look at us. We're the equivalent of super superpower when you're dealing with potential enemy you don't in`Ash Carter's book you don't give away anything for free so I wouldn't give away a meeting with the president. Resin United States for free without some exchange. Now Yeah now we gave. Now we've given it away we also stopped or curtailed tailed are exercises in South Korea. Right which is a very dangerous move member. The exercises are how we keep us and our South Korean partners sharp sharp to make it the North Koreans absolutely clear that they start a war they will be destroyed and that'll be the end of the regime and and that's what those exercises demonstrate to to not keep up that proficiency and not keep demonstrating it risks of the war on the Korean Peninsula. which is I said would be a where we would win but would not look like anything? Our people have seen since the last ask create more mini intensity violences unbelievable in that war. Although some people have argued that the North Korean troops once they're over the border might not be as aggressive a enemy as some people have suggested similar to the Iraqi National Guard will it's interesting steen You don't have much evidence on your side if you have that view your speculation. Here's some evidence that goes but it all goes the other way. North Korean agents agents military agents captured in South Korea who've been preparing sabotage and other things that they intend to do in the course the warlike that very few of their all so brainwashed. Right that they they do not turn compliant. They don't come down into this. Well lit wealthy society and change their views and even though all of their propaganda all of other media and so forth have told them that it's a poor and backward place so if you think about it bury their in their third third or fourth generation of Stalinism while no other society had that many generated what that means is that your parents don't tell you stories of health things used to be different Ryan. Your grandparents don't tell you stories. There's nowhere if your memory is. That memory is gone that there's a different kind of world. So I I. I think the evidence suggests these people are brainwashed deeply enough. They'll fight really hard before they get tempted by all the goodies. Dowden South Korea. Let's talk about another nuclear program Iran. We've had a couple of interesting military. A actions by other countries namely Israel blew up reactor on how many decades ago that was and then the whole centrifuge hack Set them back quite a bit. How close is Iran to Building a nuclear weapon. And what should we be doing about that. We had a treaty. This president Decided to overturn it. Where are we with Iran and their program? Obviously the treaty was controversial and the United United States has has rejected it in the meantime however it bought us some time because while they were abiding by and and while it was enforce the Iranians were obliged to destroy a bunch of centrifuges send a bunch of plutonium to Russia. I mean Uranium enriched uranium to Russia and destroy a reactor and. They did all that before. We backed down in the treaties. So we got not some goodies so to speak In exchange for US releasing frozen funds that were that's right. What does that from the late eighties? which turned ought to be as much as the Iranians one is so maybe in time they would have left the anyway? What's done is done at the time that that agreement was negotiated shade? I was secretary of Defense. And is I I tell a story in a book which is indicative of how we looked at things in the Pentagon the morning after That agreement was concluded by Secretary of State Kerry. I sat down as I always did with the chairman of the joint. Jesus stabbed little round table in the secretary of defense laws. been there since since. George Marshall's Day and I would sit there with Marty or later with Joe Dunford every morning and we were both in town and also the vice chairman and the Deputy Secretary of defense. And we'd say okay what are we what are you what are you need today and Marty said to me secretary the Apropos this Iranian agreement. What are your instructions to the department and I said the change nothing really? I said it changes nothing. We have a strike plan. That will destroy the Iranian nuclear program by force. We have to. We're GONNA keep sixty five thousand troops in the Gulf as a deterrent against Iran. Also carrying out the war against Isis We'll continue. We have to continue to counter Iranian malign influence everywhere else which is lots of places Iraq Syria Syria Yemen and so forth. I said don't change anything. What this does is take off our plate a headache that we would otherwise have right which is somewhere down the road? We would have to face in Iran that had nuclear weapons And that is why I thought I didn't object to the agreement. I supported the agreement even because as secretary of defense at took a headache off my plate but I had lots of Iran headaches on my plate and I said Marty let's keep working on all the other. They're headaches that Iran is this is not could never be a grand bargain. So let's talk about Iran and Iraq. I thought the the best argument against invading Iraq. In Oh three was the enemy of my enemy is my friends. We may not be fans of Saddam Hussein or Iraq racked but they were the regional counterbalance to Iran. Am I oversimplifying that. Or is that a fair that was our that was our actually conscious view during the Iran Iraq war which is pox on both houses. Eight let them fight each other right into the ground and that seemed like a good outcome and looking back back now with the Middle East has become a a country that kept order within its borders. That was not capable of major aggression against its its neighbour. which Iraq was? You'd otherwise leave alone as long as it wasn't doing anything to us us. America what we thought might become a threat to us was the whole weapons of mass destruction. Thing Yeah but we knew that was nonsense from day. One the whole Cheney separate separate department of anytime someone says yeah yeah the NSA and CIA. Those guys don't know what they're doing we're going to set up a little division in the basement of the White House House you know. That's just a nonsensical approach. You can't say that but I can say that okay. I wouldn't I say that because I didn't see that at the time I'm just being honest. Okay like to say I was presient But I actually bought what Colin Powell said at the I thought I I I in my experience in government with that much smoke there had to be sought fire Somewhere and so it was. I was disappointed. Appointed and of course. It didn't turn out very well because we did a take away. The government of Iraq and what was left was no government at all. And we've been dealing with the consequences of that so let's do a compare and contrast because the fascinating thing about Iraq is is the George H W Bush invasion in is at ninety three. Anyone now new one. So he famously said we're going to a chase Iraq out of Kuwait but we're not gonNA talk. We're not going to keep going to Baghdad as some people that suggested. Hey keep them going and let's just topple on the theory. I assume that Iran is a problem. And let's let Iraq be there as a counterweight why I will am I right in saying the senior Bush's approach. That was the right decision. Was the right approach at the time. So what was the thinking in. Oh three let's keep going and take back that out as opposed to 'cause as we clearly won the war in the first six weeks. It was over like that because it's intention in three was specifically to topple Saddam. Over the intention the were ninety one was to recapture Kuwait. Okay and then when that was done present or said a new out now there were some in Dick Cheney. He was the secretary of Defense. I was on a Advisory Board to Dick Cheney at that time and I knew at that time and he wanted to go all the way to Baghdad and said let's finish finishes off once and for all. The president overruled him and that was controversial at that time. Now fast forward a little bit more than a decade. Dick Cheney's now vice president Some unfinished business with some unfinished. And so in retrospect it seems that that was an ingredient in the decision to to invade and all the stuff about weapons of mass destruction so forth which I think was the ordinary citizens reason for writing the O.. Three invasion we turned out not to be a reason at all. So let's roll back to nine eleven and the two thousand one attack which came from Afghanistan outstanding Saudi Arabia not Iraq. You have a really interesting role not only in the creation of homeland security but post nine. Eleven we're were you. You want September eleventh two thousand and one. I lay ended in Washington. I must've taken off on a aircraft from Boston at eight o'clock just just like some of the bought. The planes that hit the town must have been in that same line waiting to take off island national airport and I looked out the windows. We taxied and there's a huge cloud of smoke over the Pentagon Claes K.. A. Place I've worked in and out of for years and there's this huge plumes and also is in striking about that. Barry Guess what else was in there. Besides smoke paper. It was a huge. He hit it office office building a big plume of of paper and I thought well. That's odd but I didn't know what the reason then I walk up the ramp look at the TV we screen in the terminal and see two towers. And then I know exactly not only did I know what was going on but I did it away and I knew it was bin Laden. God be well. He tried to the towers so I remember for most Americans. This is like the Martians had land. Yeah no Osama who who and where we're GONNA come round. Wild Earth is doing this to I knew right away And so I began to try to help the best. I I could one of the issues. Tom Ridge became the Ireland Secretary and I tried to help their get. Our government government better organized. So what was your role with the establishment of the Department of Homeland Security You I. I offered an alternative to that that I'm not in favor of setting up a formal department. I thought that you office of Homeland Security could be improved left but when you create a Department of Homeland Security in people's mind that brought together all our makes sense. Well it doesn't because you still you'll have the problem that DHS doesn't include the Defense Department right. It doesn't include the intelligence community it doesn't include law enforcement and so the issue still remains. How do you bring everybody together so instead a terrace so it it it creates what looks like a little a bit of bureaucratic tidiness? But it doesn't get to the core issue so instead of having a coordinated response from all these different resources it's just one more bureaucracy At that tries to pace together some organizations that haven't worked together in the past and they spend all this time on themselves calls and not on the not on the enemy so I thought I wouldn't have done it but we did do it and then I tried to help make it Work and for the the Defense Department to begin to play a stronger role in counterterrorism. You gotTA decide. We thought we needed to decide. Is Terrorism crime a disaster or an attack an act of crime you send the FBI right a disaster you said FEMA And if it's an attack you send the Department of Defense but in the real world. They're all three right and the president. If you think about the President I if I'm secretary of Defense as I was and there's John Kerry is secretary of state and there's these other cabinet members there only two people who sit atop us the president and vice president. Only two people outrank us. Carrie can't make me do anything. And I can't make carry do anything. Only the president can make us work together. Well the president's a busy guy and he can't watch after everything so interagency work is inherently difficult for president. Because he's got a knock together the heads of cabinet members who all have their own proud traditions and laws and committees of Congress and all this stuff and he's a bit and he's a busy guy so I thought there was a better way of doing counterterrorism interagency out of the White House but the president decided to created department and off. He went to do it but I I did. I posed that at the time I l. supposed the creation of a director of national intelligence for the same reason really just created another guy and if the problem is as you got a bunch of people who you can't get rid of any of them you can't put any of on top of each other really because law enforcement really is different from the military you gotta get them to work together so the managerial question. I always looked at it. As a manager of the managerial question is cooperation not consolidation. And so you and your managerial mind you say. How do I get different things that I cannot mush together? And it's not the right approach to Muslim together to work together. That's a different manage. Show approach let me throw the question back at you. How do you get the head of the FBI the Hannity at say the head of the CIA? The head of the defense ends intelligence groups. How do you get these disparite groups all from very different institutions to cooperate for a common purpose? There's a model. which is is the National Security Council? It's been in effect since Eisenhower's days says is worked better worse and in different times but it's now got kind. Well I can't speak to right now But it did for A number of years and really very very very efficiently in the first Bush administration work to get all of the people involved in foreign affairs whether it's economic foreign affairs or military foreign affairs sir. Diplomatic Foreign Affairs working together every day. And you know there are meetings at junior levels their cabinet member Burma meetings and they try to work everything out and then only when they have met and tried does. The president is his precious. Just time US remember. He's the only one who can tell everybody what to do. But it needs to the National Security Council basically intended to put decisions in in management form. That are ready for the president to make a decision that the people at the table can't make because that would involve bossy one another around which they they can't do that's a that's a functional system and when Tom Ridge came in is homeland security director he was setting up something. That was a replica of that. I think if they'd stuck with it longer. What would what out can you stick around? A bit of Chemo question. W we have been speaking with Ash. Carter former Secretary of Defense and author of a new book inside the five sided box lessons from a lifetime of leadership in the Pentagon. If you enjoy this conversation can well be sure and come back for the podcasters where we keep the tape rolling and continue discussing all things defense related. You can find that at itunes. Google podcasts. Stitcher stitcher spotify wherever finer. PODCASTS are found. We Love your comments feedback and suggestions write to us at podcast at Bloomberg Dot net. Give us a review on Apple. Itunes you can check out my weekly column on Bloomberg Dot Com. Follow me on twitter at writ- halts I'm Barry Ritholtz. You're you're listening to masters in business on Bloomberg radio when people around the world connect communicate and in trade the distance between us seems invisible and the world becomes a little bit smaller and a whole lot better with more than four hundred and fifty thousand global team members moving fifteen million shipments daily and serving two hundred and twenty countries and territories. Fedex plays a critical role in expanding trade. Fedex helps people small businesses. This is an enterprises around the globe. Look for better ways to connect to make a difference. That's because Fedex sees the value and impact of Trade Fedex understands possibilities that come when people connect net with goods services ideas and new markets innovation. Sores jobs are created economies grow trade thrives at Fedex. Trade Reid is their business visit Fedex dot com slash trade to learn more. Welcome to the podcast Ash. Thank you so much for doing this. I don't spend a lot of time with Former defense secretaries and I have a million questions. I am fascinated by the Department of defense. And if if I was born either ten years earlier ten years later I absolutely would join the military. I was in that you I was in that zone at tail end when I graduated high school. It was still over from Vietnam. None other draft was long over. She but there was still a hangover over from Vietnam and it my father would have killed me of had. I done that I always fancied myself a fighter pilot. which as you described your been great is it's a it is now manned aircraft is now going going to be an antique? It's not like even even today. You know you're fired missiles not a dogfight mixed. Today that mix we'll get even more and more unmanned overtime I think I think that's right. There are a couple of questions I wanted to get to both about the book and some of the more interesting things some of the more shocking things within the book I love the discussion about the joint strike. Fighter where you're negotiating was is is this Northrop Laki Laki. Lockheed Martin Northrop Grumman. which is what I grew up with the next town over as a kid Grummin was as in bethpage and building F.. fourteens there so in the middle of negotiations It's already you come in as secretary of defense. It's already way over the budget. Way Delayed and in the Goshi Asians the representative of from Lockheed asked well how many of these he's talking about budgets. And what have you. How many of these planes can you afford and your answer is how none and you get up and walk out of the room? Tell because about that negotiation and first of all why was the dry joint strike fighter so far behind. How important was this as a piece of military hardware? And how was this resolved under your leadership. I was a tough moment In that meeting room. That was a Saturday and people knew if hi call meetings on Saturday it was pissed And I did the CEO of this company. And I want to say I've as a successor and very good relations with Lockheed Martin and they do a lot of good work for us but business is business and what I was telling him was that if this management of this program program doesn't improve it's going to go down the toilet it's going down the reputational toilet. It's a joke in the media. What's the most bloated thing in government everybody can say joint strike you early? Osprey twenty two arguably the toilet seats people associated well and you can't ask for seven hundred billion dollars from the tax payer for defense if you're running things like that so I was the weapons buyer at that time and I said you know. I can't defend this kind of thing. And you're GonNa drag down the whole program with this kind of management. That's the point I was making to him What did we do with the Joint Strike Fighter under to get it back on track other a number of things but one thing I describe in the book because it is kind of an executive guide to run the place and contracting it is critical and what I did was shift the AIRCR early aircraft building contract one of the steps I took to an incentive contract it it rather rather than contract where whatever he spent we gave him that was the old the old method and you can imagine where that I mean human nature being good as you can see where that leads and that's okay if you're doing an experimental more developmental type you don't really know where it's going to go and it's unfair to make the guy give give your price once he's building aircraft and he's been doing it for a couple of years a couple of Daniel's what he's up against this particular model For a couple of years and I and we said let's write a contract like this will agree on a target price. Seems like you think and I think about what it'll cost build that plane and we'll put a little profit in a not a little profit but a reasonable profit in there for you every dollar you overrun of that. I'm GonNa make you you pay fifty cents and the taxpayer obey fifty cents except if it runs up to twenty cents on the dollar after that you have to pay for it all on the other hand if you if you deliver it cheaper then the target you get to keep fifty cents. I get fifty cents back. That sounds like a great setup. Yes that puts the right economic incentives on the contractor and with that and some other managerial moves we made the costs of joint-stock strike. Fighter stopped rising and eventually turned over. And and now we have joint strike fighter which I have to tell burrow said earlier in this conversation that I think it's the last man fighter will ever built but we do need it now because we need fighter aircraft and it's the aircraft of the future for our air force our navy and our Marine Corps so without it we would be in trouble trouble on top of which other a lot of foreign customers forward and we sell it and it's actually good for our economy and I it depends industry and we we look at the old eighteens ends in fifteen. These are decades old planes right. Yes and they got improved. You know gradually over time and we sold many of them Abroad and they were very useful fought in Iraq in Afghanistan and so forth and also in deterring more enemies than than the enemies. We found They're so we needed the joint strike writer. But this is an example of how whether it's aircraft carriers fighter aircraft dogs for Aidi he is a services. Do you know that. Half of the contract spend of the Department of Defense is not for aircraft and satellites not for things. It's for services. Mowing the lawn at a base doing high-tech. Rnd All these things and you have to. You have to learn how all to be a good buyer. They're also so As the person who ran the acquisition core I needed to train them to be excellent and acquisition and then I had to back them up because when companies tried to push him around or not companies it was it was always the what the lobbyists somebody's minis tried to push him around or members of Congress their staffs tried to push around. You need to stick up for them if they're doing the right thing and when you do that that makes everybody in. The acquisition corps performed their highest potential. And it was real important to me to set that example that the the boss backs you up and you do the right thing and anywhere in the Pentagon and I would say anywhere in leadership in any department to set expectations but then when people people meet those expectations and they run into trouble you need to back them up. That means if you've asked them to do risky stuff and something fails and it doesn't work out you say fine. You took the risk and I told you to take the risk is too often. We let people take risk in public life and then if it it doesn't work out. Well we we throw him under the bus. Cut Him loose. Yeah well that's fine. It works once then. Nobody else after that. You don't get anything Out of them So you mentioned high tech my view of and I think a lot of people's view of the rise is of technology in the American economy much of that traces back to Darpa and NASA. And whether we're talking semiconductors here's or software or geosynchronous satellites and GPS all these things trace back to what we did in the fifty sixty seventy s are we still engaging engaging in that sort of deep research I know Darpa still exists. They still run all sorts of interesting contests self driving cars. Another example are we we as cutting edge in the technology world in defense as we once were and if not what should we be doing there well there are two sides to it. We're still a big dog. Mary we spend more on our indeed than apple. Microsoft and Google combine so we still do a lot including a Lotta frontier stuff. But let's be realistic when I started my career. Everything of consequence in the world of technology. And you name things. Gee I remember. Remember the birth of GPS By the way the Defense Department the airforce a posted a really didn't want to do it and had to be overturned by the civilian leader. No kidding and then it was President Reagan who all by himself decided that everybody should be able to use a GPS but still. It wasn't as Granular Lauren and detailed as the military. GPS At least that's true that's true. But but the general point is that everything that mattered and that happened of consequence it came out of government out of the United States and mostly came out of the military within the United States. That was then now. It's a much bigger mix a a lot of the technology of consequence. The future comes out of the commercial world in the commercial world is inherently global. Would that mean for us as the Defense Department managerial generally. It's a very different thing you have to do. Not only the management within your own house. You're an R. and D. but I had to build I call them bridges to the tech world so that we could stay connected with them and draw the best of what they were doing into US rather than having the flow only be the other direction and now how do you do that. When you have Edward Snowden right and you have a generation of technologists that is kind of have suspicious of government or things government is inferior? And they're sort of or abuse I had to try to restore that relationship of trust which was the one that launched my career that went back to the Manhattan project but all that was all that had been gone. And Jim komonews. Oh me WHO's my colleague and the FBI was picking fights with Tim Cook. WHO's a CEO of Apple? And I'm in the middle of all of this and I tried and I think I had some success in drawing the tech community but you had to kind of meet him fifty fifty sample. I'd try to get people to come in and serve and I it's called the defense digital service which is it was a a way that I could attack person could come in just work for one year or on one project and enough to join the military. They'd have to join the civil service that they could come in. And I'd go and I'd try to recruit them and they'd have aren chair noses and I'd say I'm not going to ask you to do anything. Different even wear your Hoodie. Come into the Pentagon and I promise you when you do that. First of all year respect for the Pentagon will be very strong and second. Would this will be what you'll tell your children about. You'll be proudest of this prouder of this working Marie or selling advertising or whatever is interest. It's news that may may be and they would come and I wouldn't make them change clothes and they'd be walking around the halls along with all of our people who are buttoned-down guys like like me or wearing a uniform And they and it was true went by the time they left. They tell me this is the most meaningful thing I'm ever done and I'm so proud of it. I'm so proud of the people that I was with and could partner could be part of but if you didn't build that bridge at the beginning and and you didn't say look we're GONNA have to agree to disagree but restored when he may think he's a hero I think he's a traitor Let's agree to disagree about that. But I want you to come men and give us a try and then they would come in. They'd given a try be successful and they'd go back out to Silicon Valley out to Boston. Or down to Austin back to the tech hubs and they take the word that the the government ain't so bad after all and it does need our help and it deserves our help. So That's interesting and you. You mentioned earlier. Iran and North Korea. Let's talk about to other countries. You mentioned in the book inside the five sided box. Let's talk about China and Russia. China seems to be very good at hacking corporate computer pewter systems in taking pretty much they want including military manufacturers in capturing plans for Jetson drones and everything else how dangerous a adversary is China. Well they're I think they're quite dangerous and I have thought that for quite some time I came earlier than most people to the view even even though I worked with the Chinese quite closely in the nineties and after two thousand also knew everybody in the PLA had good relations with with them. It was clear to me that China wasn't going to turn out the way everybody hoped in the nineteen nineties. A AH frank us. Yeah Yeah I hate that word different. They'd be Chinese but they wouldn't challenge the world order they wouldn't become an economic competitor. petted I mean they wouldn't become a military competitor and they would be become an economic power. Boo US A free trade type economic and be like Canada and Mexico and Europe and that kind of thing well. It was a well in the nineteen nineties. You may have still held onto onto that. Hope I thought by two thousand when my conversations is I watch Jiang Zemin become who J- Intel become season being and I've known all three It became clear and clear that they were going down a path quite deliberately of state ageism rather than free trade and capitalism repression rather than an open society and One that was going to use every advantage. A dictatorship could have to advantage themselves including the one you started with which is using their spy agencies to steal information the Chinese had copied us for Longtime Marines to be flattered by that And then at a certain point they get good enough at copying you that it stops being flattering and becomes threatening to you we. We passed that point quite some time ago. So let me ask question here. I still look at China as has more of an economic threat than a and more of a potential military threat. At what point does that balance shift. At what point do they become become a legitimate military threat with aims of global domination versus letting their economy which is quite an industrial engine drive the development of the. I think they're convinced in determined to be militarily superior but that's not going to happen for a long time We have comprehensive military power. That can be take a long time for the Chinese to overcome. Think about this. We spend a lot more every year than they do for starters multiple secondly yes secondly we have been doing that for decades which means we have. This accumulated capital stock. That is much larger larger than there's third we have experienced military are people basically been at war for the last fifteen years our officer course extremely proficient and last we have all the friends and allies and they have none boldly. They've been buying friends with that. That belt and road approach. You know. I'm not I think the Belton road like them. Overtaking US militarily is exaggerated also so it's really yeah Belton road remember. This is the country that build cities with no people in high and so. They're perfectly capable of having initiatives with nothing going on underneath. What they they did with Bolton road with gathered together a lot of stuff they were doing anyway? most of the countries that they they belt and road with South America Yeah well good Africa and as cow that which were the Chinese came first and the Chinese were out there with takes about three years and they were out there. Well Oh really yes. Because that's when people realize that it's all about China and the they're not grants their loans. Their loans on predatory terms talk really end the Chinese bringing all their own workers. And then start taking your precious metals at your country. They bring in around work. And that's the belt and road right so it sours on people real fast because it's so exploitive you know and that's where China and we I think really differ in fundamentally leap and that is this if our at our best and usually in certainly our institutions go back to the enlightenment and it was about the rights. It's of man and the dignity of man today we'd say people for China. It's all about being Chinese. So our ICHTHYOLOGIST. Yes we're American. We stick up for Americans maybe were narrow minded sometime but at the heart our political values are universal at their heart. Chinese political values are about being China. Pretty soon that dawns on everybody around him. Remember also that China's only half of Asia. That's right so I want to have a China policy but I was telling people we don't have a China Pulse Asia policy and I want to win the other half half I wanNA trade with it. I wanted to be friendly with me. I wanted to work with me. Militarily and that is both good in itself and the hedge against China data so we we can't lose those he really had ski. Keep our focus and secretary defense. I spent a lot of time meeting with my counterparts from Vietnam from Laos from Cambodia Indonesia Malaysia as well as the traditional friendly Japan and South Korea Rian Australia and so forth to make sure that we had friends there and the Chinese saw that we had friends so let's talk about one other country in Asia. ZSA wishes Russia not economically the powerhouse. That China is but they seem to be very good at sewing descent. percent and sewing disinformation their brand of Warfare or prewar fair is kind of unique their involvement in various When an open society you have to knowledge that they're gonNA attempt to disrupt our elections and everything else? How does the former Secretary of defense look at the former Soviet Union? That's now Russia trend. Lines are all down Russia's and rather than up Blake China's you only have one tool and that is to be a spoiler and the Russians of perfected being a spoiler shore so they have NATO NATO which has unity and so they tried this. Ah to sow discord. They had the United States which is doing fine and powerful and won the Cold War and they presents and so their way of trying to get back at us is to try to sow discord within the United States. That's all they have and when dealing with Putin over the years by the way I I met Vladimir Putin in nineteen ninety-three. He was note taker meetings between Clinton and Yeltsin and he sat in the back the Sky Guy and we knew he was he. I knew he was. He's back there taking notes his it and my view of him has been if if it were only that we disagreed about Syria and Iran and NATO expansion and so forth. Those are normal geopolitical issues in there there with the foreign leader. You GWEN and you agree where you can and you agree to disagree where you can you go on the problem with him as you work down the list you find. He has an item on his list. That you can build a bridge too and that's screwing us and that's on his to do list. It's very hard to negotiate on. I'd say well let's talk about screwing us and maybe we can meet half way. I'm not I'm not GONNA do that. I expect we're GONNA find out that Russia was much more involved in Brexit. Is it than anybody previously madge. Yeah that's actually a new documentary out called really great. Hack a netflix documentary which describes Exactly exactly that Very deeply involved in trying to so that now of course for them it was their their Throwing in Spaghetti at the wall and seeing stick. They're they're fomenting all kinds of discord and every once in a while one of these goes one of these long shots goes the distance uh-huh dozen. Just stir up a cloud of dust. But there's a cowboy at the end of it and in the case of Brexit they scored But I don't think going into it that they knew they were going to win that they were That's that's what week countries do and and Russia basically has nuclear weapons and being a spoiler and that's all it's got I have a million questions for you but I know I only have you for a short period of time. Let me ask you some of my favorite questions. Ask all my guests sort of our speed rounds and and then we'll get you over to television and have you continue the conversation. What was the first car you ever owned year making model? It was nineteen eighteen. Sixty eight impala and the reason I know intimately about that car was I worked for five years gas station. On North Broad Street in Philadelphia. As my second jabbed first job was at a car wash I got fired from it. I walked up the street and got a job at a Gulf station there and and therefore I could take that car apart and put put it back together again something. I could never do with a car today. Well it's all chips in computers. It's you have to replay you just replace Chunks of it you know there are no turning wrenches and stuff. Tell us about your early mentors. who influenced your career whether it was academically and Mit and Harvard or an uh-huh professionally In the Pentagon well two years with the people who got me from being physicist to being a public servant were were those guys from the Generation of the Manhattan Project that I referred to earlier who believed that they had Done on something of consequence namely the nuclear weapon with knowledge came responsibility then later in might in the time where I slowly. He kind of worked my way up from junior ranks and the defense establishment to become the secretary of Defense There were people Looks like Jim Slesinger. Richard Nixon samplers absolutely great guy. Brent Scowcroft National Security Adviser and in a four star general previous yes Three star general. Actually rent I gave him the okay. You deserve one bill. Perry who is a Secretary Trey Defense Admiral in the navy and I remember this is a guy who'd Perry long ago. No this was a guy who was a scientist like okay as it turns out but not all three of those were Bob Gates these were people who were capable bull and they always stuck up stuck up for junior person and I got myself into a few tight jams where I thought I was doing the right thing. One of them was with respect. President Reagan's Star Wars. which I I said wasn't GonNa work was my technical judgment? Will that flew in the face of a president's desire fire right I I learned what it was like. To tell the truth in the real world way presidents don't like when you pull over their biggest strategic take initiative about those people that I just named stuck up for me at that time and therefore stuck up for the truth and that made me feel that there was dignity dignity and honor as well as purpose in public life and I tried to carry that forward with me now. I think I would have stuck with it if I hadn't been able to look up at my at people who it turns out became my predecessors as secretary of Defense and say that is not only a capable and patriotic person but an admirable bowl an honorable person quite quite interesting let. Let's talk about some of your favorite books. What do you enjoy reading? You're a bit of his new Barry. I am And I'm all nonfiction Because I love to learn about something I've never seen never done. Never will do. That's why I wrote the book I did about the Pentagon if you've never been in the Pentagon and you want to know how all the parts were pains quite a vivid diction it's an executive guide or a citizens guide to the Pentagon not about about me. It's about the the Pentagon I like reading books like that. That's why I wrote a book like that. I read and this may surprise you textbooks. Okay may sound boring But here's why a tech. If you WANNA learn something a textbook is battle is designed. It's written to teach you sure so it. From a good text book you can learn a lot about a subject you don't know and second if you don't like if something doesn't come through to the first textbook get another textbook. I always get three or four on the. I like mathematics physics but about history and language and so forth to because then you can say well. I'm going to this. I didn't get this guy's explanation of certain subjects saw good at the corresponding chapter and the other one and read that. They've got a better explanation and you go back and forth. I like doing that and I may sound like an odd recommendation to people but if you like to learn Try Textbooks okay. This this two books I have to ask you about on the off chance you might have read them. Based on our previous discussion. One is a book on the history of the Medieval era with the title. A world lit only by fire. I have I had not read it but I've I've read it. It's fascinating because that thousand year period is shocking for the lack of technological advance notice before and after tons runs it was it was dark in every wasn't culturally dark but if you look at human material progress not allow for the wet bet for Western culture. There was a thousand years when say Islam was going great guns as well and yes and they were doing mathematics and they were doing all sorts of things with trade and pottery and glass and we were doing nothing wrong Western world the the other book that you immediately made me think of when you were describing. How people often don't appreciate an understand with the government is doing is the most recent Michael Lewis Book called the fifth risk which is about bowed all these scientists and all these managers that are doing? The government's work that is effectively essential and most of us are oblivious to it. Well that's that's in a sense. The theme that book is the theme of My Life of getting into national defense as as a technologist and there are lots of other skills as well. I'm a strong believer that The best government is one the people come in to and go out and we're criticized for that for the revolving door the revolt. Yeah in every administration things change. And here's how it looks looks to me about political appointees government About half of them are really good. a quarter of have. I have no idea what they're doing at first. But they learned fast and they're patriotic and they do well and a quarter of Moore hopeless and never get any better than pretty much the way it is but they bring in a freshness Every time they come that I think is healthy for our government and so compared to the British horrified for example to see all their counterparts chart change every time. The Presidential Ngel ministration right. It's pretty helpful but in time particularly the military where we're very we're never going to return to the draft. We will continue to get people people to register for the draft because it's a little reminder that they owe something to their country but I don't want their four million kids who who turn eighteen every year I don't need for million Anita quarter of a million and moreover many of them are not physically or mentally fit to be in Armelin today so they'll never be a citizen army of the needs to be some way of linking the people in government and one way is for those who have something to contribute to to to Find some way of being supportive And there are lots of ways of of doing that so I I think that's important for citizens that don't don't believe you're self-made even if you're successful person none of us is self made. Tell tell us about a time you failed and what you learn from the experience I early early on in my Time in so to speak the big leagues the number three number. Two Number One I had to work work very hard at dealing with the press. And the Congress just getting good at that And first of all you have to start from the right place. Jason I did. which is you can't start from a position of disdain In Congress for example you know most of these guys are working so hard. They're so there they are trying to understand much wider range of issues than even the Secretary of defense. They have to vote on all these other issues. And so you have to start with a Attitude that they're very they're very strict and they're they're trying but what I had to bury described this in the book is practice actes. I would sit down before a hearing or before I went out and made an announcement at a press conference. I would gone practice at my staff and I'd get Joe Dunford on for news at Sharon with me so he could learn to from the same and it's a ask me all. The hard questions asked the things that I might have thought of Because when you're when you're going real fast and I was going real fast because there's a lot I wanted to do and I had two years as the top guy and I had had all those is years to think about what I would like to see see done house going fast and I wanted them to catch the soft spots lots in my arguments and the places where I was skipping over over things so I wasn't too proud practice but Chuck Hagel. Who came before me? Who is in very very a great guy? He didn't practice for his confirmation hearing and that was a rough combinations of very rough confirmation. I asked him to practices. Di Wasn't too browde to practice. He's been a member of the Senate for a long time. I know how to handle it. I think in retrospect he would have done. Well done a little bit better if he had. He had practiced I But that was something I wasn't good at and I described in the book Calif.. You're that kind of person you think you might be. Don't be too proud. What are you most optimistic about the Pentagon and the military procurement process going forward and what he most pessimistic about about as procurement process? I think that if the it continues to kind have good management at the top. I can't speak for that. Of course I tried to set that example but I I don't know I think think we can continue to be the finest fighting force. The world has ever known technologically as well as in the kind of people we attract and generally speaking. I'm optimistic about that for our military overall. It's a learning organization very constructive organization. It's been at the top technologically in terms of human talent and if it continues can use to draw from the civilian world very best tradecraft from them about how to be good and how to compete to be the best. And the I'm I'm I'm confident we can beat the best. I also think that it's a great molder of of citizens. Our veterans are wonderful people. They're they're morally correct They know how to behave themselves in conduct themselves other disciplined and determined. And they understand that we all all live here and That the government is one of the ways but not the only way that we keep Our Society -iety and civilisation going they have that imbued in them. They know that they're not self-made part of wider society. All those good values So I'm pretty optimistic. And our final question. What do you know about the world of politics and diplomacy and the Pentagon on today that you wish you knew when you were getting started? I didn't always re. I think I took a lot for granted in in the course of my life when I talk about the gym slash singers brindamour across the bill periods. And Bob Gates Being I I could always look northward. A right up to the president president and there was A good order and discipline for the most part in government. These were admirable people. They made mistakes mistakes there. I didn't agree with everything they they did. But starting with President Reagan and the first president and I worked under I could look up and I say the President United States is. This is a someone who might can work for an in kind of emulate what he stands for. There's a part of our country and it's not just the president but it's not that I I now understand how how lucky I was to have those people above me and maybe I took that for granted. I mean. I'm a believer in what we've been doing in the world All these decades. I now realize you really have to keep proving that to the public and make them understand that this is a necessity and you can't take anything for granted so I I would take a lot less for granted now than I thought I could. What I started started my career but I had around me People like those And you tend to do that quite quite fascinating. We have been speaking with with Ash. Carter former Secretary of Defense and author of a new book inside the five sided box lessons from a lifetime of leadership in the Pentagon. If you enjoy this conversation well be showing up and introduce an inch on apple I tunes and you can see any of the previous three hundred or so such conversations. We've had over the past five years. We Love your comments feedback and suggestions write to us at podcast at Bloomberg Dot net. Please give us a review on Apple. itunes I would be remiss if I did not thank the crack staff that helps put these conversations together each week. Michael Boyle is my producer Cowan. O'Brien O'Brien is my audio engineer. Teak of albarn is my project manager. Michael Bat Nick is my head of research. I'm Barry Ritholtz. You're listening to Masters Masters in business on Bloomberg radio at Fedex. Trade is their their business with more than four hundred and fifty thousand team members moving. Fifteen million shipments daily Fedex helps people small businesses and enterprises around the globe. Look for better ways to connect and make a difference visit Fedex dot com slash trade to learn more.

Secretary Iraq Defense Department Pentagon president Iran Washington United States Russia Ash Carter CIA China secretary Barry Ritholtz commander South Korea Department of Homeland Securit Afghanistan
The Future of Defense with Ash Carter

FUTURE STATE

00:00 sec | 1 year ago

The Future of Defense with Ash Carter

"The future state cast at the intersection of Technology National Security and politics. I'm your host take Clark. The president of the United States doesn't really run the government. The government is run by the people who run the departments and agencies the president's cabinet and we've been lucky on the future state podcast to have many cabinet members from the secretary of State Secretary of Energy the National Security Advisor the head of E._p._a.. And and today we have perhaps the most important cabinet position all the one that's known in Washington as the SECDEF SECDEF Secretary of Defense runs the largest organization in the U._S. U._S.. Government millions of people in uniform and millions of civilians seven hundred billion dollars a year in spending nuclear weapons fleets of aircraft fleets of ships secdef is the more czar of the United States and the twenty fifth secdef was Ash Carter Ash Carter earned his bachelor's in physics and in Medieval History Summa cum laude and of course that Yale and Phi Beta Kappa of course he got his doctorate in physics from Oxford University where he was a Rhodes. Scholar is also an instructor at Oxford and a post doc at Rockefeller University and at M._I._T.. He did physics research at the Brookhaven National Laboratory and the fermilab outside of Chicago today Ash Carter is the head of the Belfer Center here for International Affairs at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government. Ash Carter is here to talk about his time as the secretary of defense. We're going talk about that and the future of defense as well as Ash Carter's great new book inside the five sided box lessons from a lifetime of leadership in the Pentagon the five sided boxes you we know is the Pentagon the headquarters of the fence department and this book inside the five sidewalks demystify is the Pentagon and actually lays bare the inner workings of the Department of Defense <music> so let's talk about the future of defense so Ash Carter Welcome to future state good to be here. Thanks you had the job I always wanted to have uh still time so the secretary of defense whether great job I do I do I do just because I missed the department. I was there in and out of there for thirty seven year right so it's the place I know best and and love most but you know you when you're in a job like that and you've had jobs like this. You know you can't do it forever so I knew there's going to be changed administration. I would be out <hes> what was important to me. Was that I I knew I couldn't finish everything I started but I could start everything I wanted to and that I man I did manage to start everything. I thought the nation needed. It's department depends to start in that sense how satisfied but I don't know if most people who haven't worked in government understand. This is a twenty four hour a day job you. You know people joke about that three A._M.. Phone call but how often did that happen every night. We'll one of the ugliest ways that that transpires is something called Operation Noble Eagle which you have both as deputy members deputy and then I was secretary and the secretary and the deputy share the responsibility for noble Ligo which is the shooting down of civilian airliners if they're headed for example for for the Capitol Dome <hes> that is like a true crisis in today's world crises usually develop over a few hours anyway but that is something that develops over a few minutes that you do wake up in the middle of the night for and and do your general point about the pressure. I didn't feel it until the day after Gimenez took over for me. The day I walked out and Jim Walked in something came off my show. It's almost physical. It's almost physically your you'll know feel that the expression is you feel the weight off your shoulders but you literally do yes in your in your back you know begins to become normal again and maybe get the sleep <hes>. It's is an incredible sacrifice and how much we pay the Secretary of Defense Your pay about one hundred ninety five thousand dollars a year and you're running the biggest corporation in the unites <hes> Yes for for a tiny fraction of what any other corporate <hes> C._E._o.. Always getting a you're running the largest one but nobody's in it for that reason no you're not but on the other hand you know I I look at Singapore where they pay their cabinet members a little man <hes> and every year your in the Pentagon given what you could do on the outside aside. You're giving up money giving up your life. You're giving up money. It's my prime earning years. I've been in public service and that means that I'll have less to give away philanthropic plenty to live on. I'm ready I but I will have less to give away philanthropic LII and less to give to my children than people who spent more of their lives doing other things but there's nothing better to done such a sacrifice and what you get in return yeah you get a lot of job satisfaction. Let's be clear <hes> but you also get attacked by whatever the other party is <hes> I worked for both Democrats and Republicans and and if I was working for Republican Democrats attacked me in the fight was working Democrat Republicans. At the time you get attacked by the press <hes> and no one ever really says thank you very much well. You'd be surprised maybe it's the secretary of defense and the custom now of thanking people for service in leaks in the sector events I to work for presence of both administrations and so I've seen that swing back and forth the one thing about defense and since a lot of your experience was in the White House that may be different in just inherently on because that's the president's President's House and the Department of Defense is the military's house and the the the nation's defense <hes> it's less partisan and <hes> less harsh <hes> now that it doesn't mean that I didn't have to deal with <hes> members of Congress who mature John McCain Major Life Israel on a few got along with John McCain very I know everyone didn't but I always got along with John. He used is to invite me to his on his congressional delegations every year for fifteen years before I became under secretary so I had traveled with him and he knew me and <hes> evidently had some regard for what I was doing least thought it was a straight shooter I believe and I always knew that prickly as he could be and so that he his his anchor was in the America that I know I'm still in love but he did make it difficult on with this. I seen him say things to my subordinates. When I was secretary including chairman of the Joint Chiefs Vice Chairman of the joint chiefs that were so over the top critical yeah so you say those millions of people working in the Pentagon <hes> and their secretaries of the Army Navy and chairman of the Joint Chiefs and and you kind of wonder well you know what's the role of the secretary <hes> in in in setting direction and setting policy and I think you mentioned your mattis replaced you but nobody replaced him nine yet? No and I you know Jim's not replaceable in many ways because he he at least initially commended the ear and maybe the respect to president trump and I worry that the next guy isn't going to be listened to it all so we've been a longtime though without secretary of Defense and what what difference does it make whether we have a strong secretary or not the place will go one. It won't get out of control because there's so much order indiscipline in the nature of the institution and it's got a very deep keel in two point eight million professionals who work there military and civilian would it can't do Dick is move into the future without a leader because nobody can make change but the guy at the top and we need to keep keep changing because we're the best now because we've been pretty good at adaptation over the course of our history but it's a competitive world you know our competitors China Russia Iran North Korea terrorists these are fiercely competitive people who are entirely focused on us and it's a competitive world and we need to compete back and that means continuing to challenge ourselves technologically in terms of how we deal with people and manage people only the guy at the top can and do that. That's where the absence of confirmed secretary of Defense who enjoys some modem of trust from the president will be felt and that's what you did so well because you understood the technology side as well as the policy side <hes> and you talked about <hes> this is called the future state podcast. You talked about shoot your commands and you set up shops <hes> in Silicon Valley in Austin Texas. Tell us about that well when I started at you're right. I'm a physicist in fact the day President Obama nominated me. I got a call from Harold Brown. Who Jimmy Carter Secretary define remember Harold and Harold Harold said Ash every twenty years we get a good secretary of defense and what he was thinking was three scientists himself forty years before Bill Perry twenty years before as a mathematician me that was the way Harold Lloyd <hes> but when I started back thirty seven years ago and my first job when Caspar Weinberger for Secretary of defense all technology that mattered came out of America and most of that came out of defense and so we could grow our own and that would be sufficient <hes> all the electronics all the the Internet Alan? I mean the chip the Internet all that stuff came from us and you know first computer was army project. Yes <hes> for for calculating artillery shells would drop actually turns out be complicated problem <hes> and now it's a different world. It's a world in which a lot of technology comes out of the commercial and global sector. So how do you remain the best military power such world you have to be the most connected to it and be able to suck out of it not out of you. Oh just of your own tech base but suck out of the commercial global technology base the best new stuff and incorporated in your military systems. That's why I put outposts hosts in Silicon Valley Boston Austin I would have done more if I were still there and why put outposts of them in the Pentagon argued example with the defense digital service so these are are. I mean Dick Really people that don't look like you and me in suits and ties <hes> these were people that I would recruit out in these tech companies with the orange hair and nose rings and the whole deal and they are very suspicious of the government is post Snowden and I'd say give me just a year or come in and do one project and I got a promise for I'm not GonNa make you be like me. You know a guy at a suit a little. Oh flag lapel flag lapel <hes> but I promise you this that when you leave whenever that is this'll be the proudest you'll ever be of anything you've ever done. I promise you that an exit at interviews they'd always tell me they were and there are a lot of funny things that happen so these guys would be in their hoodies and they're they're aviator glasses up on their foreheads and everything walking around the Pentagon with you know they're very button down folks. We have there and one one day the men who is what they call mayor the Pentagon but the guy who <hes> get your walls painted so everybody the famous Dohuk Donnybrook was originally that young and Mike Rhodes took place. Mike comes in to me one morning and says Sir the Defense Digital Service which is what this group is called has put all their furniture out in the hallway. What do you want me to and I such as just leave him alone? Just take it away. They wanted an open space. You know so you're at the Pentagon's like like World War Two. They're these big leather chairs with brass tacks in them and big meeting. I remember when I worked there. You could do something called midnight requisitioning which maybe if you stayed around midnight you could go get yourself a nice leather somewhere way you know there were ashtrays on every table when I started out there and you'd throw open the windows in the springtime now let the springtime area not anymore no not anymore but you know the old saw where always ready to fight the last war and and I <hes> despite what you did to cause people to think about the future and and in technology and that's a big boat to turn around and I look at the navy for example with all these big aircraft carriers that just seemed to me to be targets <hes> L. I ask we're spending huge amounts of money to defend these aircraft carriers so that they can do what you know have forty eight air little F. Eighteen airplanes that can drop bombs and it just seemed to me that some of the services are still fighting the last war well yeah you do install all the base of equipment that lasts for thirty forty years so give you another example come back to the carrier rebuilding the Joint Strike Fighter now and I'm for that and I worked really hard to make that less. It was a mess when I started out as acquisitions are <hes> <hes> and it will have thirty forty five year lifetime. I doubt they'll be a follow on man tactical. You think you're the last human piloted aircraft yes technical tactical aircraft. Yes <hes> now you ask what the aircraft F carrier in a high end China Russia. Maybe Iran you're absolutely right. It's going to be increasingly difficult and has this has been true for some years to just been sure the survivability let alone the effectiveness of aircraft carrier begins those kind of enemies anywhere near their shores so fair point. I still think there will be a role however for some aircraft carriers when it comes to the Afghanistan's the series the Iraq's so if you partition things in to high end and low end they'll still be a low end role. Now you're right about fighting the last were in another sense yeah. That's been true on the other hand I would say if I if I name the biggies today for me China Russia Iran North Korea terrorism and I say well all of those are pretty big headache and I don't skinny down the list and try to simplify things. I've got these five headaches and that was my approach <hes>. I think they're each going to change. They'll be artificial intelligence. They'll be more cyber stuff. There may be bio <hes> terrorism though so these things will change but I'll bet you those same categories will be around for those same places will be problematic <hes> for awhile at Bob Gates it's my wonderful predecessor in great mentor and Friend of Mine Great Secretary of Defense and a great director Central Intelligence and Deputy National Security Advisor to <hes> Bob used to as before he became secretary defense as a former D._C._i.. I get applause with a line that went like this. <hes> we've never once predicted where we fought now. This is something you could say in the nineteen nineties and then he'd talk about Grenada and and so I remember Grenada and I do too <hes> and so they should show at right <hes> and so that's a great line however there's one thing that is not accurate about although Bob didn't mean it this way which is it's could suggest to people that are two presence in Europe or in South Korea because word in breakout but those are wars. We prepared for they didn't happen. That's not not a failure story. That's a success story. We knew where they were going to happen. Then we went there and prevented it yeah and so that's the big story of the American military of the last seven years and that is overwhelmingly a triumph of prediction and and prevention. It's not the war it's peace the peace in Japan Peace in Europe. You'd ever get credit for things that didn't happen. I I remember being part nearly nineteen nineties of the so-called nunn-lugar program fact I ran that program and that was a program. It was intended to to win the Soviet Union disintegrated to make sure the nuclear arsenal of the first ever nuclear state to fall apart didn't also fall apart pretty important mission carried out successfully not just because the United States participated in but above all because the Soviet former Soviet custodians did but it was successful and if you tell people that now it sounds like you're giving history lesson yeah but on the other hand there were twenty thousand nuclear weapons they could. Of ended up anywhere yeah so you talked about the future wars involving artificial intelligence and cyber so let's talk about this <hes>. I think a lot of people have a notion that <hes> we're going to turn over control of weapons to Algorithms Algorithms and algorithms are going to make decisions about who to attack. We're talking about cooperation with Silicon Valley and yet <hes> there was this incident at Google. <hes> were <hes> they were involved. Google was going to be involved. I don't know if they were in an artificial intelligence. They were they were and <hes> and some Google employee said we don't want to be involved. <hes> with the Pentagon and I think they were afraid of being part of an artificial intelligence program Graham that we'd go off on its own <hes> you know and and figure out what the target was and kill it <hes> we're not really developing that are we know and and I offered to talk to two Google employees. We concluded on balanced that probably will go to wait and do that. Another time. They were mistaken in my judgment and I think man their management was mistaken to change what they were doing. As a consequence that first of all that was not all google employees or a lot of Google in blazers some Google employees and that's fine. They're entitled to their point of view however I don't agree with your point of view and here's how I would reason with them. I would say to them first of all and this needs to be said good on you your thinking morally that is perfectly appropriate. I want to associate myself with you in that regard and by the way you should think that way about everything that Google does that would be normal well okay and then second I would say as far as your government is concerned in the battlefield. I want you to know that we take our values to the battlefield. I tell you that as the former secretary trey defense by the way Dick you may know this or may not but in twenty twelve when I was deputy secretary of Defense I issued what is still the extent guidance to the Department of Defense on so-called autonomous is weapons which says they will not exist says the must be human not in the loop involved in decision making. I only make that correction because other in the loop is not really technically possible at suggests a person in a chip in a circuit. Did you know that that can literally be right involved in decision making <hes> because that is morally necessary. It is operationally totally practical number three. I would say the <hes> on the contrary very. Are you comfortable working for the P._L._A.. Because you do Chinese People's Liberation Army because you don't know when you work in China which your company does whether because they don't tell you who died and the last thing I'd say to them is do you really take for granted. Everything that's around you. You have a company you drive. You drove to work today on a road that somebody made that's public project. You have employees who come in who can read and write. That's a public project. You're defended if I may say so by the department Iran and that seems like a pretty necessary thing. The government isn't some extraneous factor Dr it is how we do things that must be done collectively and if you don't like the way it's being done or distrust Wade's being done getting the game. How are we ever going to do the right thing on a I if people like you you don't get involved in it? I became involved in the government because I was a physicist and at that time star wars nuclear weapons were going on and I didn't always agree with what the government was doing but I felt like I had a responsibility ons ability to participate so that's the argument I would make to them. I share that view and I got involved in the government. <hes> straight out of college Undergrad went to work at the Pentagon S. four years of my life I think in some ways <hes> but those this where the years in the immediate aftermath of the Vietnam War and I was Vietnam war protesters and people didn't understand why are you going to work in the Pentagon us. The enemy has no. It's not the enemy that's us. Yes and the only way you prevent bad things from happening is by being involved. Yes you're so right. I I had the same attitude that I still have today and it's what I tell young people including Google irs. I say you get in if you if you want it to turn out right get in the game. There's no it's the only government we got. You can't go down the street and shopping another store and Donald trump will forever be president so these days I particularly get the question you made to from young people all the time and and I tell them yes no particular president will be here <hes> forever <hes> but this is your country. There's no alternative and you're not gonNA get your way all the time <hes> but go ahead and give it a shot and I get so frustrated with people who my model of the clueless is the wealthy businessmen who drives his lexus around simultaneously complaining about paint his taxes and the potholes now exactly when I swore <hes> the oath for the first time in the Pentagon Richard Nixon was the president <hes> and need. I say what I thought of Richard Nixon at the time I think the people should still go in <hes> because you can do good at any level in the government <hes> Roy Math Buckley Apropos Richard Nixon nurture Nixon's after my time but <HES> <hes> before my time rather but we met Buckley said he he was being asked by the F._B._i.. The question you've heard a million times asked about colleagues that they've asked you which is <hes>. It's the last question in a long security questionnaire. <hes> is there anything about Mr so and so <hes> that might embarrass the president and Buckley said about this colleague if his and Richard Nixon being president at the time he said in his best pseudo British accent <hes>. I should think the reverse is more likely. You're so we have this policy. Would you put in place <hes> on a I but I'm not sure other countries will yeah <hes> and so we have these fictionalised scenarios. I'm sure you're red. Ghost Fleet in there's great book <hes> where there's a hyper war a war that takes place really fast <hes> with hypersonic weapons with Cyber Weapons <hes> and with artificial intelligence making decisions <hes> if not on our side at least on the other aside <hes> how much of that is science fiction and how much of that is the next door I think the the speed and the automatic AC- of the weapons Israel <hes> but I think the opportunity for human responsibility and leadership is there <hes> and we'll continue to be they're not in the sense of as I said being a chip in the circuit but we've got to be the best that which means we have to have thought through the best field the best stuff the stuff that will dominate that is a creation of human thought and strategic wisdom and I think if we have that and we have good technology technology the best technology which I think we is within our Ken to have we'll win. Whatever form it takes there still will be a sense of victory? <hes> this will be a human war. One for human purpose in there is going to be human winter and human loser in the winner is GonNa be us and even when we talk about cyber wars cyber wars not going to take place in a vacuum. It's not GonNa Take Place just in cyberspace. It'll be part of an overall war. <hes> and I know oh you've thought so much instill now at Harvard Kennedy School at the Belfer Center thinking so much about cyber war but when you we talked about this earlier when you turn to the Cyber Command and said do something and go after Isis <hes> for me you were disappointed with the results I was is another story. I told in the book <hes> it was a managerial issue <hes> for me and <hes> making us us the best at cyber warfare is is to me a necessity and he's one of those areas where only the secretary of defense can lead that future and yes. I thought we had more. They're inside calm than we proved to have. When it was time to go after Isis now think about isis the these are barbarians? These are people who are crucifying people who are enslaving women so if you're there every time when the gloves are off it should be then that should be there and so I said you know just go get them and then we didn't get much <hes> out of it and that was to me me a sign that we weren't close yet and that wasn't US limiting ourselves there. Were some things like you'll appreciate this. There's always a trade off cyber between there's oh forever been in counter commanding handing control attack between listening to someone and taking away their communication so that's their <hes> for sure the problem with terrorism yeah yeah yeah and so it's you've been there you know that perfectly well still all all this was a situation where all that balance was in favour blackeyed these guys after other plotted against our people <hes> from places like rock and we didn't have anything so all that's crying over spilled milk now. It's it's but the point is a making of saying that in the book was to point up the managerial issues associated with cyber <hes> it's not enough to simply organiz around it and have a military command cybercrime lived at the margins of what is really the big dog of expertise which is the national security agency also managed by the Secretary of defense but done <hes> separately and I think I I figured that since they were they live next door to one another and had the same director appointed by us that there would be more diffusion of between Cyber Command between cyber come in and an annexation particularly from N._S._A.. <hes> to cyber combat it was difficult because the ETA said people are by nature listeners and not warriors <hes> and you can have a lot of warriors over there who may be really excellent and what they do know a lot about the trade craft of were but if they don't do anything about information technology they're going to be much useful used for that either so it was disappointing to me. We need to get better one of the things I hear about Cyber Command which I disagree with but I hear it that Wanna get your reaction. <hes> I hear a lot of people saying I pay taxes US and when I'm when I'm attacked by the Russian military or the P. L._A.. The Chinese military I expect the Pentagon defend me. So why do I have to spend all his money. Defending my company's cybersecurity security against the Russians the Chinese why isn't Cyber Command defending <hes> couple while you're right to disagree with that a couple of things wrong with it the first is that if you have laid to yourself open to foreign enemies you've also laid yourself open to everyone else and so technologically you are describing a situation in which you have not protected your Intellectual Property Operti the your customers data and that's a bigger problem than with her for nationalist is doing it so I wouldn't make that can fashion if I were C._E._O.. On a board <hes> second <hes> <hes> it's not the case the department it's not since it's not pure war. It's not purely a Defense Department responsibility and here the ugly reality which you know full well <hes> comes in. In which is homeland security is inherently an interagency responsibility which makes it a goat screw as the expression goes in Washington terms and we created a Department of Homeland Security which I knew from the very beginning and I remember saying this at the time was not going to be the answer. I did too good right so it was an aggregation of parts of things but you're still going to have an energy problem because you started diplomatic function. You still had an intelligence function. You still had a military. All these things weren't going to go away and by the way under U._S.. Law There are state and local jurisdictions as well who kinda think they're in charge. I remember during Hurricane Sandy. I was deputy secretary. Hey Defense and so we were up there trying to help out in New York and New Jersey. Yes and President Obama said to me. Don't be parochial. Help the country and I said all my people don't mess around. Just don't ask ask whether it's your job. Don't ask whether it's your stuff do it do it and so that was the spirit everyone ahead but then you get up there and you realize that there's a governor of Connecticut Governor New York Governor New Jersey and a mirror her New York who thinks none of the other exists and they're the people who are really calling the shots at you have to fall in behind them and give them support give them support and and so the reality of defending the country whether it's cyber or storm or some other form of terrorist attacker would were whatever it is in warfare. It's mostly us not entirely us even then but it's mostly us but in cyber it's it. It's first of all your responsibility if you have an enterprise and it depends upon information technology to succeed then you have the same responsibility to your shareholders and your employees and your customers <hes> as you do in any other matter. Nobody's going to get you off that Hook one one last question <hes> the future of NATO. You spend a lot of time in in Brussels at the North Atlantic Council <hes> and I always thought that was our one of our if not our greatest military asset was the fact that we had in the lions of of Democracies <hes> that the shared some oh the burden we always wanted them to take more of the burden but they shared some of the burden and now the president just attacks them all the time and I I. I wonder if you know ten years from now. We'll have a native well. I certainly hope but I actually believe we will but it may be a weakened one. <hes> the reason I think will have one is that this is a very strong institution and you know you know that institutions that take decades gates to build can be destroyed a few years. You're absolutely right on the other hand. There's a lot of strength in resilience in this institution the critical ingredient of which is the shared values that most most of these countries have that's bigger glue particularly among democracies than maybe those of us who are geo-strategically inclined purely fully appreciate the flip side of that is them being democracies that is is that that once you have disrespected or ticked off the population of another country even if their leadership can't possibly do what you want even if it's the right thing for the their country and you and even if you've changed your policy won't survive they won't survive and so you gotta be very careful about disrespecting another country that is a democracy because it's not like Kim Jong Un and you can call them rocket man one day A._N._C. Love him the next and Hills Zig Zag and he doesn't have to ask anybody's permission. It's just that Theresa may now or Angle Merckel or Shinzo obey because they have beneath them people who will take themselves personally take umbrage at the way their country or their leaders being treated and that's hard to reverse Ash Carter. There's so much in the book the five sided box that we could talk about <hes> we could do twenty <hes> hours of this podcast August <hes> but thank you for doing this hour and <hes> thank you for writing the book and thank you most of all for your service not just as secretary of defense but for decades in the Pentagon thank you thanks for having me Dick and I hope people enjoy the book I want to say. It's not a Washington memoir now. No it certainly not it's. It's a different kind of book. It's about the Pentagon it's about the Pentagon and the real Pentagon not the one that <hes> you may hear about elsewhere Ash Carter. Thanks very much thank you. I hope you enjoyed that conversation. If you did please go to wherever you get your podcasts and rate us so that others will get your recommendation and if you want to see a list of other season one and season two shows go to future state PODCAST DOT COM and also at that website and you'll see what we are reading the books of Twenty nineteen and that we think you'll like many of which were going to talk about on the podcast but they're more books there as well one book. You'll find there. I hope you'll read is the fifth domain by Rob Janaki and meet it's about cyber war and how to get from cyber war to cyber piece. It's ridden in well. I hope is clear. English has lots of real stories and real people as well as some recipes for getting decipher these the fifth domain can be preordered now traveler insurance for future state are made by Sire Travel C. I. R. E. Sira Travel Dot Com for or your personal travel as well as your business travel. Don't think you can do it as well as the experts at sired we use them. We trust them. They're the best in the business sire traveling dot com.

Pentagon secretary president Ash Carter Department of Defense Google. China deputy secretary Dick Washington Secretary United States President Obama Silicon Valley under secretary Harvard Kennedy School Russia
Episode 59: Ash Carter

5 Questions with Dan Schawbel

00:00 sec | 1 year ago

Episode 59: Ash Carter

"Are you looking to reach your full. Potential and achieve success in business and life want only tried and tested guides. Let's from people who have truly made an impact. You have come to the right place. Welcome to five questions with Dan. Chevelle New York Times bestselling author Dan Shop Bell. distills the most actionable and tangible advice. From a variety of world-class humans including entrepreneurs ignores authors Olympians Follow Titians Billionaires Nobel Prize winners Ted speakers celebrities astronauts and more inspirational guidance. Practical advice and concrete solutions our power chat sal. Welcome to the fifty ninth episode of five questions with Dan. Shaw Bell as your host might go secrete the best advice from the world's smartest and most interesting people by asking them just five questions. My guest today is the twenty fifth. US secretary her tariff Defense Ash Carter born Philadelphia Pennsylvania. Ashes father was a doctor military veteran and his mother was a teacher after graduating. Abington Senior High School. As the president of the honor society. He went to Yale. College then became a Rhodes scholar at the University of Oxford from nineteen ninety three to nineteen ninety-six. Ask served as the assistant stint secretary of defense for International Security Policy during President Bill Clinton's first term during this time he was responsible for strategic affairs including the US nuclear weapons weapons policy. He continued to work his way up the hierarchy until two thousand fourteen. When President Barack Obama appointed him to be the twenty fifth. US Secretary of defense after after over thirty five years of service. Ashra book called inside the five sided box about what he learned during his time at the Pentagon in this episode ash gives us his insider sided perspective of his decision making process relationship with the troops and advice that's applicable to our lives outside the five sided box. Most people don't understand how alumini both the Pentagon employees larger than stabs of GE Amazon. The world's largest company so talk about the responsibility walkability of manner gain in working with so many people hiring firing through what that's like in some of her decision making process to big responsibility. But it's if you think about it. A lot of important things in life with making sense of people can wake up in the morning. Their kids send him off to school. Tom Go to work live. Their lives dreamed your dreams. You can only have that if you got security secure. You don't think about if you don't you think about nothing. He also is. It's like oxygen regard and we provide that that oxygen and so wonderful. Wake up in the morning and that's a lot of responsibility but it's really noble thing to do stuttered hold your at the garden. Workforces battlefield other countries. I was talking about empathy before this. How do you guys them and connect with them everywhere. Every every place for people to avoid compute Dr Joao her their only job faced with abandoning. And I'd always tell them to this. The first is wire here with me. This and the second thing I tell is how noble their mission and how proud I was a and they would understand. That knows talking to them. I wasn't only Sarpi to them. I was talking to their families and I would stand out in the one hundred twenty res. The Desert Afghanistan and or rock and Shake Hands I.. I'd see the leaders of the country and Mike Commanders. I'd always always goes to the troops and every time. I should have a picture of me and we would give those pictures to kids and send them home and nat pictures. GonNa show up as get sent home mom. It's going to show up on her bedside table or the mantle and she doesn't know the sector defenses dances and don't care but she wants her loved one in that issue to look like they're doing something really really important. There is the secretary you can tell you tell suit. Can you see the flag and I.. I wanted to look at that picture too. Great for the whole family. I I think little things like that in a big organization or beef things. Yeah the word con. Dao were most associated with you mentioned. That's who you hire. That's part of why you fire back part of why dress the way. This is the first time I've wore for a SEC. A separate in bitterly two years. Just tell me more about your personal conduct impact. You think that's mere career. It's into rare to go through thirty seven years of uninterrupted garment and I was always in Washington and I was always a close enough adviser that I was a special boy and I never was investigating for it now. Why is that. I quater did anything but secondly I never even got close to and there's so many ways that you can cut corners corners or seemed to cut corners and in public life. I think in life in general but but you can't have that kind of thing in the profession of arms warfare and in leadership of something serious depends on the need habit either. What is the responsibility all year. During turbulent times and what are the first few steps being able to handle that and being able to connect with the report that they're confident that you've ever will be when you entered what I'll call a crisis situation You're usually any sense. You know you don't really know what's going on therefore you can't really know what you're supposed to do. The worst thing in the world is not to say or do anything leader so the question is at what do you do in a crisis when and you know you don't know all the facts and here's my advice. Don't be styled. If you're silent the worshippers will okay going and you will seem feeble indecisive and that takes away the room that you need to do the right thing. Whatever this crisis turns out. So you need to say something. I just say a few facts that will satisfy people. Aw that you're willing to speak. You're not trying to hide anything. Don't go out and tell them everything you don't know because then you look foolish eventually. Eventually you will know you wanNA show communist so say would you now. Secondly even though you don't understand the situation you can't know what old ashes tape do something. Give your people instructions. They crave that because they they need to know that everything's GonNa be okay and they'll play a role once these curve us. People ask me all the time they say I met her four here and I've got I've narrowed it down to Jude Joyce's and what I really WanNa do is eh Eh but if I do not do it but it. It'll lead to this thing. And they had this whole billiard shot. We're finally after bouncing scene often number of cushions and go to law away doing a bunch of things they don't WanNa do finally knock ball pocket. My advice is to do you. Ask Yourself when you wake up tomorrow. We're you rather be going to work. And that's not a self-indulgent plot is eh lodge goal instrumental thought. 'cause if you wake up tomorrow and do something that you you really like you too well and that will carry you forward. You'll excel at if you do something that you just think is. I had a longer Shane. Indeed you do it poorly and it won't lead anywhere So I think it's both Good emotional advice but mm-hmm more importantly it's good instrumental advice INNIS. That's the important. That's what I find myself in my own. Life does the advice. I'd give anybody thank you so much for sharing your wisdom ash to follow this journey. COMEDIANS book inside the five sided box and fight him on instagram and twitter where he shares his live appearances media interviews and his book a tour to watch the full extended video version of this episode. Where I ask ask even more questions you can go to Youtube. Dot Com slash. Dan Shah about so. We hope you enjoyed today. Show and the amazing advice. Our guest provided remember that you can only benefit from advice. If you packed on it before are you. Do we would appreciate your feedback. In the form of review you can leave a review on itunes stitcher or Pod catcher of your choice your or feedback would be very much appreciated head over to Dan. Chevelle dot com slash review now.

Dan US secretary Secretary president Pentagon New York Times Nobel Prize Dan Shop Bell. Shaw Bell Abington Senior High School University of Oxford Dan Shah Barack Obama Pennsylvania SEC GE Bill Clinton Yale Tom Go
Former Defense Secretary Ash Carter On 'The Five-Sided Box'

1A

30:52 min | 1 year ago

Former Defense Secretary Ash Carter On 'The Five-Sided Box'

"This message comes from NPR sponsor indeed, if you're hiring with indeed, you can post a job in minutes. Set up screener questions, then zero in on your shortlist of qualified candidates using an online dashboard. Get started at indeed dot com slash NPR podcast. This is one A. I'm Joshua Johnson in Washington. There are some jobs that never leave you even long after you leave them, for example, being secretary of defense ash Carter served as secretary under President Obama from February twenty fifteen until the end of that administration. He started at the Pentagon back in nineteen eighty one when Caspar Weinberger was secretary. And Reagan was president, former secretary Jim Mattis spoke at the unveiling of Carter's portrait in the Pentagon Mattis remembered, seeing him at Stanford after Carter left the Pentagon, and just after President Obama offered the top job, a still recall you and I standing there on the sunlit campus as we bid for weld, one, another little knowing that one day, we would shake hands again, in Washington DC you were on your way back to the Pentagon. And I began praying for you immediately. So it was once more into the fray for you, this time you would be our secretary job for which fate or providence had well prepared you? So what does Ashqarq think of his successor secretary Mattis, we'll get into that later in the hour? And we'll explore how he prepared for. And did a job as enormous as protecting America Carter is the author of a new memoir called inside the five sided box lessons from a lifetime of leadership in the Pentagon, and he joins us from NPR in New York Secretary Carter. Welcome to one A. Thanks for having me Joshua. I wonder how you reflect on how you found yourself in the position of being Defense Secretary, is it something you were kind of groomed for thinking about throughout your trajectory at the Pentagon or did it catch you by surprise. Well, I certainly thought about the secretary defense a lot, because as you noted, I started in nineteen Eighty-one, and I had a continuous association with the department of. Fence working for in it all the way up until twenty seventeen. So I knew all the secretaries of defense, they knew me, I did, what I could to help them and help the department during that entire time. I wasn't my dream all tied to become secretary defense. But it meant that since I was, I had so many different positions including the number three and then the number two, and then the number one position in the defense department that I certainly knew what it was like since I knew what I was doing. I had a lot of preparation but that's different from aspirin to it. I mean, let's remember that in our system, at the president chooses, the secretary of defense as someone whom he or she if we ever sheep president is comfortable with, and that won't always be someone who is associated with the department as I was. But President Obama. Chose me ultimately and other police serve the role. What exactly is in the purview of your job? But maybe the average person might not think of. Well, let's, let's think about just the sheer scale the thing for starters. It's, it's half of the federal budget. It is a place that has more employees than Amazon. Mcdonald's Federal Express, target and GE combined does more Orrin, d than apple Google, Microsoft combined. It operates real property that if it were putting on one place would be as large as the state of Pennsylvania. So this is the world's largest enterprise, and people think of the secretary of defense rightly, as somebody who helps the president decide what the policies are, and then importantly, makes plans for war and carries out war when that is necessary. And all that's true. And of course, war is the heart of what we do, but you're also the manager and leader of the world's largest enterprise by far. So how do you do that job day to day without being just on the verge of peeing your pants at how big this job is? I mean it's. A gigantic responsibility. How do you just go through it without letting the Augustus of it freak you out? Well, first of all, the would grounds you always is the troops, when I would get sick, a Washington. We getting airplane when we go somewhere and talk to the troops, and now toys would make me feel better about the mission. I never got tired of it. And there's an inherent nobility in the mission of protecting our people and making a better world, for our children, being part of something bigger than yourself, that isn't really great feeling all that keeps you going even when there are a lot of hassles your, I'll tell you a story about the, the management versus the other parts of the job. Remember the national security advisor at the time who was Susan Rice, I called her up one day and Susan, you just sent me a binder full of material for meeting with the president this afternoon. How my supposed to read all this stuff, and she showed a wrote back. Well, this is the most important part of your job. And I shot back to her and said, well, no, actually because the. President expects me to run half of his government. And he expects me not only make decisions but to carry out this decisions he makes. So it's kind of one part of my job. But it's not the only part of my job. And she to her great credits at all. Right. I understand. So you have a very big job when you're doing secretary defense, and you're doing three jobs for jobs compared to the two other cabinet secretaries with regards to that job. You write in your book that you had mixed feelings about accepting it. When President Obama asked you what were the mixed feelings driven by and what helps you get past them? Just the human things that in this case, I had just moved to California taking up a new life. I had left the department several months before as the number two, I didn't think I'd ever be back to the -partment and defense after that, and I was starting off to start another career and technology, which is my other. Side is a physicist. And so I would have to wrap up everything I was doing. And come back to Washington. Go go through it again. I also wanted to talk to President Obama. And this is a caution for people who say, if the president calls, you, you just say, yes. Well, no, you actually don't the president calls. You, you say, well, I'd like to talk to you about, or at least I wanna think about it, because your duty as a cabinet secretary is to serve the president of the United States, and you have to have some reasonable idea that you can be helpful to him. And so I wanted to talk to even President Obama whom I knew about certain issues and just see if we were close enough that we wouldn't have a problem later on, if I did become secretary of defense. So you need you need to. Make sure and I have said with respect to the current president that he doesn't seem to listen to secretary defense. So it didn't didn't seem very productive to me to be the secretary of defense to him. And President Obama, didn't always listen to me, but he listened to me enough of the time that I felt like I was being useful to them. I want to talk to you more about the work of the Pentagon in a moment. We continue with former secretary of defense, ash Carter, definitely want to talk about how you manage the finances of the world's largest enterprise, some of the other challenges at the Pentagon faces and what the future for the department of defense, might look like I'm Joshua Johnson. And you're listening to one A from W AMU, and NPR. Support for this podcast. And the following message come from Babbel. Have you always wanted to speak, a new language, whether it's for travel work, or brain training, Babbel's ten to fifteen minute lessons will get you speaking confidently in your new language? Choose from Spanish, French, and more, you'll learn through real life, dialogues, speech, recognition, and interactive trainers, and Babbel's space repetition method actually, makes you remember what you've learned, download the app or go to Babbel. B. A B, B E, L dot com to try babble for free black face in a studio like fishing on Instagram got, Israel, and antisemitism. You've got Israel and colonialism, you have go music versus the denture vibes coats, which we take the subtext of race in mega text chop it up with us. This is one A. I'm Joshua Johnson were speaking to former Defense Secretary ash Carter, his new book is called inside the five cited bucks lessons from a lifetime of leadership in the Pentagon. Lemme ask you about one of the aspects of the Pentagon that seems to make the most political. Hey, you mentioned that you've tried to keep the Pentagon out of politics as much as possible. It's the amount of money that goes into defense, you mentioned that it's half the federal government based on the budget for sure according to CNBC the Pentagon seeking a five percent increase for the next fiscal year. That would bring its total apportionment to seven hundred eighteen billion dollars. I can't imagine. Well, I don't have to imagine there'd been plenty of people over the years, who have said, why does the Pentagon knee that much money where do those funds? Go if we took five percent out of the Pentagon, we could pay for college tuition for every student in the entire country. And we're spending all this money on the military and healthcare, and roads and infrastructure and the environment. No were building more. F fifteens. What? Would you say to them? Why does the Pentagon need every penny that it's getting L? I got says it's an absolutely fair question. And it's a good question. And to the point you made about defense spending non-defense. Benny, I never ever nor would I now have argued for defense spending at the expense of nondefense spending. I think this idea that it's a zero sum. Game is is really unbecoming a strong country zero-sum game, isn't it? I mean, you can't spend the same dollar twice. Well, but here's the thing in there are other the combined defense and nondefense dollars is only about thirty percent of the total budget. If you wanna go looking where dollars are in the federal budget, you have to look at mandatory spending her entitlements, and you have to look at taxes and the deficit, the discretionary spending when we're talking about which is schools. Roads are in D homeland security intelligence, but also, national defense are the things that we all need to have done for us that we can only do collectively, and that's what our government is for. And I think that we are to parsimonious with our dollars in that regard that is where people who have been afraid to take on those other parts of the federal budget have gone to get money. So I mean it when I say I don't think it should be that I think the defense department defense budget get to that in a minute, and why I think that we need to defense department that is substantial. But why we can't waste that money? But I also believe in that a strong country depends on having our Indian having infrastructure and having an educated populace and all these other things. So I. He in my view. It's not as hero seven came it shouldn't be zero sum. Game now respected defense. You say why first of all, these are very small differences from year to year. I'd everybody makes a big deal out of a small increase small decrease in practical terms. They have been a few percent here and there as gone from administration to administration or year to year. Why is it? So big in the first place. The there couple of reasons for that one is that we pay our forces very well. Now, one is that we have ballooning healthcare costs like everyone else. Does another is that we're very high technology force, and so compared to forces that are conscription forces and so forth. Our manpower bills are health care bills are very expensive. We also if you think about it, we are up against as potential, antagonise, China Russia, Iran Korea terrorists, and may be others or totally different things in the future. So we have a lot to invest in. Whereas most of them are focused on us only and can focus all their dollars on them now. So I can I can justify a lot of the size of the defense, would I can't just won't justify is the waste of single nickel of this. And this is something I did as the acquisition officer, the chief operating officer and the chief executive officer of the defense department is fight waste that you can't justify. That's one of the things I wanted to ask you about secretary because, you know, we hear these reports about, you know, four point six million dollars on crab and lobster or six hundred dollars on a toilet seat, and Dino it, obviously a ROY. Roads trust in the system there, you write about the Joint Strike Fighter program, and the problems that arose from that. It's still more than a decade behind schedule more than two hundred billion dollars over budget. I don't wanna go through all the problems of the Pentagon, because there's been plenty of reporting about the, the difficulty of just following the money there. But what did you see that can help? Explain why it's so difficult to follow the money and maybe get it how to follow the money through the Pentagon better. Why isn't that a higher mission for a mission driven organization to not waste my money? Oh, it was it was for me and there's a lot, we can do. Yes. And there are programs that are mismanaged and you can't go to the American public and say, what I was just saying about the size of the defense budget and, and the merits of having a defense bunch of this big enough to protect the country. And at the same time tolerate waste. So let's take the Joint Strike Fighter. You give an example of what I came into office as the chief weapons buyer that thing was. Years behind, and double its budget and was in such disgrace that I didn't think it conserve. I've which would have been a problem because it was the tactical fighter aircraft of the future for three of our services and the book details. What I did to try to get some managerial control and succeed in getting some managerial control over this over the Joint Strike Fighter. I talk about the area refuting tanker and so forth and the ways in which you can tighten up defense management and discipline the contracting process so that you don't have waste in the defense budget. I believe that's possible. I insisted on that from acquisition officials from me. And if you select really good acquisition officials, and you back them up when they do the right thing in the courageous thing, you can get good results in defense, but I'm not gonna policy is for. Single nickel wasted. There's no apology. You can make for that. It's disgraceful. We don't expect it. We expect the troops to give their all and we ought to give our all when it comes to mismanagement and waste in defense department. Well, then let me ask a dumb question. Why doesn't the Pentagon just use QuickBooks? I mean it's not like there's no software for following money. Why can't the Pentagon it, which is the nation's largest contractor just contract with a company and say, install QuickBooks, on every defense department computer around the world? I know that sounds reductive in a little third grade. But you know, this is just arithmetic. Why isn't it that easy? Well. I we have in a sense that kind of compat- capability today, it's not that we don't keep track of the money, we spend, it's a lot of the products. We buy are one of a kind things. Nobody else makes aircraft carriers. Nobody else makes nuclear weapons. Nobody else makes. Specialized vehicles for avoiding improvised, explosive devices. Some of the things we do our sui generous and. If we were buying, and, but we also buy things that are purely commercially sourced, and we buy that we buy them and can't buy them in a commercial way. But a lot of things we have to do in a different way and that's not to justify things when they're done in a wasted way. But we can't do everything like the commercial sector with regards to that the president was elected in part, due to a rising anger among many Americans over partisan gridlock. He vowed to run the US government like a business. The current the acting secretary of defense. Patrick Shanahan used to be the senior VP of supply chain and operations for Boeing, what are your thoughts on that on, on running? Not the whole government. Let me just stick to the defense department about running the Pentagon more like a business. Well, I think good management accurate is a good thing to have in a secretary of, of defense. And that was basically how I ended up as secretary. Fences, more on the managerial, Saturday, certainly was not a political figure. It's a good thing to have, I would and you can get that in business, I would say that. You know, running a company is not the same as running the department of defense. So it's really important that you have some prior association with department before you take over the top job in the same way, I wouldn't have said that my being secretary defense, automatically qualified me to go run a Motte major oil company or something like that. If I had never been in that sector before there's just a certain amount of that you need to learn and master about a given field no matter how talented you are. So I think it's important to have some managerial. Accurate, but it's also important to have some background and experience in defense. All these ingredients are important secretary defense. I wanna talk more about our relationships with our allies and our adversaries when we continue with former Defense Secretary ash Carter stick lifts. Support also comes from NCR. Let's face it, as a small business owner, you wear, so many hats, every day, you rarely have time to focus on activities that drive profitability or bring in new customers. That's why you need a point of sale. That does more NCR silver delivers simple to understand analysis and business building tools like Email marketing and loyalty, so you can get back to focusing on your customers NCR silver. Visit NCR dot com slash silver. We're back with a new season of rough translation. Yeah. And this time, we are following people who break the rules in lying. He's part of the business. Opinion, the best revenge against ISIS. This to be humane a mess supposed to pinch. Yeah. Yeah episodes. Every other Wednesday subscribed back now to our conversation with former Defense Secretary ash Carter, his new book is called inside the five side of box. There's an acronym that I learned through prepping for this, which is cricket. C R, I K T, China Russia, Iran, North Korea and terrorism. I imagine that those countries the entities that pose the big threats to us national security, a number of people have articulated on those various players in various ways. Give me a sense of how you would like to see us if you were Defense Secretary today right now, dealing with cricket dealing with these five different kinds of threats. And is there one that you would take care of I sure la- I can I tell you the story of cricket? Yes, it's, it's a great Pentagon story. Well, I used to talk all the time with my senior commanders we would go through our war plans, and our preparations, and I would always say, let's not make this to abstract, let's talk. Let's put the names, the names, here who are the real problem children, China Russia, Iran North Korea and terrorism, and I go through that, that list again, and again, and again, and again, and one time I overheard in the hallway somebody talking about cricket, and then I heard it again, in a meeting somebody talked about cricket. So I turned to one of my assistance, one of these people talking about cricket, and he says, oh, that's your strategy. A said, you know, everybody was repeating it so often that they just turned it into the word cricket. So there there you go just naming the parts becomes a strategy. And in the Pentagon a strategy. Gets an acronym and you ask, what do we do to prepare for all of them? Unfortunately, they're all little bit different. China and Russia are high end. That is more demanding in terms of the level of technology and both involve are nuclear powers. Moreover, so that's important. They both have substantial landmass, and so they have a lot that's in common. But North Korea say is much smaller, and if it were only a matter of conventional war would still be a serious problem, not because it's close to the United States. But because it's close to South Korea were there we would win. We would destroy North Korea's regime in North Korea's military. But because it's in such a densely urban area. The warfare takes place. It is a very grisly war, but then on top of that North Korea's nuclear weapons, so that means you're dealing with a country with a strange government like that. That is just newly come into possession of nuclear weapons. That's a different kind of problem, then you got Ron, which doesn't have nuclear weapons put his right there in the middle. East and does a lot of stuff with proxies and third parties in has blonde so for war Yemen, and that kind of thing. Yeah. And then you got tears, so they're all they're all different. And this is one of the problems that we have the world's leading power is that if you go to a job, I bet you, if you go to a Chinese military briefing, it's all about the Americans. And she go to Russian military briefing. It's all about married to an American military briefing. It's about cricket. Because we have to be concerned about all of them, and they're pretty much focused on us. Soren wrote on our Facebook page. We are the world's bully. The USA is the most hated slash feared nation in the world. Not Iran North Korea or Cuba, as Americans, we tend to see ourselves as the quote unquote, good, guys. But with our military posturing, endless wars, and neo-imperialism, don't we cause more chaos and violence than we prevent and Laurie added. Why hasn't anyone charged the US with crimes against humanity? Where are the sanctions on the US? Is everyone too afraid of the US to do what is right secretary. Well, they're spirited questions in. They're perfectly fair questions. But to the question, do we do more harm than good? I think empirically the United States is done a lot more good than harm. Let me give you some examples. There's no other country. No other country that. Could've put together the military campaign. The training of local forces, the Marsh lane of allies to defeat ISIS than the United States, and you really think ISIS didn't need to be to be defeated this as a country that in twenty fifteen a so called country is a group of people who are crucifying people who are enslaving, women who were subjugating whole populations. I, I don't think you can have that I think somebody has to stick up for civilized world and the United States did that. I think that was a good thing. It's something I'm proud of it was in our, our own country's interest. But there were other countries, particularly the people in the territories tyrannized by ISIS. But then next you come to Turkey you come to Europe. And so over that suffered much more from my inspired terrorism, the United States did. But we. We did have it also in the United States. I, I think that was a good thing next. I'd say. How about preventing war in Europe for generation without the United States, the Soviet Union Stalin's, Soviet Union probably would have over run western Europe. Now, we've made mistakes lung lines and we can all debate along the line, and we can all Ulta bait that particular instances. But I think on that the, the records pretty good and asked to the question of Dewey. Do it in a civilized way or not. Which was the second question there. Also a fair question. And I used to say as secretary defense, and I, I meant it that the United States took its values to the battlefield, and that meant US law international law, and the law of armed conflict, and we try to abide by that, and believe me. We work very hard again. We're not perfect when we make mistakes we do something wrong in an airstrike. We do an investigation report to you about that investigation. No other country is that candid about the mistakes, it makes before I could propose something to the president to approve a strike or a hostage. Rescue, or a war plan or something. Lawyers went through it looking for just those things, and they'd say this is not consistent with US law international law. And that wasn't the American way before I let you go secretary Carter wondering if you miss it, if you miss being at the Pentagon, if you miss being the secretary of defense or if you're ready to move on before we let you go. Well, there's a little of both. I mean, I, I knew that you couldn't last forever. I but I I love the department offense. I'll always be devoted to it. And I love the. Job. I felt like I knew what I was doing. And that it was a noble calling to be working in this wonderful department. I'd say that any young person now thinking about military service or any other kind of public service, whether in the defense department or anywhere else at the same time, you can't do you can't do it forever. That's not the way our system works. And so when I came out of the defense department, I said, well, I'm not going to hang around the Washington hoop like a lot of people do or I'm not going to go. I'm not ready to go retire. Either I wanna work on the other big thing of than protecting our people, which I think, is the issue of our time. And that is the way technology is affecting our lives and technology brings a lot of good things. And I'm a technologist, but we have to admit that technology can have darker side as well. So digital technologies brought a lot of commerce and. Community, but it's also brought hatred and darkness and lies and other things we have a bio revolution to come. And hey, I revolution to come. We have the whole question of technology's impact on jobs and people sense of their own worth and ability to plot a future for themselves and their, their children. These are really big issues and as a technologist I think we need to find solutions to technologies dilemmas. That's my new crusade, and I find that as absorbing as I found defending our people, I like the idea of taking on something that's big inconsequential and applying what I know to solving it. That's what got me into the defense technology business in the first place. And I'm trying to follow that same star over another horizon now that I'm out of the Pentagon Ashkar the former secretary of defense from February twenty fifth. Until the end of the Obama administration. His new book is called inside the five sided bucks lessons from a lifetime of leadership in the Pentagon, secretary Carter. It's been a pleasure. Thanks for talking to us. Thanks. Good to be with you. Thank you, Joshua. This conversation was produced by Morgan givens an edited by Miranda. Full more to learn more about them and the rest of the team. Visit the one eight dot org slash staff. This program comes to you from W AMU part of American University in Washington distributed by NPR until we meet again, I'm Joshua Johnson. Thanks for listening. This is one.

secretary Pentagon president United States President Obama ash Carter department of defense Joshua Johnson Washington NPR cricket NPR North Korea ISIS Amazon Pennsylvania Iran aspirin
Ash Carter on Leadership in the Pentagon

Kickass News

40:53 min | 1 year ago

Ash Carter on Leadership in the Pentagon

"This is kick ass news. I'm Ben Mathis. Summer is here and mosquitoes are to nothing can ruin a barbecue or an afternoon by the pool faster than those miserable, little bloodsuckers as soon as I start getting bit. That's Mike you to head back in the house, but it really doesn't have to be that way. Don't let mosquitoes bug you this summer? True green mosquito defense eliminates biting mosquitos from your yard within twenty four hours of application. It's all backed by their mosquito free guarantee. Get your first true. Green mosquito defense application for just thirty nine ninety five or bundle your mosquito defense with a flea and tick service for just twenty dollars. More visit true, green dot com slash kick. That's T R U, green dot com slash kick. Restrictions may apply. And now enjoy the podcast. Hi, I'm Ben Mathis, welcome to kick ass news to most Americans, the dealings of the department of defense are a mystery and the Pentagon, nothing more than an opaque five sided box that they regard with a mixture of all insufficient. But in a new book titled inside the five sided box lessons from a lifetime of leadership in the Pentagon. Former secretary of defense ash Carter demystified and sheds light on all that happens inside of one of the nation's most iconic and most closely guarded buildings and on today's podcast, the twenty fifth secretary of defense takes me behind the scenes to reveal the inner workings of the Pentagon. It's vital mission, and what it takes to lead. He describes just how massive an organization, the DOD is how he managed to seven billion dollar budget, and how he recruited top tech talent to the Pentagon Ashkar reveals how his background is a physicist came in handy in the Pentagon, and how it led him. Mm to oppose president Ronald Reagan's Star Wars program in the eighties. He discusses how he came up with the successful strategy to defeat ISIS, but cautions, President Trump against pulling out of Iraq and Syria entirely. He talks about his efforts to reach out to non traditional military recruits, and his history-making decision to open all combat roles to women, plus Russia, China general Pershing's desk in much more with former secretary of defense ash Carter, coming up in just a moment. Broberg thirty five years ash. Carter served in numerous jobs in the department of defense. Most recently as the twenty fifth secretary of defense under President Obama. He currently serves as the director of the Belfer center for science and international affairs at Harvard University's Kennedy School. And as an innovation fellow at MIT. He's written a new memoir, titled inside the five sided box lessons from a lifetime of leadership in the Pentagon in today, joins me on the podcast to talk about it. Avocado, welcome. Thanks spin. Good to be here with you. I described inside the five sided boxes a memoir, but beyond that, you, give readers a fascinating organizational tour of the department of defense and how it operates you saying here that no institution in the world is as big complex, or consequential as the DOD, can you give us some numbers that put that in perspec-. Tive. Sure. And you're absolutely right. This is not about me. This is a book about the Pentagon and how it works and it kind of takes you inside the five sided box and gives you a peek down in the engine room at the mechanics and about the size. I mean let me just give you a few metrics here. We have more employees in the department of defense direct and indirect than Amazon. Mcdonald's Federal Express target and G, E coli, and we had, we do more RND than apple Google and Microsoft combined. We're the largest real property managers in the world, managing territory, the size of the state of Pennsylvania. And so this is the largest enterprise on earth by a substantial measure. It is managerial speaking. 'cause I was the number one, but I was also the number two, that is the C, C O chief operating officer that fence department. I was the number three the top weapons buyer and are in D manager. And by in all three of those jobs had to run. What is the world's largest enterprise, and it's budget is half of the federal government. Why is its budget is larger than that of most countries? It's about the size of the country of Sweden as you said, you were weapons and tech Sar and COO before taking over as secretary of defense, do you think it's safe to say that you came into that post as secdef with bound as good a working knowledge of how the Pentagon works is just about anyone? Yeah. I think probably among secretaries of defense, and I want to say about my own experience, that we have been blessed with. A lot of good secretaries of defense. I knew every single one of them going back to Bob McNamara and they all I've known him for years. They all would call me up, obviously not Bob, who's dead and some others and, and give me support and advice when I was secretary says a great brotherhood among us. But for pure experience in the Pentagon. I don't think in fact, I'm sure that there was no one who is was in there and associated with the place that long, you know, I, I walked been in to the Pentagon, my first job in nineteen Eighty-one, and I walked out in January of twenty seventeen that's a pretty long time. Yeah. And in addition to being the number one, the number two and number three, I was all various layers down below as well. So I've been in every little corner of it. And a lot of people have been in one part of it or another, and got to be secretary. And we're fine secretaries of defense. But it just so happens that. I know every corner, I know where every. Part of the every nickel of the dollar spent in every relationship we have around the world it just so happens. It's been my life. So re pretty good position to take the average citizen or a CEO, or an interested young people thinking young person thinking about what he or she's going to do with her life and, and take them inside and mature. And that's what the books about. And I didn't realize until I read the book that you came to the military with the background as a theoretical physicist did that come in handy at the DOD it. Yeah, I did. I mean, they seem sort of odd. But the way I got into it was this. And that is actually a lesson in here for any people who may be listening thinking about a career in public service. I was a theoretical physicist. That's how I started out. I was my twenties and the spirit of the people who taught me physics was the spirit of Manhattan project. They were the Manhattan. Project generation they were proud of what they done, but they also knew that they had done something very serious. And that they had a responsibility for the rest of their lives to deal with some of the consequences of nuclear weapons, and they told me that they said, are your if you have knowledge, you have responsibility. And so one day, a couple of eminent figures, called me up and said ash, we need you to go to Washington for just one year this is nineteen eighty and thus began a career that didn't last one year, but lead acid until as I said, twenty seventeen but for somebody who's thinking about maybe somebody's listening to this even thinking about where life's gonna take them. You sometimes try something, and you're not gonna you don't I didn't intend to dedicate the rest of my life to have. But here's what I found bin that was so captivating about that one. Year. First of all, we're physics came in was, I was actually useful because my knowledge made a difference in the rooms I was in and without my knowledge decisions, wouldn't have been as good, and I could see that and second, I could see that the decisions we were making, which were about the big issues of the Cold War, and nuclear weapons were hugely consequential things. So those two things together that you, you can make a difference. And the issues are huge. And what else that's the perfect combination for young person. So I was captivated by, as I think, anybody would be, and that led to my whole my whole career he asked whether being physicist was useful later. It certainly was when I was in charge of all the RND and buying all the weapons my new how everything worked, and nobody in the defense industry in any. Laboratory could fool me that was useful. But even as secretary defense and their other backgrounds do this for you. But one thing that science teaches you is that you can learn anything. And so when I was in cannery new problem like what to do about ISIS or a new place. I wasn't familiar with a where suddenly a crisis arose, or we had to do a hostage rescue, or a counterterrorism operation. I had the habit of mind that if I applied myself I can learn enough about it. And, and I never gave up. So I think that science does teach you that not to be afraid that nothing is beyond your knowledge as long as you work hard enough and another place where your physics background came in handy. Pretty early on a was during that stint in the eighties. You objected to the strategic defense initiative better known as Reagan's Star Wars program from a physicist point of view. Why was Star Wars a bad idea? Well, it just wouldn't work. I wasn't saying with a good idea or bad idea. But I, I knew that XM relase free electron lasers chemicals, IRS x Ray lasers. I knew it all these things were and so I- analyzed the prospects that if they were put up on big satellites, and space. They could shine down and shoot ascending missiles from the Soviet Union attacking the United States if nuclear war should break out. And that would obviously be a good thing. If you could do it, but you couldn't do it, and in years later, forty years later when I was secretary defense, Ben, we still don't know how to do it. You know we we do have missile defenses, but they're not based on lasers. They're based on rockets that go up and mash into other rocket. And they are, they are affective, but not against a huge threat like the Soviet Union. Mos. During during the Cold War. So we still don't know how to do that. So all I said, was this eight this isn't going to work, and it was. And the reason it was significant was that it was, my, it was the first scientifically informed analysis based on full access to classified information of President Reagan's idea. And so it got a lot of notoriety, and as things happen in our world, even then. You. You are contending with something the president the United States did, and that means that the munchkins around him, try to come after you and take revenge. And that was scary for me. Because I was naive scientist I had no, I would not intending to get involved. In anything political, I was just from my point of view telling the truth. And so it was a lesson in, in the political big leagues. And that frightened me initially, and I thought, well K that's the end of my career, I blundered in something, but it ended up teaching me the opposite lesson Ben, and here's something that's probably useful to remember today, but there are a lot of people, including friends of President Reagan, and supporters of the Reagan administration who stood up for me, and they simply said, this guy is a scientist. He was doing his job. He was answering the question he was asked. To do. Everybody layoff them. And they said he did a responsible job. He did a knowledgeable job. And that's the kind of people we wanna have working on national defense. And in this case, he happened to arrive at a conclusion that was inconvenient for the president. But that's the kind of information and analysis, we need to have to have the best defense on earth. So the thing started off scary and actually discouraging me, but it went full circle, and it came around, and I said to myself through various people sticking up for me. I said, no, this is really very principle country. A lot of decent people contributing to defense. And when you hear these debates they're not debates to the death, there, debates among honorable people around the truth. And I only say that net and not in a partisan way and I only say that now because. In some ways that seems like a bygone era from from today's right? You and you've served under several presidents, finally ending with President Obama. Who do you think had the best grasp of how the department of defense works best and how best to utilize it? Well on day one as he walked into office, I would say, President Bush one. He had fought in World War Two. He had been in the government that is in the administration of President Reagan for the preceding period of time. So search surely on day one he was the most knowledgeable. But, you know, people learn really fast, I can't speak about President Trump because I didn't serve under him in the book, my book mentions and very few times, accordingly. Right. And I can't imagine he had much knowledge it certainly doesn't look like that. Don't see where he would have gotten it. But, but every president that I worked and get him star goes from Reagan right through bomb. They were hard workers and fast learners. So let's take Obama, I wasn't his secretary defense in his early days, but he came in he, he had never been in the federal government before. So did he know where all the villages in Syria were did? He know what it f thirty five was the difference between thirty five and an F eighteen. No, he didn't. But by the time he left he did. And the same I think is true of his predecessor President Bush to President Clinton. They all the, the presidency sobered them up quite a bit. And they worked very hard every day, and it was impressive what they learned over time. So you're here. You are. You're secretary defensively. I've been doing this, my whole life. I can. Expect the president to know this church and you go in, you start talking to them about it, and damned if he doesn't already know about it. I was always impressed with all of them, really with the, the degree of mastery, they got over time. But at those early years are very sensitive because you can't expect them to have all that, and mastery, and if there's a yen to the defense department's Yang, it would certainly be the State Department. There's also a certain amount of friction that's almost inherent between those two organizations. How do you view that relationship? I really refused to have friction really. And I yeah, I mean. Well, we had to do that. Carried I but that's not friction John Kerry night would would agree to disagree of president from time to time. And that's, that's, that's called giving unvarnished advice resin nearing different points of view frictions different than a. Here's how I learned my lesson. And I remember being an assistant secretary of defense when the secretary of defense was Bill Perry, who was secretary defense to Bill Clinton, and I had a number of system, secretaries of state, who were my counterparts the we because we had very few assistant sectors, independent, they had lots of assistance state. So your counterparts were many to one, but I'd go in and every once in a while to Bill, and I'd complain and I remember him looking at me and saying ash, I will never call up, Warren Christopher's secretaries of state at that time. I'll never call him up and complain. About something our staffs can't resolve. He said, I'll just never do that. So there's no point in you coming to me and doing that. I want you to work things out yourselves, and I took that to heart. And then I when I was secretary would say that to my, my staff. We can't have petty bureaucracy fighting. We can have debates, and I actually bent on the substance of it believe that in today's world even in matters of War, I benefited from the inputs of the diplomats, the intelligence people, the financial people, and treasury people because the world's complicated. And if you're running a war as I, I was in Afghanistan in Iraq and Syria and almost wars, and many other places of most of those have a big political and economic dimension to them. Now. I do remember working for casper, Weinberger in the eighties when it was a simpler world, there was only one war, which that we all thought about all the time, which was the big one between us and the Soviet Union. Right. And that was so apocalyptic that it was purely military and Caspar, Weinberger believed that we needed it, and he held secret within the defense department, all aspects of our war plans, that was the habit, then and we wouldn't share them with anyone, but the president of the United States, wouldn't share them with the State Department or anybody else. And that was reasonable at that time, because there was, there was almost no political and economic point after he launched new start a new war. But if you're fighting ISIS, and you're defeating ISIS, we all know and this is important right at this very moment that they're not beaten for good. If you don't work on the. And economic circumstances that rave them birth in the in the first place. These days a secretary defense needs to have good relationships with other people around town, so it's not a luxury and it's not just a kindness or courtesy in order to do your job. Right for the country. You've got a make a team effort. We're gonna take a quick break, and then we'll be back with more with former secretary of defense, ash Carter when we come back in just a minute. If you've been enjoying my conversation with former secretary of defense, ash Carter, then you should read his new book inside the five sided box lessons from a lifetime of leadership in the Pentagon. The twenty fifth secretary of defense takes readers behind the scenes to reveal the inner workings of the Pentagon, it's vital mission, and what it takes to lead drawn from Carter's thirty six years of leadership. Experience in the DOD. This is the essential book for understanding the challenge of defending America, in a dangerous world, and imparting trove of incisive lessons that can guide leaders in a complex organization, Facebook's. Sheryl Sandberg says this book should be required. Reading for every citizen, who wants to know more about how our country stays secure and Henry Kissinger, says this book should be essential reading for anyone concerned about the evolution that technology and political upheavals around the world. Impose on us order inside the five sided box lessons from a lifetime of leadership in the Pentagon. On Amazon audible or wherever books are sold. And now back to the show. You've been credited with the successful plan to turn the tide against ISIS in Syria and Iraq. What was your thought process when you develop that ISIS strategy? The two principal military objectives from my point of view were Mozell in Iraq, the second largest city in Iraq. And we had to take that back and Raka in Syria, which is not a hugely consequential town in any other way, except that ISIS declared that to be the caliphates new capital. And so I had to take that too. So if you think about those two cities as kind of the, it's the Berlin and Tokyo of this war than how are you going to get there? And so our approach was instead, rather than doing all the infantry fighting ourselves. We'll say all right. Look will train you guys you be the infantry you go into the cities are role. Will be to advise an accompany you on the ground, but also to bring the huge tornado of the US military, down upon the battlefield, and you'll get intelligence and air power and logistics, and all the stuff that only we can do and will overwhelm the enemy ISIS, so that was our strategy. But by the end of twenty fifteen I enjoy done for the chairman of the joint. Jesus staff had built that plan. For most one Raka the president had approved it. We got all the I at countless meetings with allies and also with the body of Iraq and Bart Sahni of, of, of, of Kurdish Republic, which is part of Iraq and also Syrian forces in basically, by the time I left office in early twenty seventeen it was, it was all over the we had surrounded those cities. And we, it was inevitable that we were going to. Yeah, we were going to take them, and then we subsequently did now I did, I mentioned earlier. I'm I'm worried that we're. Taking our foot off the gas and it's a mistake to now turn around and, and leave the place to without our influence anymore. I'm not saying we have to be fight each surely, not dying there. But we need to keep our influence. They are simply as a matter of self protection, and we've won the war, let's not Unwin another war in Iraq. So is President Trump then justified in his assertion that ISIS as he put it is basically defeated. Yeah. I think so. I think the I think, as I said, both the fact and the idea are destroyed. The only thing you have to say is that nothing's gone forever. Other a few of these fanatics left, we pursued them down to the freight down the frady's valley. I thought we were going to kill them all, apparently we'd didn't. So there are still some there, which is one of the reasons why we need to stay and. These are fanatics. And so they will try again to get people on their side. And if you allow the conditions to be recreated where they can get a few people on their side, and then tyrannize the rest of the people, you'll have old ISIS. Mac again, that's why I would I think we should not leave Syria not leave Iraq. We should stay in the game again not fighting and dying. But assisting and enabling our friends, they're these people are now they, they fought the war. We asked them to fight. They won the war, they couldn't have done it without us. But they won the war. Now, we want him to win the peace and turn our backs on him at this point is, is self self defeating and global terror is one of the five biggest threats you list, and inside the five sided box also on that list Russia, China, Iran North. Korea, I want to try to get to each of these in the time, we have first off Russia. It almost seems like there are too many problems to keep track of Putin is testing us on so many different fronts, whether it's cyber warfare the election Syria aggression in the Arctic Ukraine, and potentially other former Soviet satellite states violating the nuclear-test-ban withdrawing from nuclear treaties with so many balls in the air, where do we focus, our resources with Russia? It. He you're exactly right. He's, he's all over the globe at all over the strategic map, but there is a common denominator to Putin and I say this because I've been in meetings with Ladimir Putin's in nineteen nineteen Ninety-three Putin feels that the Soviet Union's collapse, was a catastrophe for the Russian people, and he's entitled to that view of his sleep. He believes that the United States has made mistakes around the world and he enumerates them toppling, governments in the not knowing what to do. So he makes some reasonable points that I don't necessarily agree with. But you can understand, but here's where Latimer Putin becomes tough to work with he views fourteen the United States, as an aim of his foreign policy in itself. Now, if he wants to talk to me about Syria. Okay. We can talk about Syria. We have different views. Maybe we can build a bridge between his view and my view in some way of, of, of, of reaching common ground. Same thing if we're talking about terrorism. We're talking about North Korea, China, whatever. But if his objective is so to speak, excuse my expression to screw the United States. That's an objective. I can't you, you can't compromise with that Ben build a bridge to that. And that's what makes him so difficult. And that's why you have to push back. We didn't have a war plan for Russia. Because when the Soviet Union ended, we didn't need ours. Soviet in Warsaw Pact war plan anymore. And it looked like they were either on the ropes permanently or we're gonna kind of turn into a democracy, or at least. Some sort of friend. And that's what everybody hoped. But when I was secretary defense, I said, it's, it's time we have were plan for Russia. Get them said to say that a but we need one in NATO needs one that's when we began to put the, the additional forces into Europe and obviously, this is not something we sail a lot about in detail publicly, but we begin to build, again, a comprehensive or plan for Russia. And then in the cyber, you mentioned that there's a lot we need to do there. The Obama administration didn't do enough and the Trump administration hadn't done enough. The United States has not done enough in this guy hasn't learned any lesson at all. So I think that he will not. Stop pushing the just not he's nature until an in less. We push back and that doesn't mean starting World War three but it means applying counter pressure and checking his moves. That's why one of the reasons besides ISIS that I wouldn't simply walk out of northeast Syria, that has become our, our strategic chess piece with respect to Syria. We didn't have. Any leverage over Syria. Now we do. Why would you let go of your leverage given that both Iran and Russia who are in Taganrog? It's are trying to stab wish their own position in Syria. Why would you surrender the US position? So it easier out pushing back and in this book, you also warned that the US is beginning to lose its technological advantage over countries like China and Russia to address that problem you became the first Defense Secretary to reach out to Silicon Valley, and I think twenty years, what was your pitch to top tech talent. There two things that make our military the finest fighting force the world has ever known been one is our people. But the other is our technology. And in the old days, we used to do all the technology ourselves. We just give we most of the things importance like the internet and communication satellites jet engines and all the stuff was. Was done by the Pentagon. Now there's a lot of technology outside of the Pentagon, and we need to reach out and get it and get it used as appropriate to defend our people and make a better world. That's our. That's our job and to do that, we have to have a reasonable relationship with the tech community and the passage of time had led to a certain amount of estrangement. Or in some cases, they just never worked with us before. And then there was things like Edward Snowden that created a suspicion about us, and I needed to try to patch that up and say to people look, let's agree to disagree about Edward Snowden, but we do have a common mission. Here we both believe we all believe in freedom. We believe in civilization. We believe in protecting our people if you are concerned about what your government is doing. Come on in and make us do the right thing. The government is not a thing apart. The government is just us. If you're concerned about how to use artifice intelligence, for example, then come in and tell us how to do it responsibly and ethically. And that work those arguments worked because tech people are. Have the same thought process I had way back when I started when, when I described I wanted to do stings of consequence every young person wants to, and they wanna be able to make a difference. And all I had was my knowledge of physics with. They have is knowledge of technology. And so, I say, come on, in, and just do it for one year say mortgage payment, they might see near as used on me. I say come in for just one year. You can keep your hair orange. You can the jewelry and your nose in your ears. I'm not gonna make you try to look like me guide a suit or with a flag, lapel pin or somebody uniform, you'd not you can you can you can be yourself. And I said, commend in work on one project or for one year I created a sort of rotation program to let them allow them to do this. And I said here, here's what I guarantee you. I guarantee you when you walk out if you walk out after a year that you this will be. The thing your proudest of having done your entire life. You're going to be dealing with issues of life and death and freedom, and slavery, and your government doing the right thing or the wrong thing. All that's really meaningful. There's nothing nobler than than a public service in my judgment. And of course, security is the thing without which no other good things in life can be had. If you're not safe, and as part of your effort to attract the best talent to the DOD you advocated for greater outreach to members of the LGBT community single parents, and other nontraditional recruits, and one of your major policy changes was your decision to open combat to women. You say in the book that you kept that plan a secret even from the president right up until the moment that you announced it, why I wanted this to be a professional sober military personnel decision. Okay. It's not a it's not a. Political decision, and he wouldn't do this, a president wouldn't do this, but White House staffs, you know, they could they could say they'd could try to take political credit for it. I didn't want to getting political credit for anything because that would only mess things up that would make something that was kind of a no brainer in to a political thing, and it wasn't social policy. I tell people who say talk about social Bazi. I see you don't really have that wrong. You've got it. Upside down, it would be social policy to exclude people, not on the basis of their military qualifications. But for some social reason that would be social policy and military policy is to have the best people who were the most qualified to do the most solemn job that you can have, which is defending the country. Well, I'm kind of ending by going backwards here. But I have to tell you that my favorite chapter title was from the first chapter it's. Called how not to waste seven hundred billion dollars a year. And this gets into your role as chief of procurement at the Pentagon. Why do you think the Pentagon is prone to these accusations of fiscal responsibility brings to mind the thousand dollar toilet seat? Or I think now there's a ten thousand dollar that seat and those kind of crazy expenditures because it does happen. Yeah. And it's unaccept- and number one, that's not a lot, but it happens and second, it's completely unacceptable. How can I go out and ask the tax payer for about seven hundred fifty billion dollars a year with a straight face which I you know, happy to do knowing that the money wasn't used? Well, I e can't have that you can't you can't do that. It's a constant battle to make sure that it is. Wisely used now ever, I do believe it can be done Ben in with the book, basically says is. Is here's how you can do it. Right. Even in war, even in the in the very fast pace of Warren. I gave some examples of their some fighter aircraft and some submarines and so forth, that were in, in very messy shape when I took office, and how I applied myself to try to improve them so that they were no longer buying schedule that they were no longer cost over running. And then give people some of the tricks of the trade that go with good program management, which include things like contracting. Now, you may not think that's very interesting. But if you think about it that seven hundred fifty billion dollars. I spoke of four hundred billion of that is spent on contracts. The rest is spent on, on pain, soldiers and so forth. Interesting. But most of it is spent contract it out, because remember, we don't make anything in the Pentagon, right? Right. And on private industry. So everything is contracted out. So how those contracts are structured is really important and people and I try to make that interesting to people I it is certainly it'll be easily apparent to them that it's, it's very important. But I say, here's you know, if you ever wonder the whole book is like that it'd be ever wanted. How you buy a fighter jet. Have you ever wondered how you buy an aircraft carrier? Have you ever wondered how you ship stuff to Afghanistan or build two hundred and fifty eight basis in Afghanistan in one summer, which is what I did in twenty ten. How does all this stuff get done? We talk about all the politics of it in the geopolitics of it, but down in the engine room where I was for a substantial part of my career. How how has all this stuff get done? I think curious people and leaders CEO's future leaders, future soldiers young people future. Technol-. Logist will all find that interesting. How does this place? Really work before we go. I just have to ask you ask, what was the coolest part of being secdef was at working at General, John blackjack, Pershing's desk, or flying around in the defense secretaries playing e four b it's, it's easy answer. It's the troops. You gotta stand in a desert with these kids and talk to them. Tell them why you're proud of them why they're doing something that is an absolutely essential and just look in their eyes. And then if you get a chance and you go to their home base, talk to mom talk today. Talk to young spouse, it really lifts you up. That's the best part of the job. I you know all the hardware and, you know, the theaters of war and situation room in the White House, and all that's kind of interesting, but the troops are really what keep you going. Yeah, but being able to sit at general Pershing's desk is still pretty cool that ain't bad. Yeah. That's a very big desk since a history at the very least place. Looks the same as it did. I have a picture of the book of Robert McNamara sitting there during the job administration. Well, the same desk, same table. Same chairs longtime. Well, again, the book is called inside the five sided box lessons from a lifetime of leadership and the Pentagon Ashkar. Thanks for talking with me. Thanks for having me Ben enjoyed it. Thanks again, to ash Carter for coming on the podcast or his new book inside the five sided box lessons from a lifetime of leadership in the Pentagon on Amazon audible, or wherever books are sold. Be sure to subscribe to kick ass news on apple podcasts if you haven't already. And if you like what you're hearing, then rate and review us while you're there, five star reviews or the easiest way for new listeners to find us, don't forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter at, at kick ass news, pod, and feel free to Email me with your thoughts questions and suggestions at comments at kick ass news dot com until next time. I'm Ben Mathis, and thanks for listening to kick ass news.

secretary Pentagon president Ben Mathis Syria United States ISIS Iraq ash Carter President Reagan DOD President Trump Russia Soviet Union physicist President Obama Syria department of defense China President Clinton
US troops leave Syria  but not entirely

PRI's The World

00:00 sec | 1 year ago

US troops leave Syria but not entirely

"President Trump says the US is done fighting wars in the Middle East but former defense sector very ash Carter says there are consequences for the US turning its back what's going to happen I'm afraid is that Isis is going to come back we're going to have to incomprehensible as one of your main responsibilities during your time as Pentagon chief was combatting ISIS president trump is trying to reassure us that isis cannot rebound isis is under very very strict lock and key and the detention facilities are being strongly maintained of our position and of the people who helped us win and you know if you don't want to be in endless they might be able to influence something about what's done with the oil there but we basically just gave up our principal it went out to our guys it's a terrible thing to put him in this position this was a incomprehensible surrender I don't know how sustainable it is but I think it arises in guessing from the Pentagon trying to claw back some sort of position there were a few that got out a small number relatively speaking and they've been largely recaptured well there are mixed reports adding what to do with that oil I mean why does president trump think the US can decide what to do with series oil you have a small number of troops in a big place we might leverage voluntarily to Turkey to Russia to the Syrian regime and to Iran and I find that act position after having done this to me incomprehensible move walking away from the Syrian Kurds in our position in northern Syrian at all and I asked him how he felt when he saw images this week of US personnel carriers being pelted with rocks and potatoes as they departed from northern Syria. My Norway I'm Marco Werman those stories and more today on the world I'm Marco Werman and you're with the world descend thirty Abrams tanks along with half of a an army armored brigade to serious oilfields. What do you make of this news well it's kind of a fall they've shown their ability to come back so isis they'll come back they'll come back in part through these detainees that the Kurds are now watching where they have the oil and we're going to be protecting it and we'll be deciding what we're going to do with it in the future we will be ores don't lose the wars you've already won so president trump has pulled the US troops out but they're now reports at the Pentagon has drawn up tentative plans especially concerned with serious oil let's hear this we've secured the oil and therefore a small number of US troops will remain in the area well also green lighting Turkey do something that's been asking to do for years and we've always said no for good reason this is a fallback fallback position are done there so what might the region look like without the American military Ash Carter was secretary of defense under President Obama from two thousand fifteen to two thousand seventeen in northeastern Syria despite the president's decision I mean it's clear the leaders of Russia Turkey and Syria all want US troops out at president trump scene it is their neighborhood and they have to take care of it and that's what president trump had to say about northeastern Syria trump says he wants other nations to get involved and that US troops British fighters and civilians drop back or are we likely to see something like what a lot of people worried about ethnic cleansing in this area they'll have at each other I wouldn't say that and are now less able to protect and have less desire to protect and then there are some that we never captured or killed and you should definitely visit Norway just don't go for the food I was sued Cultura is not based on very strong taste at all it's a virtue to be bland hundred years later mit engineers wanted to know if his designed could work islas incredibly worried on until I put the last stones in we'll find out if the stones held government and now we're trying to tamp down a Turkish campaign that we essentially green lighted what advice before he makes a decision I therefore don't know whether the current secretary of defense was involved in this decision or not of course that was the principal reasons have shown before in history oath after two thousand and three and then after US forces were fun basically withdrawn from Iraq the first time for three years now as you may recall earlier this week British prime minister bars Johnson was trying to ram his one hundred ten page bill through Parliament in Brig Knicks GonNa Happen I'm afraid is that Isis is going to come back we're going to have to do it all over again but next time we'll be alone go well I think we inadvertently destabilized situation which it didn't look like we understood mm studied this excellent deal they can have it but they have to agree to a general election on December the twelve that is a terrifying prospect especially for Kurdish civilians and it's not there only menace right now Turkey and Russia patrolling the so-called safe zone will I I'm speaking with former defense secretary Ash Carter getting his take on the situation in northern Syria if there is widespread killings of courage would the US be complicit ticket to Brexit success the opposition party is not so keen on his new compromise here's the Labor Party's Valerie Has Majesty's opposition Labor Party will Carter thank you for speaking with us again good to talk to you the UK has just one week left to get out of the European Union of course deadlines have been coming and going in the Brexit saga the number two of escape but do you think the Pentagon is as confident as president trump about the future of isis? They certainly have no reason to be as confident as that these guys can I think he's trying to preserve whatever parts of our strategic position or left there but we really relinquished a lot of our position there and Kurds will have the upper of the Turks rather the upper hand they're one of the things are people who assessed the Turkish proposed campaigns over the years that's the way forward got that members of parliament can have more time to study the bill if they also agree to a general vote at this point Johnson might see a popular election the lady Gaga and fashion they feed a long way from brexit and Boris Johnson the golden and Anti Brexit March indeed there were one hundred twenty four pages of notes but Johnson seems to be a man of compromise if they genuinely want more time to in election wants no deal is no deal means leaving the EU without any agreement on Tariffs Migration even basic regulations ah UN troops were in Rwanda in nineteen ninety four for what happens in that zone we won't have caused that in any event we will have precipitated pershing was a reference to American missiles being deployed in Europe at the time stone cemented hamlet status as a designer and an activist but despised do exactly what they're trying to do now was they wouldn't be very successful so there may be some bloodshed and so forth and as always in these situations the civilians pay the okay say they would prefer to remain in the European Union the world's Orla Barry in London has more on that interest house the former British prime minister has how many turned to greet patter she opened her coat revealing a t shirt that read fifty eight percent don't want pershing in other words just getting out of the EU as fast as possible. Britain's fashion industry would surely hate that according to trade group ninety percent fashion designers in the Vermont but gingic says most people in fashion want to remain part of Europe the people we speak to want to second referendum I often the question has your vote changed the secretary of Defense under President Obama from twenty fifteen to seventeen his memoir is inside the five sided box lessons from a lifetime a leadership in the Pentagon secretary I said they'd fight to the death and unfortunately they didn't all so these guys are fanatics and if they're not dead they're waiting for a new opportunity so what's asserting boy and do they feel that the politicians are listening to them now and it's not just about the designers many of the fashion students studying in the UK come from Europe reason for Brexit if you can find it anywhere because I can't it's just heartbreaking hamlet I made front page news in one thousand nine hundred four at a party at Margaret this would you offer a US defense secretary Marcus but the president doesn't seem to consult his advisors and his cabinet members heart is not GonNa be possible clawed back nor do I think the president is going to permit the department to clawed back even if it were possible as Carter collector in Britain but not many talking about what happens to this business after Brexit Tamra Ginger is hoping to change that she launched fashion roundtable lighted by Jimmy friend of mine in my successors Secretary of Defense for relinquishing his position you must have some thoughts on what direction experts will be what the consequences would be a lot of people think about the ceasefire well well I'm probably in government now not outside of it represent my views I won't be watching the next election the fashion industry is worth over thirty billion pounds a year to the UK economy that's almost forty billion dollars but in the brakes the brexit referendum party's away to lobby politicians about the needs of the industry many business people now say they just wanted definitive decision by the UK you see many protesters wearing t shirts that read fashion hates brexit's and cancel breakfast those t shirts designed by Catherine Hamnes one of the pie under brexit so better make a move now you know sooner rather than later others in the industry are thinking the same thing Tamra gingic from fashion roundtable is in our national waters after daily signed and that industry as up to only around one and a half billion pounds annually fashion employs almost as many people as the finance the publicity harmless is not convinced that her famous t shirts are all politically powerful unit we've got marches we've got petitions we got t shirts but in years of modern British fashion many in the business keep their mouths shush when it comes to politics but how much is not one of them hate this whole thing to show me one good sure it's been a millstone my neck of since and for most people in the fashion industry that's exactly how they feel about brexit already for the world is it conversation with our students to make sure they have right to remain or the half settled status the amount of students we have we've got over hassle on Paul you listen recruiter at the London College of fashion he says those foreign students in particular or worried about what breaks it means for their future your specific risks snus because this is an exciting creative hop they might keep their tech teams here but they're basically moving their logistics I'm more importantly taxation out the UK for her failed the only thing that she changes politicians behavior is something that threatens their ability to get reelected that's what we're trying to galvanize people to do to achieve right to their MP and say Katherine Hamnes has opened a company in Italy she hopes it would make her business a little more brexit proof and ask for that iconic t shirt and tour infamous meeting with Maggie Thatcher vandalism and looting stores and subway stations have been set on fire at least eighteen people have died and more than two hundred injured evicted thou- limited Kins facism towards European now and also it feels that the financial economic prospects of British fashion industry where they're working again to shrink radically debase politicians pay much more attention to industries like fishing Russia given absolute showrooms that it will be for the U K in the UK alone to determine who says many designers have already moved offices to other parts of Europe. I've met with some that have already relocated the business I've met some here moved part of their and shut down schools Catalina may says the protests only seem to be getting bigger she host spanish-language podcast Lazarus you are in a position where that may affect them going forward but unlike many in the fashion business you lose up piece for a few reasons saw a steady increase and our catalina may joins us now from Santiago I'm hearing what sounds like clanking pots and pans I is this from the protest you went to Yes yes definitely that's Aleppo is last Friday President Sebastian Pineyro declared a state of emergency he deployed military to the streets installed a curfew and Chile's capital Santiago Service but will they stay after graduation and after brexit if it ever happens the designer Catherine Hamnes his not convinced they will relieve your they've been massive street protests throughout the South American nation this week most of the demonstrations have been peaceful but there has also been on his nonstopping from last Friday almost so it's happening all the time all over the country and protest on the streets with all kinds of people teeters nurses are these students lots of students on the streets but also there's this feeling of Oh her daughter because her daughter is actually in depth because of her student loan so that's one of the reasons she also said to me that she leaves early selfish I just thought it was a photo opportunity I mean I had no idea that it will have such extraordinary longevity I just thought it was here today gone today quite funny moment to show that they are not willing to keep leaving like they are leaving Teela surreally unequal society according to numbers of the Chile has woken up in Spanish she stepped off that is one of the popular chance in the danger and repression because we have the army around us all the time as well for example on a protest I took to the neal he'll be will protest so he said that people are tired of the abuse tired of the inequality he also says that a small percentage of tea a lot of social inequality and that reference Norway there are a lot of people in the one percent in Chile that he's not happy about absolutely people feel like this is the sense of community on the streets you know people are going now using the public space and that's that's a nice feeling that's good I have been talking I'm more to Bari in London you're with the World I'm Marco Werman Andrew with the World Eh World Bank we have a one percent of people who are getting thirty three percent of the income of the richness so people know that tip of Augusto Pinochet that ended in one thousand nine hundred I mean how how significant to set it was very surprising because the government already record Leonardo Davinci gets credit for a lot of inventions the calculator and parachutes he even invented an instrument in his veal organ Davinci also wanted to add a really really long bridge to his last in fifteen o two he proposed to connect nice that eighteen people have died during this day and the National Institution of Human Rights said that five of those people were key because they thought this was their home and I mean I've got an assistant ups this is going back to Selena now are they going back because of Brexit here there's the she was with her daughter and also her husband was there so it was like a family protest for them and she she said to me that she is protesting the study so you only had a sketch of the bridge and Davinci's letter to the sultan but Davinci did not specify what the bridge would have been made of what were the options that to neighborhoods and what is modern Istanbul it would have been the longest bridge in the world but the Ottoman Sultan rejected it and the bridge was never built until now every day what what what does it take to the center of these demonstrations what have you seen we have two different feelings about this why do the sultan turn it down you know when you build something you look at what has been done before to kind of validate what you're going to do but this is something that would have been about talk to him he said that he was protesting in solidarity with everyone's coast because that's the feeling now this is like an an all kinds of people he's the host of the Spanish language podcasts Lara's or the outsiders cuddling thank you very much for being with us today thank you very much we're happy to let the world know what's happening here dedicate or she so she was afraid at the beginning of all of this but she said we're not afraid anymore we're not hiding like rats anymore that's what she said a team of researchers at MIT built a scale model of the bridge to see DAVINCI's plan would've worked spoiler alert here it would have engineer Carly Bass actors to look at economy construction and I think those would have been posed some complicated challenges for them so you ended up printing three blocks assembling them on top scaffolding which is how it was killed by the military so that's happening now in this country is hard to believe really cut leader may lives in Santiago Chile where she perfect when you take the scaffolding out you realize that this thing is standing and so you can imagine after months of printing it was like wow locations in the quality of students that we are seeing apply to the University of the arts specifically in the culture fashion and actually the weakening of the pines actually made it more attractive for you to be a place or so I've heard a lot of concern about the presence of military in the streets in police that the people in Chile have not seen this since the seventeen year dictator when you're not really able to confine Leonardo Davinci to one label he's not an artist and he's not a scientist to sort of shows how unbounded he was by any done in Davinci's time it took six hours to three d print each block there are one hundred twenty six of them and it initially took an hour to put them all together then modern bridges I mean is this something that could be put into place today the form is not something far off from forums that you see now sound Kinda surprised that it happened I am so you're construction your model was successful how does Davinci's design compared to none of that voice have changed but we're not hearing we want this deal done and dusted we're hearing we want off with his head this so bad for the economy that we cannot countenance sounds like they are in Norway but they majority struggles to make ends meet so you are listening this kind of things all the time so protesters like Daniels old both on our instagram feed we are at PRI the world they do it all over again but next time we'll be alone also today Leonardo Da Vinci Dreamt of building a really really long bridge hint times longer than any span at the time so I think the structure makes sense and it works but in reality when you're going to build something there are a lot of other you had at your disposal and how did you decide what Davinci most likely would have used so the shape kind of guided us there are Woodbridge's and semi shape split most ktar plans to do better that's coming up here on the world I'm Marco Werman with the world where co production of the BBC World Service take the scaffolding out it's kind of the Jenga moment how worried were you that all that hard work would just GonNa fall apart I was incredibly worried I assembled it similar to how you would assemble foreign workers poured into Qatar to build soccer stadiums for the next World Cup and they signed contracts that bind them to their bosses some call it spot of course I was in the basement of our lab alone like three o'clock in the morning and of course alone I go to say you still likely would have been stone or brick the brick just wouldn't have been strong enough there is no mortar there's nothing reinforcing this it's just the stone from held together by compassion disciplined Carlton passed a recent graduate of MIT civil and Environmental Engineering Master's program who has reproduced Leonardo Da Vinci is designed for fifteen to bridge carly thank you very much for explaining the altus thank you very much marcle for your time I appreciate it we have Leonardo's original sketch and a photo of the bridge that mit form is something you can kind of recognize now what you were able to do with Davinci's design I mean is this just another example of how ahead of his time he was yeah a masonry bridge so you start from the ends and then you kinda come towards the top in when you put the last piece in you can sort of feel you have to squeeze the peace because the geometry's answer ship others call it slavery and they ended up having to work for long hours sometimes with delay in their salary in very dire living conditions but what's different is the material we have more advanced materials like steel and reinforced concrete so I don't think it's realistic that the bridge had been built today but I would say that the they feel it and they actually leave it every day and they are tired and they don't want to have this level you emphasize on it are you also took on what if the number am on your heel is for the he suffered doug refer to trundle host country to step into the international spotlight the Gulf nation of Qatar plays host next but with prestige also comes responsibility and for cutter that Oh you GBH Boston PRI NPR X. The men's soccer World Cup is the most popular sporting event on earth it happens every four years it's a chance for the undermine international scrutiny for the way it treats its foreign workers it's response has been slow but last week the resigns of chain Middle Eastern country picked to host the soccer tournament but it was great news too for people from countries like Nepal Bangladesh and the Philippines personal and researchers migrant workers rights in the Persian Gulf countries they have to buy this job they tell you they take up loans sometimes they just also let go that announcement came back in two thousand ten it was a historic moment for this nation of two point six million people are tired became the first the motivations and then they ended up having to work long hours sometimes with delay in their salary in very dire living conditions what makes their situation even they need to be sponsored by a company who turned hormone poor heads the US International Labor Organization Gutter on once they come here that was she says is that workers cannot quit their jobs they also cannot leave the country without approval from their bosses the yard in effect Wjr the International Labor Organization said Qatar is implementing a series of reforms to its labor laws here's you an official who turn harmonium poor again when workers are here if they want to change their employer they can do so giving the standard advance notice just like any other country also if they want to leave temporarily uh heads the International Trade Union Confederation the Group calls itself a global voice for workers she says migrant workers now make up ninety five percent he then your negotiation position is much weaker and also your mobility's controlled by the employer in the years since the World Cup announcement Qatar has can keep an eye on how the reforms are being carried out we will continue to monitor we will continue to document the human rights situation speaker workers and followed the sponsorship program means that if they want to leave the country temporarily or permanently it would need to get an exit permit from their employer expects them to be in place by January may Ramona's of Amnesty International says the proposed changes do sound promising the question thousands of job seeking men and women salk retired as a place to find work and a chance to lift their families out of poverty many for other countries in the region that have similar abusive labor laws it could also send the message to the future host of the soccer World Cup that they need to can't of Qatar's workforce that's of course being largely due to a construction boom but you're also seeing massive increases in hospital bound to their employers through a system called Kefala Cafa is the sponsorship program basically for migrant worker to come to avert war hooked chance in the span of Eight Years Otter population double we're talking about more than two million migrant workers Sharon Alevtina Vince management job seekers are often willing to do whatever it takes to get Takata says may Romanos she's with Amnesty listen to their stories and see if actually there is improvement and their rights she says if the reforms do turn out to be successful and guitar they can be a model impor- says the system has to abuse when you need your employer approval to change your job when you need your employers approval to leave the country properties to come hoping to get some money and a better future for their kids but Ramona says when the work is get to Qatar the reality can be very different checked the rights of workers for the world I'm sharing Jafari Russian President Vladimir Putin hosted a massive Africa summit this week it just wrapped up in Saatchi host city for the two thousand fourteen winter Olympics leaders from every African nation were present including forty heads of state many trade deals involving a clear strategy yes there is a very clear strategy so what he wants to do is that he wants Russia to be synonymous with change and synonymous with or permanently this eighth of fats are no longer be required to obtain an exit permits I'll tell us government has not yet approved all of these changes but Himalayan pop over the other sectors that they're interested in so experts as one Greens is another infrastructure development is another dave discuss nuclear contrast and some had a Megyn you that came out of those particular regions Russia exerting its influence on African leaders making deals lots of weapons deals I understand actually it was just a rebranding of the system I'm not much has changed this time it does help. She says that the Labor Organization has an office in Qatar and understand what every country wants to table so they know how Russia can help Russia getting involved more deeply Africa makes me wonder about how their approach shapes up there was even a virtual gun range for some hands on experience what was that about now to just show you the kind of Powell the kind of showcase they were doing and to exempt on what they were promised most of the time they were promised a different salary from what they have they are promised different working conditions and then they different also labor it is how they are implemented we have seen this promise before and it didn't really materialize was something big was in two thousand fifteen same announcement who made and sounds of this conference of you would Saladdin Putin sat across numerous African leaders putting pen to people one by one they came and one by one some side this is Africa Business Unit in Sochi Russia for the Russia Africa summit thank you very much thank you as well in South Korea Body art is big and Korean Collagen as well not nuclear warfare but nuclear technology and nuclear research centers in different countries so

US Isis Marco Werman President Trump president Russia European Union Pentagon Boris Johnson Middle East Syria ash Carter Iran Russia Norway Turkey Labor Organization Qatar pershing principal
Jack Goldsmith Talks to Former Secretary of Defense Ash Carter

The Lawfare Podcast

00:00 sec | 1 year ago

Jack Goldsmith Talks to Former Secretary of Defense Ash Carter

"Hey podcast listeners law. Fair has a new podcast for you. It's called the report and it brings you. The in depth story of the Muller report both out having to Wade through four hundred forty eight dense pages a legal text the first episode dropped on Friday and you'll be able to see it in our feed but for future episodes subscribed to the report wherever you got your podcasts. You're so I thought when I was in office we're not doing nearly enough respect to China and Russia and the reason I disagreed with crowds speak through the two thousand two thousand ten period it was that it had become cleared me think before the that it was clear to many people that China and Russia China and Russia we'd hope for in the nineties wasn't happy and the we needed to be able to counter them and they were a higher end enemy the Taliban guidance second we'd spent all that time and energy on Iraq and Afghanistan and ultimately Syria and was that a distraction yeah. It was so you those two things together in China and Russia were getting the attention they needed to events to our for about ten years and one of the things I did. All three of my jobs was tried to restore that attention to China Russia. I think that's now more prevalent in country which is a good prevalent in Washington which is a good thing but it wasn't ten years. I'm Michaela Fogel and this is the l'affaire podcast last July twentieth two thousand nineteen. We've got something a little different for podcast listeners this week. Jack Goldsmith sat down in Cambridge Massachusetts to have a conversation with former secretary of Defense Ash Carter and you're about to hear it they talked about Carter's time as head of the Pentagon the challenges of conveying national security threats to the American public the Obama Administration's response to the rise of the Islamic state offensive cyber operations and the role of of lawyers in defense policy. It's the law fair podcast episode four Hundred Thirty six Jack Goldsmith talks to former secretary of Defense Ash Carter so this is an amazing book on many levels. I learned a ton on and <hes> it's many different kinds of book wrapped into one is a comprehensive accessible explanation for how D._O._D.. Works on policy ranging from acquisitions in procurement to chain of command issues as to strategic planning and dozens of others use. It's a how to in leadership manual on enough. You would accept that characterization. It's it's full practical advice for how to deal with the press interagency process congressional the hearings crisis management more. It's an assessment of U._S.. Grand Strategy with <HES> with China Russia the Middle East North Korea it Analyzes D._O._D.'s technological strengths and weaknesses in nature of rapid technological change change. All of these things come wrapped in a memoir about your decades of work in the Pentagon so is that a fair characterization that is absolutely fair and I appreciate your saying that because different kind of book Jack It's not a Washington then more for <hes> people tend to think of former officials. Everybody who comes to government writes a memoir they were born in such and such a year they count and then a lot of who shot John about their time in office and the first of all my times been long. I've been doing it for thirty seven years but more importantly because in about Ash Carter it's about the Department of Defense in about leadership and I don't know whether you're a non fiction reader Jack but I am an I like to be taken through nonfiction to place. I've never been amazing place. I'd ever will be and told how it works and for those who are curious about the Bene- God <hes>. I think this'll scratch was that it I completely agree. I worked in the Pentagon for a year and the general counsel's office and I got to know how it worked a little bit but I would have loved to have had this book to read before I got there is really no other book like this that explains in practical but accessible terms how everything works. It's really extraordinary. Although the General Counsel's office you were close to the heartbeat across right everything. I'm doing law for dairy aboard Yep. We could talk about I. I'd like to let her on. It seems like this book. The seemed like you gotTa Drawer Roar of reflections that you've been kind of saving up for three or four decades that right way too early the lifetime. It's really a what did I learn that I wished I had known going in and let me help someone someone else know that even it not to be in defense or government somebody WHO's trying to lead an enterprise. Nothing's going to be as big as department Benza World Vegas but leaders of all kinds of something that they can as the orchestra leader for the Philadelphia Orchestra. The one little biographical note all add is that I'm from Philadelphia and he used to say when asked what is programs going to be say. I give them something to a whistle on the way on at had I hope every leader reads it got vendors and the Defense Department. I'm at the I think the lessons I will talk about some of them. Apply to all parts of the government into other other areas so I'd like to start with where you came to work in the Defense Department. When you've got a <unk> I guess it was in Oxford in theoretical theoretical physics and you were on the track to be academic theoretical physicist and you even allude to a famous article that you wrote? It's kind of amazing that that a theoretical physicist with the Secretary of defense just tell us a little bit about that and how you it's a great story about how you got from there into the defense world yeah I was a theoretical physicist. That's all I thought I do in my life. I loved physics. I loved the particulars sub-field L. Dollars in which is elementary particle physics I so I had done experimental work at Fermilab the big accelerator at Brookhaven National Laboratory another big accelerator and I I thought that's what I was going to do. The connection to defense and I got into fence was this the people who populated my field in the generation before me were Manhattan project people or their immediate descendants attendance and they all had a relationship to technology in national defense that was natural and sustained wasn't always one where they didn't subject what was going on the refused controversies in the detector community over whether to build an H. bomb originally if you remember ever civil defense and missile defense and arms control in lots of things of the point is that they they believed that bringing their expertise to bear on big questions was responsibility that came with the knowledge of being a scientist I they also believed that they had invented whether we would now call disruptive technology right and they were proud of that become at nuclear weapon. Yes they were proud of that because it had ended World War Two right and they were proud of it because in their judgment kept the peace for fifty years of the Soviet Union but they also saw the huge dark side of an existential writer at team Guide and if you think about today's world just parenthetically a one of the things I am doing now is evangelizing for the view that today's technologists should similarly see the bad as well as the good and involve themselves in minimizing minimizing the bad while maximizing the good. That's a lesson I learned any rate so then. I think that that's happening less now than it did followed him. Generation technology to either didn't didn't participate because they didn't care took things for granted or because they had a downright aversion to working for the government which they saw as a bad thing and my view is I don't annoys like what the government's doing either but the only governor you got and we have to get in there if you don't like it get in the game and make it better so that was the spirit that my the air in the rooms Angelou's infused with right. I was a young physicist and so when a very famous repair of physicists actually came to me one day when I was a post doc and said ass. You need to work on a certain problem in Washington. And you only have to do it for a year but somebody like you is needed. I said yes and I worked on it. It was with to do with the Amex Missile Jack which is ancient history now but which is a huge U._S.. Intercontinental within a ballistic missile that was being built as the counter to a similarly large realistic missile built by the Soviet Union in the old arms race days and op particular issue arose about where or to put it and that turned out to be important strategically but also complicated technically and so I worked on that and I had the feeling that I think every young person who decides upon upon a commitment in their lives has which is I saw my knowledge making a difference to a question that made a huge difference you you put those two things together and you're twenty something years old that's pretty magical and so at that point I decided that I was going to continue to take advantage of I was going to be in the government all the time but continue to be be committed to helping when I thought I could help and using my knowledge <hes> for the greater good and you had an extraordinary array of tasks jobs lead to a second. Is there something these think about your in intensive of scientific training has a background that gave special insights or helped you in your career Deity well I if you compared to other academic disciplinary backgrounds it's unusual because there are a lot of little designs is there are a lot of lawyers there are a lot of business people I and so forth and those are all valuable skill sets also my view early in my life is somewhat arrogant was done. I could pick all that up on the fly but you can't pick up physics on the fly now. What is physics get you? When you're secretary of defense is I got it is a habit of mind that is emboldens you to believe you can understand anything if you work hard enough at it so when I was working on a problem that has taken <hes> weather to admit women to all military specialties or to understand Syria and its geography and the People's within it or how the Joint Strike Fighter worked? I didn't feel there's any where I couldn't go if I worked hard enough and understand and I say that because for example even as capable a man as Leon Panetta do whom I was deputy for while during time you zicree Viz he used to joke with me as you know how everything works around here because we were talking about a ship or satellite I dern airplane. I didn't have to take anything for granted. I could dig deep with a briefer who was superficial or wrong or trying to sell the secretary of the wrong story and Dan so that's what I get out of it. A continuing emboldening remember we were arrogant and physicists physicists are arrogant but they were very arrogant and in those his Jack if you couldn't make it in physics you became a computer scientists. Yeah that's true. I still make physics Sartor so another reason that you knew everything that was going on in the building when you work for Leon Panetta's because you'd been working there on offer decades really you had a lot of jobs is united eighty one. Could you just briefly because it's a long list is tell us quickly the things you're baseball I was I was uninterruptedly a government employee from nineteen eighty one to you when I walked out that the at on Inauguration Day handed the keys over to Jim Mattis in January twenty seventeen my first job was casper. Weinberger Ronald Reagan was the secretary defense. I worked Berkshire Cap Weinberger on a space nuclear command and control continuity of government the whole star wars question then an am skipping some things just to the big things I was a scientific advisor to Paul Mitzi great cold warrior who was Ronald Reagan's chief arms control adviser. I was for years and years on the Defense Science Board which is executive defenses science advisory Orch which you as you know from your time. <hes> in the Pentagon is a requires you to be a special government employees. I was on Condie rices scientific advisory board. I was assistant secretary of Defense in the Clinton Clinton administration the Defense Policy Board and the Defense Science Board for <hes> in the Clinton administration's and the second Bush administration's. I was the under secretary which is a number three job for Obama then the number to the deputy secretary of the C._E._o.. Arben advance and then finally the so I've I've been in lots of corners and lots of lag one man bureaucratic say you know how the you know how the building uh-huh during the book so you very vividly illustrate how enormous defense form it is yeah you say that it employs more men and women than Amazon McDonald's Fedex target in general electric combined you say does more research and development than Apple Google and Microsoft again combined it manages more than half the US federal budget excluding entitlements in interest on the debt of budget of more than seven hundred billion dollars and it owns comes in maintains more than thirty million acres of real estate area larger than the state of Pennsylvania so this is one of the things I was struck with when I worked there just the enormity of the ODI. The first question about that is why does the United United States lead such enormous Defense Department of Defense presence well. It's a good question. It's a fair question because it is half of the federal government in terms of discretionary spending half of what the Congress Chris Appropriates in government for government agencies spend is <hes> in the Defense Department so why here's one. You're a couple ingredients to that. There's a lot of history in that answer jared handedly which is once you're at seven hundred seven fifty. Seven fifty for political reasons is not GONNA go way up and it's not gonna go way down so the real question array a another interpretation of the question is is this money money well-spent writing our findings rationale for I'm let me get to my waist question second. Just now why why seven fifty couple ingredients go into that one is that we have in the here and now south China Russia Iran North Korea and terrorism five just to take the biggies the things that might trip off at other ever any moment the things which if not deterred will be big trouble in the security America all those potential enemies real enemies have just us we think about the Chinese People's Liberation Army wakes up every morning thinking about the United United States the United States military in the Secretary of defense when I woke up every morning I was thinking about the L._A.. But also the Russia Iran recre- and so forth so we have a number of contingencies nobody else has that that's one reason why we need more stuff than we needed around the world. <hes> another reason is that we pay our troops well and we get a huge benefit that which is the most skilled old military and it's the quality of our people quality our technology make us the best. There's nothing magical about being American reason why America's the best military is for those two radius. That doesn't come cheap in today particularly typically today is labor markets. We have to a dearly to attract and retain those people but it's worth it in other countries. They encrypt people. I am very little. It's an it's much cheaper. We have we provide guide them with very good health care which like healthcare everywhere in the country is escalating faster than general cost of living so there are a number reasons why we spend that much of some strategic some some just the way we do things and that's just spending money on today's military. Another thing you have to do is invest for tomorrow as were all these guys are competing with us so out of that seven fifty a couple of hundred is. <unk> spent investing in the future new technology buying new systems because speaking is the secretary of defense. I always you Sam the Secretary of Defense of today but I'm also the Secretary of Defense Tomorrow and that this place has been around for two hundred forty years. It's going to be around for a very very very long time in the future and you are today's custodian of it and I need to make sure that my successor and my successor successor has fine a military as the one that was bequeathed to me and that takes money also so you're it's today and tomorrow it's and it's the way our expenses are done as Americans about Bain people decently absolutely and so forth and there's a lot of history as well and how <hes> death you actually to my surprise opened the book talking about this about the waste question which is always coming up very good question whether the resources are being allocated correctly both within the DOD budget in across student. Let's just clean always first and then we'll get to wrongheaded US money which is different from <hes> waste. I was a hawk on and cost overruns and schedule overruns because they're disgraceful in their own right because costumer runs mean that the taxpayers having to pay more than they were told their app today and the were fighters he's having to forego capability that would be bought with those dollars if it wasn't being wasted on another on the first program and delay is intolerable because it means stuff gets in hands of the warfighter later and in work time time especially and we have been in more time all the time I was number three number two number one we were at were we can talk about those wars and above different views on them but I was all in for them. I couldn't be otherwise and a day's delay there. Literally meant the potential for the loss of life swells loss of effectives so you can't have that stuff and that's why when I was undersecretary I canceled a lot of many programs the president trial copter her for example that was bloated and out of control and it just had to be killed so I canceled a lot of programs on a lot of them that were in trouble like the Joint Strike Fighter. I had to spend a lot of time rescuing from trouble and I couldn't cancel them right didn't WanNA cancel them because they didn't. There wasn't a readily available alternative to them and I couldn't punish the military for the bad performance of the managers on this <hes> one programs is essentially had to manage it myself but I was always aware Jack that I couldn't go to the taxpayer with a straight face at asked for seven hundred fifty that kind of money johnny if we were clearly wasting some to the question of are we buying the right stuff in the first place. Let's take the Joint Strike Fighter that aircraft will be the next tactically aircrafts for three of our armed services the air force the Navy and the Marine Corps and for many friends and allies around the world who will be their next active player craft and a lasting bond to the United States which is valuable to me. Whatever people say about alizes today? I'm for them but I do think it is probably the last man tactical aircraft that lower be built so we need to be realistic that some of these things that we've associated chatted with our military for a long time infantryman many kinds of surface ships big satellites manned aircraft these things are not gonNA. We're not GONNA be buying the twenty thirty years we we begin need to begin to create the mentality that will willingly let go of those things that's to your question about allocating spending money on the right things I think redoing okay now at allocating allocating them to the China Russia Iran North Korean terrorism threats. We weren't always so I thought when I was in office that we were not doing nearly enough respected China and Russia and the reason I disagreed with the crowd so to speak through the two thousand two thousand ten period was that it had become clear to me I think before the that it was clear to many people that China and Russia Asia the China and Russia we'd hope for in the nineties wasn't happening and the we needed to be able to counter them and they were a higher end enemy the Taliban or al-Qaeda second long we'd spent all that time and energy on Iraq and Afghanistan and ultimately Syria and was that a distraction yeah it was so you put those two things together in China and Russia weren't getting the attention they needed to from the Defense Dr for about ten years and one of the things I did it. All three of my jobs was tried to restore that attention to China and Russia. I think that's now more prevalent in in the country which is a good thing prevalent in Washington which is a good thing but it wasn't ten years ago. Let me let me ask you a question of of on that so there are many places in the book on thinking especially about your discussion which will come back to about the problem of Isis the Islamic state when you got there and what you did to try to <hes> to to change our strategy on that one of the things that was apparent in that discussion was that you in the Defense Department and the intelligence community really more than that received a threat that use lot required more U._S.. Gauging public wasn't necessarily onboard for that president. Maybe not on board for that at least for a while or at least not comedies on board for that and and that seems to be a general problem that you face in the Defense Department I mean you've had really President Obama and president trump in one way or another ran on platforms of Reducing D._O._D.. Foot run abroad so you're the secretary of defense and you're responsible for keeping the nation safe and you receive these threats but the public is not there with you all the time and maybe the president's not there all the time. How do you think about that problem? How do you think about your responsibilities as Secdef when you face as that Paul well you're absolutely right <hes> in the case of Isis to me? It was completely unacceptably running amok when I took office as Secretary of Defense at Twenty fifteen I I had been out of the Department for several many months actually eight months between the top of the deputy secretary and when I came back I was shocked and we were doing enough and it was completely. These are people who are crucifying people who were in slaving women and to me that you can't have that now you're right. There is it in the country generally and among presidents residents very understandably disinclination <hes> to start wars and I think that's been a general truth these guys all the president's the five presents that I worked under each took up to their responsibilities really seriously and the idea that any of them and I know that there was some controversy over George Bush the seconds Darnay the Iraq war but I think that in general presence and this country been naturally in very commendably Mendel reluctant to use force and go to war and there's a popular image that we in the Pentagon just dying to start a war all the time and that's false also because people who've done it or do it take that responsibility released seriously to same time every once in a while you gotta do it now. Remember President Obama had campaigned on ending to worse and not only deny want end those to prematurely but I was starting the third that was a high hill to climb you talk about the Islamic state. Yeah it's Hattie's hat. But how do you think about that because you've got certain responsibilities. President elected making certain pledges. There's a reality on the ground is disagreement about what to do about it. How did you in general go about? I think the key was to show people that victory was possible that it was doable. Put a plan in front of them that they could understand and say this is what must be done in this is what can be done and so when I put the plan together and the focus on Mozell and rocket in two thousand fifteen when I came in office. This the motion rocker were the two key objectives but I had something else in mind as I brief that too I the president publicly into the troops which is those newsreels in World War Two where the Roy thirty two red arrows one going to Tokyo in one going to Berlin so everybody knew what the game was with the objective was and I wanted people to understand that there was a clear plan for doing this and they should have confidence in it and try to give them that communist by showing them the steps and showing them the the progress so if they see that it is doable. There's a plan that's a big ingredient. The the other thing is isis unfortunately conspired and making it increasingly clear something at when you guts some loser here in the United States all frizz up on the Internet who goes out gets his car and starts running people down the street he believed that's that's enough when there are people in Raka collecting the names of American government officials and servicemembers including yours truly and their children and their families and putting them on the Internet and inviting people to go and attack. That's when it begins to come home to people at I remember going to Davos clearly after shortly Jimmy. I got an office because I won't emphasize technology called Youtube dot about later and I just went over there for a day. Did the you know the usual thing with the snowfall the background right trying to get people's attention one of the things I was trying to get people's attention to this but now at the same time I'd have private meetings with leaders leaders not only world leaders but business leaders and I all the business leaders said to me you need to do something about Isis is beginning to affect people's offense and <hes> I hit tourism but just more generally my workforce. My people are perturbed and that's moving towards fear see here. You have a few Barbarians Koreans relative speed in Iran not relatively speaking of robbery of pulse view in Iraq and Syria who really are having a major terror effect on the rest of the world but I'm supposed goes to protect the American people one of those things are supposed to protect them from is the fear that they're going to get attacked and so if you put that together the rising fear and the fact that I had something to sell them which is doable plant for the president of elements off to the public at large that proved to be the combination how much he talked about this briefly in the book say you're coming in after we've been at war against various forms of his Tomic terrorist organizations we sixteen thirteen years. It's now eighteen years maybe fifteen or sixteen then and there's a sense in which people are numb doer of their those engaged from it to some extent I take it that makes your job a lot harder what you make of that problem Tom. I think you have to take it for this. which is that we live in a country where the few defend the many that is just a fact? It's not GonNa Change. We're not have a draft. We're not going to happen greatest generation. We have a relatively small number of people devoted to defending the rest of the population and the rest of the population needs to understand enough to accept that that is being done on on their behalf and to give some support to and people were they've been added now for almost two decades watching what's going on Muslim themselves. All they're doing is watching T._V.'s our our. Are you tired work right you tired of watching T._v.. I know people who really tired of the war. There people don't have legs and the wives of people don't have legs and the mothers and fathers. I know people really tired of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan but you won't even watching on T._v.. At the same time they are citizens they require awarding on their name. Yeah need understand exactly and so you so there's a huge burden on US Secretary of defense offense to support the enunciation of the policy and to help the president enunciate. I will say that President Obama had many many strengths and and he almost invariably did the right thing in my judgment even when it was unpopular and against his fundamental inclinations so for example he did agree to my request to not only not draw down on the number of troops in Afghanistan but increases he agree every time I asked him something for Isis. The answer is yes and I knew that went against his grain. He had Eddie so he had mutt many many good features. One thing he did not do well was explained. That's interesting because he was a great communicator lots of other ways but inspect of war he was not a great communicator and there was nobody else in the administration John Kerry's news mostly working on the very important issues conducting. 's Fair enough of the National Security Adviser Susan Rice in before Tom Donlan they don't normally give speeches so there aren't that many people in government who can authoritatively talk about war. The Secretary of Defense is one of the best is the president but as I said it wasn't president Obama voter line Obama was a good explainer something many this but I agree not explaining the military strategy in general military operations in general he came to office be someone who was peace inclined <hes> and he think that he was just disposition really uncomfortable that no I think it was Jack back that he did not want to be is predecessor we thought oversimplified and it particularly in the matter of the Iraq war and so so there was always every president runs against the last guy to some extent and I don't think President Obama ever fully stopped wanting not to over simplify and what that means though is that you stand up up in your manner is very didactic. off-putting Chile is he himself would say about hymns about himself in that mode and it wasn't the kind of thing that got people convinced and and determined and maybe even a little bit angry. If you're going to wage war you have to you have to have a little steve up a moat emotionally and so in the case of Isis you had to be angry and yet to be determined. These people need to be destroyed and you needed to WanNa get it dot and you needed at if you're trying to get other people feel the way wasn't oversimplification but it was giving the full emotional import of the need to go to war and that was something that was not in his playbook of speeches and I think it had a lot to do with his view of his predecessor and add his campaign rhetoric so let me ask you what might be or leading question. I'm not sure perpetual criticism on the Department of Defense during the Obama years was that the White House micromanage the battlefield and you actually talk about give a chapter on it and discussed throughout the book so in your view what was the problem. What were your main response well? What I say in the book is I don't? I didn't have the experience that my predecessors blamed about a micromanager and here's my unfold impart. Let me just interrupt their pleas for this. 'cause you did something about it. You talk it out. Talk About Times where I forget proposed. <hes> Condo wrote about positive operation and it was being vetted by the N._F._C. before it went to the president is supposed to be advice coming from you so you change that so there were things that in but you fixed yes I did. I made it my business is to not be micromanage nice. We'll help you do that. The president outranks you wanamaker badge right and to me the right answers the good old fashioned answer. I needed to have rock Obama have the confidence that that when Ash Carter came to the sit room or sent him a proposal that I had worked as hard on it as he thought it needed to be worked on and is he would work on it if he didn't have that confidence if he thought the Pentagon was just sending in. Stuff which we could do and the Secretary of Defense had beforehand vetted it as though he were the president himself. That's my job after all. That's important part that that's your job in. That's is your that's I've wanted to win from from President Obama the confidence that when we the department events sent something to him and which had really looked at it hard otherwise is he would do the only thing the thing he ended. Do we just turned his staff and say you better check this. I think they just came up from the lower levels and the guys at the top just send it on over and there's probably something wrong in there uh-huh and I'll be held responsible and so I I respected makes up. I and I had to earn that slowly because he there was a habit of having the staff look over our shoulders. I didn't like that and I changed some of our internal procedures and above all my own involvement in such a way that slowly but surely the president came to have confidence when I was doing do also I need to say Jack that what I I worked for wine murders for example Weinberger would sooner die than that anybody outside the Defense Department talk about war plans to the president. He believes that it was only the president in that apartment as L.. Everybody else that was the spirit in the reality of the cold word is if the war went up it was it was all war today and things like Iraq and Afghanistan but even even if who were dealing with Russia and China there is inevitably a political and a intelligence and an economic side to things so I did not have the view that the president wouldn't wouldn't benefit from in that my were plans wouldn't benefit from diplomatic input and intelligence but it just I sought it out because sometimes they would say well. You don't really understand how the country works or your. You haven't understood how this tribe or this locality works. These were valuable insights to us why we ever forego though and provided they could keep secrets. Stay invariably could and their inputs were in good faith sometimes they would then later argue argued the president of the National Security Council against a proposed operation on policy grounds fine. I would argue for doing it on Alcee grants but beforehand I would have let them see what I was proposing and say. Tell me what you think. Most of the time I benefited from that sometimes I bought myself a debate that I wished I'd have to have but we debated in front of the president. Naso experience in government was always better to have those debates rather than average but this is the key thing about journalism all things you said in the book that you did was you wanted to get that input yourself before you gave the president the vice rather than use hitting the White House advisor then letting everyone their way set bear. Yes you have to be a stickler for the chain of command chain of command goes from the president to the secretary of defense to everybody else and my view is nobody else is sending anything up towards the president. President doesn't go through Ashford and likewise but inversely. Nobody in the White House can give instructions to the Department of Defense. I've the only time I ever I saw the really mild manner or secretary sheds built airy. Good friend of mine stood in for my father my wedding's in fact the only time I've ever seen bill really angry was when a white White House staffer gave orders to a dod general so I was a real stickler on that and then somebody would come to me and say the White House says this or that I would say listen. The White House is one one person in the White House. He lives dude. That's Barack Obama. Sometimes I would get before I gave a speech Jack in another country. I'd get the White House comments and they'd want you to change this that the other thing sometimes that was very helpful and I would look at them but I wouldn't make the changes I didn't want to and then I'd always wait to see fomin rare and if the president of the United States said to me ash you need to cool on this or that subject or something that's one thing but if it's anybody else otherwise it was is your call not there yeah I'll take it as input but that not as an order okay. I'm going to switch topics. You have a really fascinating discussion of cyber issues in the book. We're not GONNA be able to discuss most of them. Unfortunately I WANNA talk about offensive cyber. In the book you continue to compensate you along the lines that I think you've made publicly in the past you said combatant commanders seemed reluctant reluctant to develop cyber offensive capabilities as part of their work planning tasks and you did something about at that and you also talk about Cyber Command failing to deliver much help in the Campaign Against Isis which echoes nothing he said in two thousand seventeen so this is surprising for outsiders <hes> why is there an institutional reluctance wants to use offensive cyber weapons and how if at all lawful readers understand cyber command into Vegas basic issues about Cyber Command had is that reluctance if at all relate to the structure of Cyber Command and the future soured me. That's a big adequate yet is is as well the reluctance was partly political. It was considered very controversial <hes> whether we were going to do offensive cyber and it was a policy policy decision that had not been made by the country in general and sellers kind of taboo about it when I came into office. I didn't think it was appropriate but there's no question that it was there but that didn't explain are in my view general incompetence so it does explain it but one is the. I don't think we were Managing Bravo. I can go into more detail about that but then how we structured cyber common is and as the people we gave it Marty Dempsey and I basically establishes the fundamental structure of it when I was deputy and we staff it with military and that was a because because we could put them quickly in this new agency not because we thought that was the right talent mix in the long run who never quite the right talent ex cyber com was the step child of the national security the agency we put it out in Maryland so could use the national security issues national security agency is a spy agency right and you get run into the Terminal Problem Jack of do you listen to their communications. Are you disrupt disruptor communications. As long as there's been warfare and espionage has been that it's a tactical debate in every cigarette case and the intelligence community was powerful thumbs like with the Chi Bosh next you get due to the fact that the infrastructure for cyber attacks tends to be a global infrastructure in you know if we're going to bomb a country and we're GONNA fly over another country to bomb it. We need to ask the permission of the country. Were overflying in Cyber. They're similar kind of overflight issues where you're going through a server in Germany Italy legal issue which is you know from your own among others and so there were so many reasons to say now the intelligence community would say now the taboo would say no the diplomats would say no and on top that we didn't have the right competence anyway so that's a lot that's more than three strikes right against you now. That's not a good answer. I'm just giving you an honest answer. It's unacceptable so I think we have time for one more question. <hes> <hes> you famously I think tried to build bridges between dod in Silicon Valley. So why does there were some bridges there you try to make them bigger and devers. wattage bridges need to be built. How things stand Dan you left? And where do they stand today. They need to be rebuilt because the bridge I walked across when I was a young physicist. The bridge that was built by the Manhattan Project Generation Adoration that Ridge was in disuse disrepair in the generation that followed many technologists were simply intent on making money some had the libertarian philosophy. That somehow goodwood come without the governor's Ma'am some looked at Edward Snowden as a hero hurt to me a traitor and some were just so absorbed. You're making money that the public purpose didn't wasn't high on their screen so the there's a generation that was only minimally involved in Fez matters. That's what happened under the bridge. Between the time I started when I came back into office. Two thousand nine those bridges I wanted to rebuild and ahead do that. Despite the snow never hang display the romance with startups and get rich quick and that took a lot of work and it had to be relationship of trust and I used to tell Abe would look w quite skeptically it whether in the valley or in Boston or an Austin or whatever tech hub does in they'd be looking at you quite skeptically and I promise them I said I'll meet you half way. Also I say if you know Edward Snowden is on your mind. We're just GONNA have to agree to disagree and if you're worried about whether your dress your dyed hair your nose reindeer all that's fine we can deal with all that I'll meet you halfway and try to get them <hes> to devote a portion of their life like you have jack as early like I have a large chunk of my life to do some of these bigger than yourself and I got enough people to answer the call. I got enough industry in tech leaders answer the summer clueless but not all clue and and lasting. Why can you explain listeners why this is important? I'll tell you I think it's important but I don't know what I'm talking about converged to you. It used to be that a lot of technological innovation happened within the government and it still does but enormous amounts of technological innovation that's relevant to national security national defense now happening outside the government and I take it. That's one reason for national security defense reasons why this relationship it needs to be a group designed for you very fair we cannot row are on a rely upon what we grow into merely any longer the global and particularly commercial tech bases are too big and moving too fast that if we're going to be the first the most is's Lyndon Johnson used to say with new technology. We have to draw a lot of that from the commercial sector that means having a relationship of trust and where people people that ideas go back and forth. That's why the bridges even more important today than it was that I have one more question in that has to do with lawyers which I was a little surprised by one of the important institutions Susan In D._O._D.. That you didn't devoting enormous amount of time to the book so my basic question is how did you view working with fifteen thousand or so lawyers in the defense establishment. How did you work with lawyers holiday you vine lawyers? I think I think Eric Rosenbach himself lawyers is your cheeses staff and how did the role initials voyeurs change over your decades in the bag. While first of all I repeatedly said and I do say in the book look that the Department of Defense takes the values of America enshrined in law not only our national law but in the Law of armed conflict and international understand news about proportionality and discrimination we take all that the battlefield I make no apologies about that were not the Russians and when we decide what we're doing and women and children are involved and so forth those red lights for us and I make no bums about that and therefore nothing that I ever did was did I in no case that I ever failed to get legal input and to be assured that what I was doing was lawful. That's why the office that you rid is so central. Nothing happens. Most secret stuff right is known in that office because it has to be by the General Council yet general counsel the Department offensive we had wonderful was during my time. Now that said one of the jobs of a good lawyer is to keep you out of trouble. Stop you from doing that. which you shouldn't do but another is to help you to do what you WANNA do? At I had good councils in that respect back to at one of the stories I tell them. The book was due. When the shutdown was coming in I learned that the shutdown would prohibit us from making death penalty payments to the widows does of people who perished on the battlefield that infuriate me that that for these stupid reasons of gridlock in Washington the government would be shut down and I would be forbidden to do that so I called up a philanthropist surfaced in New York who I knew was patriotic minded and said didn't have giving me a few million dollars or giving these widows few million dollars and my general counsel sat there in my office fish shaking his head and he told me that I couldn't do this in all probability and I was doing in any way so sometimes I took the risk and another big one <hes> Jack Jack which you know extremely well is the whole conversation of the authorization of the use of military force? That's fundamentally illegal issue but it's bigger than that it has to do with the involvement of Congress grice in war which the Constitution reposes important indeed the principal responsibility for deciding whether there will be a war or not in the Congress the conduct stuck to the war in the in the executive branch for sure but the decision to in the Congress and then you say to yourself well. How can I be fighting ISIS IN LIBYA CHAGAS or in Syria which I was house or in Afghanistan which I was what W- added Congress ever authorized that as you well know all of what we did went back to two thousand one the al Qaeda authorization in two thousand cousin and three the Iraq authorization and our lawyers continued to assure us that the things we were doing were reasonable descendents of those antecedents and therefore before it was lawful trust to continue at the same time there was a view in the congress that they needed to refresh that authorization and I was okay with that and I testified favorably towards that subject subject to conditions do conditions were that the new authorization mustn't tie my hands with the things that I- reasonably thought would be needed at might be needed due to defeat Isis and terrorism elsewhere which really meant that it should confine itself to a long large anticipated war if it's long enlarge urge then there's time and there's magnitude for Congress to act but I didn't want to have my hands tied shorter that would elicit <unk> the second was the the process and the product be enthusiastically supportive of the troops when the authorization permitted them the fight they didn't deserve to be sent to you war without a strong warm wind to their backs from the American people and for their sake I said it needs to be not a grudge gene sending them to orbited a enthusiastic firmly committed sending toward those who might do criteria and I thought they might have been mad on around twenty fifteen or so when I testified that way turns out? They weren't as a great place to stop. Thank you so they weren't really really appreciate. Thank you appreciate it good to be with you. The l'affaire podcast is produced in cooperation with the Brookings Institution. Thanks this week to Secretary Carter for coming on the show. If you haven't yet please take take a second to share the l'affaire podcast and social media and give us a five star rating and review wherever you found us you can also now purchase l'affaire swag at our online store W._w._w.. DOT The l'affaire store dot com the podcast.

president Secretary Defense Department President Obama Jack Jack Pentagon China Russia Iraq Afghanistan Washington United States Secretary Carter Department of Defense Secretary of Defense Iraq Syria Jack It John Kerry deputy secretary
AP One Minute Headlines Apr 01 2019 19:00 (EDT)

AP Radio News

02:00 min | 1 year ago

AP One Minute Headlines Apr 01 2019 19:00 (EDT)

"Concerns about blocking the board or I'm Jacky Quin with an AP news minute. Some economists and politicians are expressing concern about President Trump's threat to shut down the border with Mexico to stop illegal immigration US. Shaeber of commerce says the US and Mexico trade about one point seven billion dollars in goods daily closing the border would be at debacle in threaten five million American jobs and our saga megani? Reporting in MandA, North Dakota police are working to identify a suspect in the killings of four people at a property management company. Police chief Jason Ziegler says they're reviewing potential clue. There was multiple syrup security cameras. We are working on that stuff. Right now. He calls it an isolated incident. Former vice president Joe Biden pushing back against claims, he's touched women a little too affectionately and one supporter. Stephanie carter. The wife of ash Carter says Biden was very reassuring. I'm Jacky Quin. The all new Toyota RAV four asks what if what if your ride was refined Rudman at the same time. Introducing the all new rap four hybrid two hundred eight combined horsepower and standard all wheel drive. Make it the most powerful raft. Four plus with its head turning style. And breakaway speed. It's bound to change the way you think of a hybrid y'all knew wrath for hybrid, so Yoda, let's go places horsepower ratings achieve required premium unleaded gasoline with an octave rating of ninety one premium fuel was not used the forms with agrees. This is firefighter Raphael. Poor yet for firehouse subs. Introducing new firehouse pairs pair, your favorite small sub with a signature side, like the awesome, five cheese, MAC and cheese. And remember a portion of every purchase at firehouse subs goes towards helping first responders firehouse subs. Enjoy more subs saved. More lives. Participating locations only firehouse subs. Donate a minimum of one million dollars in two thousand nineteen to the firehouse subs public safety foundation by donating point one one. And every purchase.

firehouse subs Jacky Quin Joe Biden US Mexico Stephanie carter North Dakota President AP vice president ash Carter Trump Jason Ziegler Toyota Rudman seven billion dollars one million dollars
Ash Carter Shares Lessons From His 'Lifetime Of Leadership' In The Pentagon

On Point with Tom Ashbrook | Podcasts

00:00 sec | 1 year ago

Ash Carter Shares Lessons From His 'Lifetime Of Leadership' In The Pentagon

"Support for this podcast and the following message come from x finnity now you can get enhanced security for your home why find network with x finnity x fi if it's connected it's protected now that simple easy awesome awesome go to xfinity dot com call one eight hundred xfinity or visit a store today to learn more restrictions apply from npr and wb you are boston i'm david folkenflik and this is on point the physical structure of the pentagon was arrested at the outset of world war two and it said it'd be the world's largest office building the leader station there command the world's most fermentable military power and yet they're charger means daunting to defend the united states its allies and it's perceived interests across the globe you're about to hear from a physicist in public servant who rose through the ranks in academia at the pentagon to take the helm this hour on point former secretary of defense ash carter takes us inside the five sided box join us what global hot spots of what issues affecting the military would you like to address those were serving in uniform were civilian defense department employees when ash carter helped run the pentagon what questions have you always wanna ask him now's your chance join us anytime at on point radio dot org or on twitter and facebook at on point radio as i said joining me from wb you are studio in boston is ash carter himself he served as secretary of defense under president obama from twenty fifteen to twenty seventeen after holding top deputy these spots in the clinton in earlier obama years he has also author of the new account of his professional life titled inside the five cited box lessons from a lifetime of leadership in the pentagon currently carter is director of the belfer center for science and international affairs at harvard's kennedy school of government ash carter welcomed on point banks remediated now i've got this big thick book right next me here you hear it i could see it it's filled with insights enact boats and i wanna ask you about a bunch of that i do think that i would like for brief moments turn to the news of the day or at least of the past twenty four hours i talk a little bit about these july fourth celebration in particular because of the president's explicit desire to celebrate the military but also surround himself not only with with veterans there'd be honored but also with a senior leaders of the military themselves what did you make of that as a proposition why didn't watch the parade but as a general matter a the troops should be training for that's their principal purpose and 'em so i would prefer this is not something i would have recommended a i think they should be preparing for war we don't want war but you only way to deter it is to be ready and readiness is very important m i n as far as honoring the military is concerned a newbie feels that more strongly than i do i wish that went on everyday and the way it does you know you go to the airport and people that are are folks board first i can tell you david i don't know what i would have done if i were secretary defense during the vietnam era i couldn't have stood seeing are people treated that way now we do have morial day and veterans day which are dedicated to the military parades and various other ceremonies at that time fourth of july is really about independence of so it's it's a it's a different kind of thing being celebrated my red line 'em would be politicization of the military or a holiday 'em and i know that my colleagues were concerned about that i think that 'em it stayed reasonably professional yesterday said i didn't didn't watch it but generally speaking my my view is the group should be draining for their also seemed to be in and then i wanna move forward but it seems to me is though this present has done a lot to invoke a boat the military wrapped himself it's sort of surround himself with a notion military saying i have the best generals and pointing them with strong support in the case of a gym mad at two major major a being a defense secretary succeeding you but being a playing major roles in administration throughout 'em to what extent do you sense from your former colleagues that they have concerns about the degree to which invokes the military as as part of his appeal the military's never liked politicisation or any hint of politicisation a that's not what they're like remember all of the senior officers now where people did i recommended president obama so i've known these people for a long time jim mattis i'd known for twenty five years john kelly i've done a long time in these are a excellent inexperienced people people and they are the president's generals in the sense but he is the commander in chief but they're not the president's generals in a pulled in any political sense because we have in our country eight professional military it crosses administrations it crosses generations a let tell you a story that's in the book but i sure morning after the election in which donald trump unexpectedly one remember we had nothing to do with the election then i i protected are people and kept are cells myself and the department out of the entire kaleidoscope of the twenty sixteen election with lots of kennedy it's on either side the morning after the election i root short message to the department is i think the first thing out that morning is the country woke up and it said a that we've been in existence for two hundred forty years are country has elected a new president and i expect you to help him and his administration get up to speed and do the best they can in their job that's the kind of spirit we had we had briefings all ready for a new team big binders you know how we do things in the pentagon we've done it before and i thought it was important that we do it professionally only standard and that was respected by everyone in the department that's the way the department of defense behaves it stands apart from politics it's been an important principle of the united states in one of the reasons why it's so good other people get their militaries mixed up in politics and a sacrifice military excellence we can't afford that we have china russia iran and north korea terrorism that's where people need to be training all the time and that's where military turn needs to stay focused on its military tasks and they get they get political leadership they needed the president is the commander in chief of the military that's a serious principal so he is at the top of the chain of command by the way the secretaries number two that chain of command so i'm getting a lot of calls and feedback people interested in in asking you questions talking a little bit but i wanna play a clip that sort of speaks to a little bit of the comedy in this sort of partners from politics to a degree that you're describing even as you know to some degree when you're at that senior level that you were at the politics intrudes in various ways here's former secretary of defense jim mattis speaking at the unveiling of your ass carter's portrait at the pentagon just last year he remember talking with you in twenty fifteen at stanford university rusty shortly after prison obama had decided denominate you delete the pentagon still recall you and i standing around the sun let campus as we bid farewell to one another little annoying one day we would shake hands again in washington dc you were on your way back to the pentagon and i began praying for you immediately so it was month once more into the fray for you this time you it'd be are secretary a job which fater providence said well prepared do fate or providence we have a call now from a new orleans louisiana is something i'm gonna go ahead and go i'm just gonna say jim mattis i knew what he was a major and he was an aide do the then deputy secretary of defense in the nineteen nineties announces his victory and we used to sleep on the floor of the secretaries plane overseas trips together that's how long i know jim since he was a major and how glamorous life where there was a sad moment no doubt already patty were gonna get you on now go ahead what's your question for the former secretary hello hello i'm curious if you could speak to the concept of the pentagon's 'em perceived across a lot of different media a the conspiratorial concept of the military industrial complex and all the conspiracy theory that that involves all right well patty thank you call ash carter before you answer that i wanna play the clip that that sort of a a inspires that that thinking in some ways the warnings from president eisenhower in his farewell speech in the white house nineteen sixty one in those warnings about good ever since even at the height of the cold war eisenhower's is flagging his fears about the build up of the military industrial complex the need it together the armed forces and defense contractors and the council of governments we must car guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence whether saw or i'm sought by the military industrial complex the potential for the disastrous rise misplaced power exists and wilbur says we must never let the weight of this combination in danger are liberties or democratic let me actually bring the question this way ash carter at the two people who are currently in was most recently acting as secretaries of defense a both came if i'm not mistaken up from major military contractors patrick shanahan says boeing mark asper raytheon is this a in some ways suggest a a to close and eating together of of those seemingly independent collaborators will first of all let's start with why do we have the military industrial industrial complex and the first part in the first place eisenhower's right but the the reason for it is we don't build anything in the pentagon a we don't make are weapons that's what's the soviet union's way didn't work out very well for them but he american way has been contract with private industry to make are military equipment to the tune of these days on around four hundred billion dollars a year that is a huge amount of money and so it is reasonable concern that that much money be well spent nb fairly spent the corruption that sort of thing that is one of the jobs of the secretary defense and also by the way i was the so called weapons are the number three years years before that which did all the weapons by now when i sat at the business table width the people who were gonna build a airplane or shipper something from my point of view i sat on the warfighters end the taxpayers side of the table and we would have tough dealings and a contract negotiations and that sort of thing 'em a but in another sense the defense industry was they unavoidable partner do us one of the reasons we have the finest fighting force the world has ever known is we have good people that's the first thing the second thing is that we have good technology a an we have decided not to build it in the government we've decided contract outside and that's a better system in the sensitive service better than lord knows the soviet union was served but there is a danger there and when you're on the taxpayers side you have to be tough and remember that you're on the tax payers in the warfighter fighter side of the table now they're ashfield on hold and ask carter on the side of the tax burden warfighters were gonna pick up right after this break we're discussing the pentagon national security in the military industrial complex the former secretary of defense that's ash carter join the conversation what do you wanna know about how priorities are set the pentagon what role should usa might play in shaping the twenty first century world i'm david folkenflik and this is on point this message comes from on points sponsor indeed when it comes to hiring you don't have time to waste you need help getting to your shortlist of qualified candidates fast with indeed speed posted job in minutes set up screener questions than zero in on qualified candidates and when you need to hire fast accelerate your results with sponsored jobs new users can try for free when you sign up at indeed dot com slash npr podcast terms conditions and quality standards apply no matter what you've got planned you need a song of the summer this week on npr's pop culture happy hour we are rounding up experts from npr music we will play a ton of songs lift your spirits might even find your next favorite artist that's npr's pop culture happy hour listen and subscribe and this is on point i'm david folkenflik were discussing the pentagon and the career spent largely would end well much within its five walls with a former secretary defense carter he's author of the new book inside the five sided box lessons from a lifetime of leadership in the pentagon you couldn't join our conversation what questions do you have for the man who used to run the military what questions you have about his time is present obama's chief military adviser what crises do you want answers about follow us on twitter and facebook at on point radio 'em quickly let's just do this quick lightning round so we addressed it and then moved to a couple of more things but i think where someone in your book i i did wanna ask talked me very briefly at a at they mentioned the to acting deities that follow jim at this or at most recently run the pentagon patrick shanahan for a brief time mark asper currently acting secretary of defense both came et sequentially shanahan shanahan from boeing mark asper from racing on that reflected degree of two great coziness of between a those that would get contracts from the military and those that get the give the contracts well i i there have been people before who have worked in the defense industry before they become secretary of defense i don't think that's disqualifying by itself but you gotta remember when you're in there you're the boss and eisenhower was right in the sense we always have to be cautious about about a such a large industry that is entirely dependent upon the government and members of congress who have an interest in it and a a a a a people who yes have worked in it and then work in the pentagon or vice versa and i was always very careful about the revolving door of extremely strict about who the boss was 'em you gotta remember that they work for you you're the customer and you represent the tax payer in the warfighter and as long as you're willing it'd be tough and be end to a deal with what is inevitably they get pressed come after you and members of congress come after you and so forth you gotta be tough so you need someone whatever their level of expertise is who remembers who the boss's boss is the taxpayer and the warfighter and very briefly the fact they're acting defense secretary is this is that disruptive not really it's not ideal in if you think of it inside and outside david inside the place is a very disciplined place it's got a deep keel it'll keep going without leadership at the top confirmed leadership the top which you don't get without a leader is moving into the future and we need to be let into the future remember warfares changing technology's changing were used to being the best but that's not a birthright it's a competitive world we need to continue to strive to be the best and it without a leader the place can't move forward i'm not worried about moving backward can't move forward so i i i am concerned about it so speaking about bosses and moving ford wants things i really enjoyed in reading her book was sort of you're origin stories and how you got to be such a major figure a at the pentagon indefens policy and there isn't early boss involved in nineteen eighty three a precedent reagan addressed the country nationally televised speech from the oval office he called for defending united states against any first strike attacks on the soviet union died by developing was titled the strategic defense initiative system it naturally game the nickname star wars that means share with you a vision of the future which offers hope it is that we embark on a program to counter they are some soviet missile threat with measures veteran defensive let us turn to the various drinks in technology that spawned are great industrial trail base ended up giving us the quality of life we enjoy today what is free people could lives secure and the knowledge but their security did not respond the threat of instant you as retaliation to deter soviet attack we could intercept and destroy strategic ballistic missiles before they reached our own soil that are allies now there is a young scholar physicist by trade who sort of what's that say hey felt like you kick the tires on this and tell us what you find and you will appreciate and that'll be that what did you find what what's the consequence well what i found was it wouldn't work in forty years later we still don't know how to do it's not like it's not a wonderful idea it'd be able to have in space lasers or neutral particle beam capable of shining down on a let's say russian missile is it flies through space from russia the united states that would be a great thing and i was a physicist i was in my twenties it was one of the first things i had done i had worked for caspar weinberger in the department of defense and then i was asked by the congress to do this examination of this subject was this possible or not and i just finished the report saying it wasn't technically possible according to the physics of the time instill actually when president reagan gave that speech and so instantly i was catapulted into the national spotlight completely unprepared and terrified i didn't i thought i'd just told the truth and all of a sudden i realized that i had antagonised the white house of the united states of america so it was a scary time for me but redeem the whole thing and this is kind of a lesson for young people and for all of us is that this senior people of both parties stuck out for me and they stopped anyone from harming me ruining my career trying to you know punish me anyway they said look this kid is a scientist he told the truth most scientists believe that this is actually right it was a it's a nice idea the president has but we don't know how to do it and those people who stuck out for me who included for example former secretary of defense jim slesinger who had been richard nixon's secretary of defense charlie towns who invented the laser laser and who is a close friend of president reagan so these were people who might have just let me hang out there but they didn't they stuck up for young guy and it's really that which kept me in defense because it told me that in public life there were good people and then if you did the right thing or tried to do the right thing a you get stuck up for and so when i years later is i rose through the ranks and all lately becoming secretary defense i always remember the one of my jobs was just stick up for people people who were doing the right thing you mentioned the defense budget defense contractors before i had and stick up for my people when they were having rough business dealings with the defense industry and they were getting attacked by congress or by in the press you have to stick up for people who were doing the right thing it's a very important job of senior leadership about take a call but i did wanna ask when i was covering congress back in the late nineties there were is always the claim i don't know if apocryphal are not that major contractors had subcontractors contractors in all four hundred and thirty five house districts as a wave insuring that they could always pointed jobs when when things came up for a budget vote is that true or is that just now they do and they they somehow think that by doing that they'll that yes they build some congressional support and after all congress's coordinate constitution the people who ultimately have the money but that's not really how we do things a when i was the top weapons buyer i made decisions and all my people made decisions of according to the best value for the taxpayer in front of we really believe that yeah i get calls from members of congress and i'd say thank you i hear what you have to say but then i go back to my job which is usually to run eight free and open unfair competition and it's fine if they could call and say that there's somebody in their district who has an interest in it and so forth but we never let that that affect their decision making and when i saw that that's where the appearance of that or the reality that in lower ranks i get rid of people on the other hand when people were doing the right thing and were getting attacked politically i just stick up for him so there is a certain amount that's necessary as i said are system is one where we buy from private industry but you gotta remember you're doing it on behalf of the public and you need to stick up for the public interest and let's take a call now from boston massachusetts not unfamiliar city do a guest as carter peter is calling we're questions for the former secretary of defense he said i think you're a curious a listening to you you're comments about a particular about warfighting new secretary defense just explained to me i i am a combat veteran marine fresh foods in combat in vietnam tell me how when the movie boats to render then take somebody rainy in both surrounded then put up a fight there is no taxpayer of all how did you enhance outlaw fighting ability nobody was court martialed secondly you you you you applied the politically correct dumbing down of the physical requirements in the military service women could a what what did they do it like women and like officers base school they lowered all the standard so they could pass things and i i'm curious how you i i understand the secretary defense where did you ever hit the water fighting capability of troops are theater why well let's let's let's let me answer you've answered the public good crush mister secretary let's let you take a mind when i started with a question about iran and then we moved to winter to others will try to take them in relatively quick order okay well first of all first marines are terrific so thank you you're you're own serves you ask about these ten sailors they were taken by the ukrainians i was yes i was in office during that time somebody was punished for that a it namely the person who is conducting that operation they lost track of where they were end sailed into uranian waters a the uranium sees them a we reacted right away we had f eighteens over uranian territory by the time that are sailors were detained other ten album i'm fortunately the art diplomats were able to get the released within hours of but it would have been real trouble because we are are troops have the right the self defense which is you indicate these ten sailors did not a did not defend themselves they did give themselves up 'em and a they were released a later and i'm sorry to say that they did blunder into that situation and they were punished for that it was just pour navigation import leadership so you're not right but people were punished up people were punished i eat and then you ask about women in service in his that politically correct 'em and it's not politically correct it's just correct a the reason to open all military positions to women isn't because they're gonna get him it's because they're half the population and we have all volunteer force an i want the best people in every job as some the best most qualified person for the job happens to be a woman that's fine now you said we changed the definition of qualification to allow women that is not true and if you go back and you're eating my initial statement when i made the announcement opening up all combat positions to women a i said we are gonna change the standards so this is a talent management decision it's not a political decision a and its consequences the fact we all have it all volunteer force lasting you say is well what did i do to make are forced better i went out sector defense i give you two answers to that one is you know i i'm a secretary defense but i'm gonna give credit everybody in the department 'em here's what we did make the country stronger a few things a one it was a big initiative of mind to rebuild build the bridges between the pentagon and the technology sector that's an important thing for the future i wasn't important thing to move more forces into the asia pacific to confront china to make are first war plan in a generation against russia to defeat isis in iraq in syria a i'm in a to keep going with the program in afghanistan of building are forces i'm in favor of keeping do so they're lovely adding a couple of days to yet where you're getting a were getting a lot there a i i did you know you you you mentioned iran last month the president trump abruptly called off military strike that he had called against the run up do you run instead shutdown usa drone aircraft which is to say no with piloting are on board that aircraft here's what trump told chuck todd two weeks ago on nbc's meet the press i'm not looking for anything there is it'll be obliteration like you've never seen before but i'm not looking to do that but you can't have a nuclear weapon earlier this week to iran said that it will soon exceed its uranium enrichment level a that was agreed to under the twenty fifteen nuclear deal that the us was part of that trump withdrew from trump responded on wednesday night to the iranian new announcement with tweet be careful with the threats run they can come back to bite you like nobody has been bitten before now a escorting you were involved actually i is i remember eating in your book in sort of planning for what a war with iran would look like how realistic how likely do you think actual conflict will be i don't think intentional war is likely you heard the president's saying he doesn't want worm self i don't think uranian earn any position their economies in bad shape their internal politics is complicated owning anybody wants and intentional or what you have to worry about is unintentional war that is us us clashing in some way uranian doing something they'd go crosses the line there in the gulf war through their proxies or something being because were wound up really tight a in the president's right will win i'm confident that nobody wants war there but uranian and he did know will win and they'll lose some of the planning that i did particular when deputy in by the way jim mattis wasn't centcom was intended to make sure that's true that's what would you expect us to do you expect us to be training any equipping ourselves to do to defeat are enemies if that proves necessary that would surely be the case with iran but but nobody wants to war with iran and you're the president's say that and i don't i don't think uranium think they're in any position they certainly got another don't lose we've only got about two minutes left in this segment but i did wanna give you chance to afghanistan feels a little bit like the forever war right like we went in in late twenty two thousand one we still have i think something like nine thousand troops there is there any way in which it makes still makes sense really to be there this long is there any way in which it is feasible to think of drawing down in the way that we ended up having dinner on you know it's good question and a i am for staying in afghanistan not substituting fifty afghan secure security forces but continuing detritus did not try to succeed in supporting them so that they keep a mood of order in a place because we don't want terrorist attacks originate there now we don't have as you said tens of thousands or over a hundred thousand troops there anymore and they're not doing the mainstay of the fighting fighting they're they're supporting me afghan forces i'm in favor of that because i don't want another attack in the united states and i think also that it's not bad have a place in that part of the world firm which we can operate member we we couldn't have killed bin laden if we didn't have a base from which to get to about about it a lot of years ago well it is but you you whenever you have a friend in a dangerous part of the world that's a good thing so there's an upside to beat in afghanistan provided we are fighting and dying every week were only supporting afghan security forces so yeah i know a lot of people say they're tired of it it's been twelve years and that's true it's a long time but there's a reason for being there and i'm for a continuing to support the afghans short thank you for that you're listening there to ash carter were discussing you us national security with a man is dedicated most of his life death thinking about ways to protect the country street he of course is the former secretary of defense you can join our conversation what questions do you have about america's role in combating terror groups like isis and maintaining stability around the world also talked about some truly gee whiz developments in defense i'm david folkenflik and this is on point hey it's been in amery and we're the host of endless thread the show featuring stories found on the website read it but you don't have to be a writer to enjoy the kinds of stories we tell like a couple experimenting with non monogamy for board game that may have predicted be attacks on pearl harbor subscribed the endless thread on apple podcasts or wherever you listen if you love this show and checkout life kit tools to help you get it together thinking is that friend who always had great advice on everything from how to invest to how to get great workout subscribed to life kit all guys forget episodes on every topic all in one place find it in apple podcasts or at npr dot org slash life kit this is on point i'm david folkenflik were discussing the history the pentagon and the role of usa military in today's world with a physicist former secretary of defense and now wants more author ash carter you could join the conversation what questions do you have for my guest follow us on twitter and find us on facebook at on point radio with us in studio up at wb you are in boston is ash carter he was secretary of defense center present obama from twenty fifteen to twenty seventeen his new book is called inside the five cited box lessons from a lifetime of leadership in the pentagon we've got some calls rolling in this call from a key waters ken is calling from new york ken what's on your mind i thank you i'm curious to know what the secretary thinks about the new trends torch cyberwarfare where we've been leading the there or attempted intrusions against our power grid just a few days ago eyesore newspaper articles schools about us actively in trudy will to power grid to suppress just see that in the newspaper on i'm quite curious to see a previous on on how this will play out in and whether it should be quite so public i well it is one of the frontiers of warfare 'em i you ask whether it should be public or not i'm in favor of that and it whether there is a lot of the cyber offense and defense was a hidden and people were afraid to talk about it and i wrote the first public defense strategy towards cyberwarfare so i think we gotta acknowledge it's part of our future and it's gonna be part of warfare and that means we need to get better defense and we need to get better at all fence when are networks i'm not gonna sit here and tell you were secured today i wish i could tell you that but i can't and i frankly wish we were better at all fence and better at a punishing people who attacked us or or capable threatening to attack us cyber seems mysterious to most people but you to me when people ask is it a cyber attack and attack i said attack isn't attacked the sector at advance i'm supposed to defend are people against attack and that means cyber to and i wouldn't necessarily respond to a cyber attack with cyber anymore than when people flew airplanes and or buildings we flew airplanes in their buildings a to a response we may respond in some other way entirely but sadly it's part of our future 'em and it's a good question caller but i think they captured it very well it's here to stay he can just very briefly before we let you go it sounded to me from the question is though you had reservations about the usa engaging in that a at what what's your thoughts on that well a computer science professor at cornell unexplained done some work for the geo d in this in this area in the past in my concern is basically the king escalates would get a situation where the united states is actively talking about hacking ridge in iran russia in a we know the tip there or attempts to hack into our kelly bitch bitch an existential threat really the power grid in the united states were seriously compromised but i think the consequences this will just be extreme an insulating franklin's there were a single we can actually starting to deploy these kinds of weapons and others or two it sounds like kenya you're concern is that in some ways were amplifying flying at the possibility of greater conflict in terms of in ways in which were doing certain kinds of offensive maneuvers of her own things can infer that inciteful un interesting calling announces what do you say mr sector kendra right i mean we can't just go pill mill a into this new era of all buyer sells a there have to be some and we have to leave seek some international understandings about what appropriate conduct is we need to have some understanding with industry about the tech industry especially about what their responsibility is to democracy to protection of are people a and to civilized behavior on social media and other things things so he's exactly right he obviously knows the technology very well and if all this is the wild west and were only a in the defense department doing our thing all buyer sells i i'm not for that iser i think we have to talk to the rest of government needs to be particularly the diplomacy side needs to be involved in these nommik side and i think we need to do it with other countries that are like like minded otherwise will have a free for all and remember when we had nuclear weapons and develop nuclear weapons long ago the people who develop them made it their responsibility to also work on arms control nonproliferation missile missile defenses which we discussed other ways of protecting ourselves so i think the computer scientist experts like the one who's calling in a are absolutely right and i want them in the game not only working on weapons spins and defending ourselves and responding and all that sort of warfare stuff but also in making a world in which it's not a wild west is too dangerous i associate myself with the views of the caller so so let's let's in interesting pivot let's briefly touch on a expansion of the rounds and which con back can occur in june twenty eighteen president trump directed the department of defense begin establishing a six branch of the military sixth branch to be known as space force vice president mike pence officially unveiled a plan to much later during the speech at the pentagon president made it clear that are ultimate objective is to create a new branch of are military that's separate from an equal to five other branches today the department of defense will release a report outlining the first stages of our administration's plan to implement the president's guidance in turn his vision into a reality ash carter you're no longer running the show but why are we doing this house sound you're the physics guy who blew the whistle salon on star wars how how sound is this well it's very similar to cyber it is they future arena of warfare it's actually current arena of warfare and we need to be good at it but i think we also need to be prudent about how we approach it in so this is an area like when we talked about cyber where some discussion among a country's about what is appropriate and sending some limits on how we compete in space face i present a bum you may be interested to know also a heads several times asked me about a space force fees hughes attractive v idea to cause he recognize that it was like not an important part of future warfare in that are military depended upon space in not weapons in space but a says communication satellites navigation satellites reconnaissance satellites and so forth so he was concerned about it my response to him was we could do what he wanted which is give appropriate attention to space without a space force what bothers me about a space force is when you set up a new bureaucracy in washington and man i know what that looks like you spend years deciding what year uniform looks like in what you're anthem is and so forth and it's not it's a distraction and it it people talking about tooth detail and military things this is more tale and less to so i'm wolfer paying attention to other problems of a war in space and and including the diplomatic aspects of trying to avoid going too far in that area in giving more emphasis to it in the pentagon i wouldn't do it by creating a space force i would not have advised and i did not have vice president obama a and he took that advice although he took it i think reluctantly present trump decided to go forward with it but it's it's not really the right managerial approached emphasizing emphasizing space who's and you did right interestingly about you're engagements with president obama on certain things where you agreed in somewhere you disagreed i wanna turn a little bit more matters on cure on earth a in recent days in recent weeks you've heard various people call for reconsideration of of the draft and many of them can it's her office at pete buddha judge himself the a m self a veteran a said he'd like a all americans to perform some form of national service of which military could be significant part on how you look at the you had an all volunteer army is usually described how do you feel about such calls disservice idea that we should all be bound together in certain kinds of uniform a participation to the patient a in the american experiment well a four million young people turn eighteen every year end the military only needs a quarter of a million album and i wanted to and i think every secretary defense will feel this way i wanna pick the people i want i don't want the picked for me by draft so i don't wanna draft i'm i'm very comfortable comfortable with people having to register for a draft because you could imagine some very exotic situations in which would want to restore the draft but also because it creates exactly the spirit you're talking about a david which is a sense since among every young person in their family the national duty now if you wanna take those four million people and not let him go to college or go out to work or whatever and you wanna have them do national service you think about that but that's a four million kids a year that's a lot of dormitories you gotta build a lot of of proctors you need have and what did they gonna do are they gonna take the jobs of construction workers hers and build roads and build bridges a that doesn't seem like suddenly it's gonna be popular on the other hand if they're just gonna go out and flip burgers with a uniform on and that's not much different from the way things are done today we don't need them in the military and i'm sorry to say david you gotta just remember that as the person who is in charge of all volunteer force when i look at those four million young people sadly half problem don't meet the physical requirements for the military mostly because of obesity and another half i'm having a graduated from high school and therefore don't meet are intellectual qualifications and then you get today twos and drug use and other kinds of of things and so the reality is that are military is carefully chosen that a quarter million is carefully chosen from those four million 'em i i think the winner kids come in and are chosen they become accidents citizens they become leaders there button down there organized they know how to talk to you i'm not just talking to their cell phone a all day they get up in the morning they go to work and i'm limit the i'd let idly yeah yeah well you know the visible tattoos thing is a real well it's a real problem today his kids they're wonderful recruit and but at fourteen they got a visible tattoo and we allow some of that but their limits to what we could allow you to have for example you have the skull and crossbones on the back of your hand and were sending you to go into a peacekeeping mission or something it's it's i mean there are some legitimate concerns here it it's it's a problem because so many young people go out and get a tattoo and the recruiters would say to me oh jesus kids just great in every way really wants to be soldiers sailors airmen marines but he has the power spelled out is not a yeah so if you're a parent tell your kids not to get tattoos all right well let's take a call now from stanford connecticut peter go right ahead a yes i was curious that any defense we i've heard that votes are 'em are weapons they're still a hair trigger alerts but these icbm's end the old technology and i'm wondering how dangerous the russians my number's called the show you how are they keeping any safer and it wasn't a cold or like years ago willie safer than it was in the cold war but it'll never be safe as long as their nuclear weapons you know these things are in the headlines and the questioners absolutely right he's hurting the headlines every day thank god you gotta remember that nuclear weapons are the most fearsome weapon developed nothing since then all the money we've spent all the money the other countries of spit on military science and art since nineteen forty five nothing as fearsome as the nuclear weapon has been in bed at night you say could something suddenly happen and here's an important point we build the one of the reasons we spend a lot of money on her nuclear force is to make sure it can survive are first strike so we don't have to act quickly we build an arsenal they absorb let's say rushing attack of god forbid there is such thing instill retaliate against russia any idea is if the russians know for sure that they can't get away with attacking united states with nuclear weapons that major consequences of themselves the hope is and this is been born out per per seventy years they won't do it in the first place but it is a very uncomfortable situation is long as their nuclear weapons i think the most solemn duty of any secretary defense at any present united states do everything he or she can to make sure nuclear weapons were never used you can't forget ever a that they're the they're the most fearsome thing ash carter we have about a minute and a half left but i want to address one thing one of these a anecdotes you telling her story was you're frustration irritation from both the policy in and really a a a sort of procedural point of view what you called table dropping present had promised to get rid of get mo guantanamo bay is placed a whole a suspected of a do not being tried in federal court of a terrorist acts of involvement in tourists movements end you said even as he basically were rolling it out the people would keep table dropping it would keep showing up and papers as you go the oval office meetings what was you're exception that was your problem with that a table drop heat is when somebody comes to a national security council meeting in puts down in front of the principals sitting around that table a piece of paper that they've never seen before proposing posing a policy it's a cheap trick it's not fair to the president's it's not fair to the cabinet members and i really objected to it and it was very rare but when it happened did i tell a story in the book it happened in one the subject happened to be get but that's coincidental 'em and the i just balled up and threw it at the staffer who put it in front of me and said don't table drop expletive a it's the foul a it's a foul so let me ask you ten seconds let couldn't that be seen somebody trying to insist the president at least consider keeping one of his earliest promises on the campaign trail well look you run up to meetings people are i'm happy to have people make proposals including ones they know i won't agree with an end when the president went around the table sometimes people just don't agree with the secretary defense but not the table drop but not surpri are not fair to the president's and that'll be that'll be the final word from ash carter he's former secretary defense under president obama author of inside the five side of box lessons from a lifetime of leadership in the pentagon we had a tip jar in case you used acronyms you didn't so you're gonna walk up with all the money came in on great to have you with us today good to be with you thank you continue the conversation get

boston kennedy school of government president facebook harvard belfer center director clinton obama npr twitter ash carter secretary physicist united states pentagon david folkenflik four hundred billion dollars two hundred forty years
Inside the Pentagon, With Ash Carter

The President's Inbox

00:00 sec | 1 year ago

Inside the Pentagon, With Ash Carter

"Welcome to the president's inbox is see if our podcast about the foreign policy challenges facing the United States. I'm Jim linsay to rector studies at the council on foreign relations. This week's topic is the Pentagon in how it works. With me this week to discuss the department defense is former secretary of defense ash Carter a Rhodes scholar, who holds a PHD in physics secretary Carter is currently director of the Belfer center for science and international affairs at Harvard's, Kennedy School of government is also a member of the board of directors here at the council on foreign relations. Secretary Carter is held numerous positions at the Pentagon over his three decade plus career, most notably he was under secretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics from two thousand nine to two thousand eleven deputy secretary defense from two thousand eleven to two thousand thirteen in secretary of defense from two thousand fifteen to two thousand seventeen he's the only person to failed. All three of those specific jobs is latest book inside the five sided box lessons. Ray lifetime of leadership in the Pentagon comes out today. Secretary Carter congrats on the publication of your book. And thank you for. Joining me today pre shit. You're having me, and please go ahead. And call me ask since you and I've known each other for a long time. Let me begin with book and ask preps. A basic think important question what do you sit down to write it? I wanted to provide to the ordinary citizen and maybe even the Spiring young person, contemplating serving in the government, a user's guide to the Pentagon, people see the Pentagon from an airplane coming into national airport, or from the roadside and have a mixture of admiration for sure and support, but also kind of all and mystery and I wanted to take them inside and just explain how everything works our war plans written Hauer wars conduct. How do you hire promote retain and fire if necessary will? Millions of people I had you spend an manage, what is essentially half of the federal government of the United States, the book talks about some parts of the world and how we prepare for potential conflict with parts of the world. But this is not a geo political story, mostly mostly a management, and in inside view. And it's not a memoir of ash Carter. Although it uses the fact that I spent almost forty years since my first job in the department of defense, and what that long time has meant is that I've been in almost every part of it. And so there hasn't been anybody else as you indicated in your introduction, who's touched every part of it, and I thought to use that vantage to take the reader in every part of it and satisfied their curiosity about wasn't really feel like what is it looked like out of people do those things. And that's what the book does. How one makes the department of defense run. And I was struck in reading the prologue to the book. The following passage you write the DOD also employs more men and women than Amazon McDonald's. Fedex target in General Electric combined. It conducts more research and development than apple Google, and Microsoft again, combined in it manages more than half the US federal budget, excluding entitlements in interest on the national debt, a budget of more than seven hundred billion dollars, a, some larger than the GDP of Sweden close, quote note later on you note that the DOD budget is larger than the GDP of all, but eight countries, how does one running organization, so large, and so complex got all the parts that in a sense, any other enterprise hasn't, so I shared the past of any other leader, only much much bigger. So let's start with the people. Art gym. You've got. Those millions of people, and what that means is that you have to tend to the recruiting part, and let me just tell you for example, that we have a very large fraction of our recruits, come from just six states in the United States, just six. Now, what does that tell you, it tells you that we're not adequately present in the other forty four states, and what that means is that we have a big opportunity to big responsibility to get out there and people from those other states. So that's the response that is responsibility of the secretary of defense. You know, I'm associated with my decision to open up all military positions to women, which had not been done previously other secretaries had thought about it, and then shied away, and I, I made the decision and the principal reason for that decision was women are half the population, Jim, and we had an all own tier force. And so, I. Pete labor markets talent. And I can't afford to take half the Palin pool out of my intake that doesn't mean women get to do whatever they want, and they don't have to be equally qualified, but it does mean I'm not gonna take him out of the pool and that was the basis of my decision. Now, let's go to money. How do you spend three quarters of a trillion dollars every year? Well, I explained in the book how to manage as I did. What is very pundits acquisition bureaucracy, how to avoid having those embarrassing cost over runs that call into question, the whole integrity of the defense system, and making implies secretary defense can't go out and ask for more money for defense as we're inclined to do. And I did with a straight face. If you know, your money at the same time, how do you respond quickly to war when you're in Afghanistan, and you realize that the troops are either not affective or are being injured because of the lack of something. How do you make the system go faster? I tell about that. And I talked about technology how we build bridges Silicon Valley and other tech jobs. So there's all this management stuff, and I'm not even talking about were here, yet, I'm talking about just running the institution, you get to war. He have to deal with the pace of operations. The fact that were is constantly changing, you've got a president to serve and make sure he's comfortable with which doing you make mistakes every once in a while, and you have to take responsibility for them, you have to get allies and partners to do their part. You may need to make sure that enemies. And potential enemies know exactly where you're coming from the consequences for them will be if they cross you this is a how to guide to all of those things 'cause I've done them all got help me and thirty seven years in the department. The department of defense because you've just sort of spoken about the people below you in the challenges that come to your desk from inside the organization, but obviously department defense exists in a broader political context, you have to report to the White House, you have members of congress who have oversight responsibilities and appropriate funds for the department. You also have the sort of public facing aspect of being secretary defense, you have to deal with the media. How hard is it to do? Each those tests on net. Did you vote in the book a chapter to each and I'm struck that the title of the chapter, the White House. Reads the White House is on the line. Can you have a sense of sort of what it's like interacting with the White House by which you mean not just the president, your case President Obama, the broader White House staff, first of all, I seen sector defenses since my very first boss. Casper winder have issues with the White House staff. And so that's been a. Of staple of sectors control longtime. I have to say I never had difficulties with President Obama. My no, my staff may have had troubles with his staff from time to time and quarreled about this that, you know, the thing but I got along very well with him and found that he listened to what I said, and I only make that point, Jim because some like predecessors complained that they felt micromanaged by the White House staff, I did not. However, I regard that as something you have to earn another words if you don't want the president, turn to his staff and say, check up on what DOD is doing. You have to do your homework, and such that the president tends have confidence that would you send him as a proposal or say to him proposal? You've really thought out in the way that smart guy and Bracha of smart guy that all the presidents, I've known. Have been smart people. They know they're left holding the bag in the end, and they wanna make sure you've done your homework. I thought that was a pretty respectable request on the part of the secretary of defense during the Mike course of my time with serving his secretary defense. I felt like I tried to an ultimately did earn his confidence that when I sent him something I had looked at it through his eyes and made sure it was sensible through. His is the other thing you have to do besides giving them a product you can trust, and that isn't doesn't have thought through by you is not trapping publicly. I never ever put out to the press, or the congress something, I wanted the president to agreed to in the hope of getting him to agree to it and to make sure nobody who worked for did that I tended to keep those things to very close circle myself job done for the chairman air grows in Bach. My chief of staff a few. You. He bought work the deputy very few people knew about things of consequence that I was going to take the president before the president decided let me give you an example. Jim. When I went to the president asked him to slow the withdraw troops from Afghanistan, and in fact, increase somewhat the number of troops in Afghanistan. I knew that would be a hard sell that was against everything. He had can't paying twice on which was winding down the wars there. And so, I knew that even though he wanted to do the right thing as always that I was asking do something very difficult for him. And the niece I could do was keep our deliberations secret. So the day he announced that he was essentially changing course in Afghanistan, he asked Joe done for me to come and stand behind him in the White House while he made the announcement and I went over and I went in the Oval Office with Joe Joe Joe. In the car on the way over. We thought the boss was probably going to be grouchy because he, he was doing something that we knew he wished. He didn't have to do and let the law office beforehand abomb flash that big white smile and trouble. Yeah. And, and he said he said, you know what? We're the only three people in this whole building. You know what I'm about to say? He was so pleased just by the fact itself that it hadn't leaked and he was gonna get the INSEE before anybody else had their say, and I thought I that too and put those things together doing my homework and not trapping him. Then he didn't sick his staff on me anyway, let's talk the other. Other. View namely on Capitol Hill. Right. With some criticism about congressional oversight efforts, noting that some of the more recent provisions written into law by members of congress have done more harm than good. How would you assess the state of relations in the Pentagon, and Capitol Hill? I always had really good relations with John McCain, and I really miss him. He was a source of strength and continuity up there and doesn't mean he always loved what I did when I made a mistake he didn't balmy out for it. But I, I love that kind of leader up there and unfortunately they get fewer and fewer seams over time. But I you know, it is, is the third branch of government. You've got to work with them. I don't question that or, or a grudge that on top of that, they are the ones who have the money. Now, what I do object to, and I wrote about it in the book was that in the eight years, where I was the number three the number to the number one in apartment in those eight Yay. Years. We got a budget on time. Exactly. Once people why that's a problem for the department of defense, why this sort of government by continuing resolution creates real harm to the department. If the herky-jerky budgeting does two things are very difficult from a managerial point of view. The first is inefficient because you can't make long range plans. And you all know anybody who has a phone plan knows that you get a better deal, if you buy a long term phone plan that if you buy short-term from plan almost everything we buy and the defense department is like that. And so if you're forced to shorter and shorter timelines and shorter and shorter contract timelines as you're spending money. It gets inefficient and the other thing is that it gets in the way of strategy because strategy is about being able to take the long view and building steadily the military the future. And you can't do that, either. You're trying to fire flight to get through a single year. So it's very bad for defense. And that's why I what I lust for is an appropriations Bill, would I always got who's an authorization, Bill for listeners who don't know the difference, appropriations, Bill is where the money is authorization is essentially a regulatory Bill and I would get thirty five hundred pages of regulations every year like clockwork, they would pass that and call that the defense Bill, but then there'd be no money. Now, I don't mind regulation. I don't mind oversight and so forth, but thirty five hundred pages does seem like a lot. It's cumulative. And then on top of that, just to respond to something, you said every once in a while there's something in there that is spectacularly wrong headed from a management point of view, because in general, the people who write, it haven't managed anything at all still less the department of defense, and so without consulting us and in a surprise because they write this thing in the dark of night. Don't tell us what's going to be in it. We get ideas. So one year I got a proposal to add more boxes to my acquisition physician. So I do to obey the law added more boxes even though I didn't think they were needed, and then a couple of years later, they decided that the bureaucracy was bloated and one. No. So those. Yeah. But meanwhile, I've got build the Joint Strike Fighter Bill two hundred fifty eight fives in custody. Afghantistan. Forward operating base. Correct. I'm sorry. Yes. Support operating base or outpost games. I gotta do real stuff in the midst of all this. Well, you're moving around the boxes in my office. I don't really appreciate it relations with the press at least one of the story telling the bookie. So after prisoner Bama announced general Denver, chairman of the joint chiefs, recommendation, you had made strongly, there was a Rooney's report out there in the news media, that he hadn't been top choice. How did you find sort of dealing with the news media in your vision is obviously, they're important way to connect with the broader public? And also, I would imagine also people on Capitol Hill errors and live by the press really rare and the only reason that I mentioned that one in my book, was that it really ticked me off to have a lie or an error about Joe done for because the best decision I made secretary defense was point. Joe Dunford as chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, so I'm particularly thin skinned in anything having to do with Joe. And that's why I told that story in general, the presses light congress, it's, it's a fact of life, so you have to deal with it. But Secondly, most of these people are very well intendant, many of them are, are. Well, informed. Many of them are quite brave. They bid with our troops. If you're covering the defense department a serious way, that's a serious commitment, and I admire the people who have come with us, and embedding with us and risk their lives along with troops to report doesn't the principal, vice I give to future secretary of defense and might be reading this book is don't ever go out there on prepared before I would do a press conference, I would practice I'd have my staff in and we try things out. I respond to a question and realize that I never even answered that question and it deserved to good. Dancer. So I practiced until I had a good and don't be too proud to practice and the other thing is when you've done something new like when I you know, the basically the strategy that was the one that ended up defeating, ISIS or when I made initiative like to open up all military positions. Women, I was careful to have enough opperations security call it so that I got my story out before it leaked because it's really important if you believe you are doing the right thing, and that you have a good logical explanation that people could understand the why you're doing it, why they should agree with you. It's the right thing for the country to do you lay all that out. You wanna get that out first and have them report that if they get something leaked, it's likely to be an early draft or rumor or fragment, and then. When it comes time for the press conference, you spend the whole time trying to say no, that's not what I did it all. That's not what I'm saying. That's what I'm doing it all. Yeah. Clawing back the truth from a bunch of river that has been printed in, in advance. So if you don't go out there cold, don't it, and take the initiative work hard. I wrote my own material of people helping me. But I wrote my own words, I chose them carefully. I committed them to memory. I use them over and over and over again. I mean, how many times did you hear me say lasting defeat devices that because I wanted people to get the idea that is the strategy lasting defeat. That's why we are using going through the laborious task of building Iraqi security, forces and training Syrians, including the Syrian Kurds, which I was always part of the work plan with today's press and noisy environment. You have to say things over and over and over again, to make them stick reputation. I wanna actually just giving you a reference to Islam state maybe pivot for second talk a bit about the challenges, you see facing the defense department, and maybe you could begin by telling the starts charming, one in the book about how you were walking the halls of the Pentagon in heard senior combatant commanders, casually. Referring to crickets. Yeah. I had. Habit of doing something that believe it or not was unusual in defend history where we usually spoke, quite abstractly about military strategy, and I used to tell my senior commanders it all boils down to five things China Russia, Iran. North Korea and terrorism. So let's just go through each those when we had major meetings of the senior commanders, and I which we did about once a quarter and I would sit down there we go through war plans. We'd go through deterrence plans and so forth. And I always say, let's talk about the big five, and if you think about those letters, C R, I K T, I never thought of as an acronym. Only in the Pentagon, does everything become an acronym. And so people were talking about cricket and they crack in this. Yeah. That's the strategy that secretary Carter has using. And you know, to me, it was coming sense, but to them, it was a strategy and to me. It was a way of remembering the Refai things, but to them, it was an acronym. But I understand it. I what they were talking about about crickets, and then I realized it was my own doing. Kiki worried about any one of those five challenges. I worry about China in a fundamental way. Always have because China was not what we did not turn out the way we hoped that can nineteen nineties, and I served back, then obviously than the eighties to. It was week, then therefore, ignore -able, also, we hoped it would turn out differently as turned out to be a communist dictatorship, which is not something prepared to fight with them about or seem to change. But it does mean that we are in a sustained strategic relationship with the communist dictatorship again like we were during the Cold War, but this one is one that we trade with we need a new playbook for that. That's not a purely military playbook. That's probably the most fundamental the crickets. If you're saying what worries me at the moment, particularly, I'd have to say the terrorism part, I'm concerned about in. The following since we won the war against ISIS, basically, ever, went to time I'd have to office, we had surrounded and we're taking Mozell in Raka which were the two key objectives of the so-called, but I called to red arrows strategy of twenty fifteen by the end of twenty sixteen that was basically been done. But I said, again, and again, and again, in the course of those two years, that is our military strategy. And I have competence our military strategy. We will win. We will take what we will take Raka we'll destroy the physical caliphate. And the idea that there can be Islamic state like this. But I'm read about the political and economic aftermath. I'd said that it gave me again, and again, and again and darned if it isn't coming through. And when I see the United States, basically, surrendering, the strategic position that we won in northeastern Syria. And in Iraq, I that. I is very concerning to me because it creates the conditions under which ISIS or something like it can come back. And, you know, I I don't want to lose the war in Iraq third. Ash. I wanna take advantage of the fact that you're scientists by training. I mention the opening that you've appear in physics. There's a lot of talk about how artificial intelligence and variety of other advances in technology or remaking warfare. And it's big complex topic. But I guess I like to get your sense of whether we're maintaining our technological superiority or whether it's at risk. And if so, where it is, well, it is, and it will always be at risk, because if you don't keep moving in technology, you're going to get her taken by somebody that's always been true, but different 'bout. Now, then when I started out what I started out Jim everything that mattered in technology happened in the United States came from the United States that came from the government, those things are truly more. And what that means is that if you're the secretary of defense or the deputy or the veterans are as I was either case. You need to tap into global commercial technology base, and use that to the advantage of defense to be the best. So that means a day, I, for example, we're not going to do the best. Hey, I research within the walls of the department of defense or even under contract to the department of defense, but I won't the best work done like Google that assay to be available to defense, and that means that I need to build bridges used to say to the tech community and recognizing that we had no and so forth. The made some people wrongly conclude that their defense department would not be properly, if it had its technology, and I wanted to persuade them, otherwise and list, them, and tell them that you not only have a duty to help your government protect itself. But it's a real rewarding thing to do. And if you're concerned that. That I might do something stupid. You're secretary defense then getting the game I've spent forty years in round the defense department, did I always think that vents are doing the right thing, of course. Not. But I felt like it stood a better chance of doing the right thing. If I joined it. That's why I was so concerned when some Google employees really a fairly small number persuaded the company briefly to stuff working on the project Mazen that was a mistake by the leadership of the company and every way now they've corrected since the rather. Short answer, your question is that you've got to keep up and the way to keep up today is by keeping connected with the whole technology base, and that means a defense department, it's deeply involved in technology, and that means you have to work at making yourself, accepted, attractive and so forth, so that we aren't viewed as somebody gonna wanna work with. We want people to work with us who are smart technologists. And I wanna ask this, 'cause I know for a lot of the listening to this podcast are never going to get to experience this. But what is it like to travel on the secretary defenses playing the four be very convenient? It is a seven four seven. It is really the nuclear war command plane. That's what it was built to be. It is used by the secretary to travel around the world. Because I, then I have always have access to the communications and to the survival, if necessary to do my duty in the event of the terrible thing happening. It happens to mid air refueling, which is helpful because you can fly from any place on the globe. Teddy other place and not have to land and stop, that is convenient inside jam. It looks like the nineteen eighty s because that's when the year was built I had a different vision of the inside of your playing. You know, I used to be their big consoles that looked like Star Trek, captain Kirk consoles and they're not used for that anymore. But that is what battle stations looked like before the PC now the colonels, who are saffy thing, and my staff are all sitting around PC's classified wifi for it in the old days. It was all this, custom stuff, and these big old screens green screens. And so the airplane still filled with all that stuff. It has a conference room, believe it or not, where you can do PowerPoint presentation, they the press actually tends to sit near most of the time, but mostly for me, I would be working all time when I was on there. So I had a rumor my staff's at, and we could sit around the table and work, we had bunks that we could go sleep in 'cause sometimes you'd be on the road for seven nine days. So it looked very good on the outside. It's a big beautiful white and blue airplane United States of America in big letters on the side. It looks great stands proudly for our country, but inside it looks like the nineteen eighty and it's feels like one wall later after another. I am going to close up the president's inbox for this week. My guest has been former secretary of defense ash Carter, his latest book inside the five cited box lessons from a lifetime leadership in the Pentagon comes out today. Secretary quarter, thanks you being here. Thanks for having me, appreciate it. It's been terrific. Police scratch the presence in boxing, apple podcasts, Spotify or ever, you listen leaves your review they help us get noticed improve the show opinions expressed on the presence, inbox or solely those of the host or guests, none of see form which takes new institution positions. Today's episode was produced by Zoe call this senior producer Jeremy Sherlock CD pertinent, Dan, mud were recording. Engineers special thanks to Corey Cooper for his assistance. This is Jim. Thanks for listening.

secretary president United States Pentagon Jim linsay Secretary Carter department of defense White House under secretary of defense for DOD cricket Joe Joe Joe congress deputy secretary Afghanistan Google Iraq General Electric principal
Former Secretary of Defense Ash Carter on surveillance, AI ethics, and how to regulate tech

Recode Decode

1:19:55 hr | 1 year ago

Former Secretary of Defense Ash Carter on surveillance, AI ethics, and how to regulate tech

"This episode is brought to you. By verizon. Our world is obsessed with speed the faster it goes, the faster we need to make it go. Now Verizon has pushed beyond speed with rise fives, y'all wide ban. We're entering the air of real time stream four K beautifully for the first time ever or play console quality gaming on the go with near zero lag in virtually no buffering be I to real time with a rise in five geometry wideband get the Samsung galaxy S ten five G variety and wireless dot com slash five G five geometry wideband available only in parts of select cities. Hi, I'm Tara Swisher editor large of Recode, you may know me as the secretary of defense. But in my spare time, I talked tech. And you're listening to Rico decode from the box media podcast network today. We're gonna play a live conversation. I had recently with ash Carter. The former secretary of defense under President Barack Obama. We spoke about the regulation of tech the relationship between Silicon Valley and the defense industry and the implications of emerging technologies like AI the last time I interviewed ash Carter. He was secretary of defense. This interview was recorded at Harvard University's John F Kennedy school of government or Ashworth's. So let's go there now to hear my conversation with former secretary of defense ash Carter. I dared ask to hug the flag. But don't if that reference jer. Listen, everyone. Welcome. Thank you for being here tonight. I'm very very pleased to have tonight as our guest, my guest here in the forum CARA Swisher, the editor at large of Recode, the host of the Recode decode and pivot podcasts. Which are my are my morning, Jim. I'm not making this up. I listened to carry every day. I don't know how you managed to do as much be as prolific as you are and contributing opinion writer to the New York Times, but in the long and the short of it is in a long career. She has become the most sophisticated entrenching tech journalist on the scene today. And so in view of the importance of those issues to the Kennedy School and everything that we're doing here and everything that I personally am very. Committed to you can't ask for a better observer and commentator, then Carris Wishart now this is going to be an odd forum because by rights as her host here in the Kennedy School, I should be questioning her on the other hand, she has a podcast, which is recording her it is normal for her to therefore be interviewing her guest. And so we decided that we were going to just have a conversation. And that's why it's billed as a conversation. I am going to suggest to you care as I did earlier topics though, turn. So we see each other here. I'm we'll stick to the digital area. Okay. But if you want to stray elsewhere, we are also challenged as society in the biotech area. We were talking about breakfast about that this morning and also in the huge issue of job. In training, and how to have a cohesive society in a world in which too many people feel that there's a fast lane of technology and a slow lane there. I write and talk about right? So okay. So all of those things are fair. I thought I wanna talk about game of thrones. Or? Avengers endgame. I'm willing to go wherever you you. You may find me a little dry on things to say about those topics. If you have something juicy have added style, but at the premise that the night king and Thanos or misunderstood. But we'll go from there. Okay. Just that. Got to wear reword. On digital. So let let's start with you care if you would. Social media curation you've written a lot about that. And the repeated failures of social media to reflect good values to act in a way or to be governed in a way that you can. You feel comfortable at your children participate in if you go back to the sucker Berg hearings, which you covered quite a bit about which were huge bust. Sadly because he had nothing to say. And they had nothing to ask. If you could re roll that tape and try to do better on both sides. Let's play that game little bit. If we if we could would they were all saying there is that the answer is some mixture of regulation by government and self regulation by companies. So can we try to design that mix is eighty twenty eighty and what would you say to this day when the internet started? There was a lot of promise around tolerance. Openness the ability for people to communicate across great distances. The ability for lots of different people to get access to information. They couldn't all premises that were great. And that's what they sold you on the idea. That would happen was. Coalescing of power around just several companies just a few companies, an obscene amount of wealth creation for very small amount of people who had enormous who have enormous sway over these platforms. And are that are that they don't govern. Really, even though they do make the money off of them. And that they have no intention of governing and could possibly be ungovernable because of the way they built them which makes a lot of money. And so we've a really bad situation that the public square, which is, you know, the public square has now owned by private Fillion airs, and they have no I'm going to say ability or compunction to fix the situation. They've just let loose these cities. And I've used this comparison a million times, these these absolutely unregulated cities to be built and are not understanding the consequences and the consequences pop up again, and again, and again on very simple things. Just the way we talk to each other on Twitter or or the way that it's being used for propaganda by various political figures, or or or or whether it's being used in say New Zealand at a very tragic situation where the shooter was using it and using it as part of the entire scheme of murder that it was a critical part of the murder scheme to be radicalized online. Then use it to say what he was going to do and then broadcast in. It's just a perfect horrible storm. And so the thing that I was troubled by by those hearings was that there's ample evidence that these in many, many ways not just one, but dozens of ways that these companies have hurt society rather significantly, and they seem to have no intention of doing anything about it. They just want to move on. And so what I'd like to have as citizens, the the public and and politicians have some measure of discussion with them about. How they should be regulated. And what what the regulation should be that smart, not regulation just for regulation. Let's go down that that sounds a little bit to me like eighty twenty runs and twenty eighty you know, they've tried self-regulation. They tried no regulation. They seem to like no regulation, and they have had done their self. Regulation is is zero. Some they have some rules. They change every now and then to suit themselves, but there's in general they have rules, and they're there and they point to them. But they make no sense to anyone who has who can reach a little little. A little little threads. I I can think of a few one would be the Communications Decency Act thirty for those who don't know CD to thirty is the thing that allows them to be. Yup. Cranston. It broadened for everybody. Can unlike the New York Times or something? Published in the New York Times, you lay yourself open to the rules that govern speech in the press country. Yes, if Britain is different everywhere else it either way in general, there's not so under CD to thirty. Now. Another thing is is various forms of regulation based on any trust share, many people not regulation, that's legal action. Well, okay. But well, I don't know any trust has been used lots of different ways. Of course, where history sometimes it has been to break up companies. I personally don't recommend that in this case. But more often as in the case of AT and T and the Western Union telegraph, so they were not broken up. They were recognized to be natural monopolies. And maybe that's what Facebook is a natural monopoly. But there were only allowed to exist provided they followed public rules. So that's an avenue and another avenues. You tech talked about the money. Karen, other avenues the money. Any if you follow the money, and you say why is this free? What is the business of of social media? And there's someone and I forget who she is. But she's also a very good writer who has observed that in social media, the user is not the customer the user is the product. That's something that they hate when you say. Let me see. She would correct it. You're not the product. You're the fuel. You're the fuel that creates their ability to sell things. And so you're not the product the product is advertising and the ability to target you you or the fuel to get through the third string would be pulling on the business model and having alternative business levels. So what do you think where should we go? If you're into a president. If I was candidate. No anyone could be a presidential candidate. It's every week. There's a whole new one the new flavor of the week. Look there of current laws in place that would covers a lot of this some of it in terms of privacy and things like that. Are we do not have an actual privacy law? We have we have one that's about to come online in California in twenty twenty. This is going to be relatively strong. There's ten more in states across country across this country. That are happening. There's GDP are Britain, which is the defect in in Europe. I'm sorry in the European Union, which is the facto rules right now because everybody's has to follow them. So they might as well follow them here privacy privacy. I'll come to all kinds of stuff they've all kinds of stuff that that are in GDP are. And then there's there's stuff that's being worked on in New Zealand and Australia around different things and so different things like fines. And of course, the European Union is also imposing fines on companies like Google and apple and others dapple for non-tax paying Google for monopoly. There's billion dollar fines, which is like they haven't their drawer. These people don't it doesn't. They don't these fines don't matter to them in number that they're being. It in. And then there's threats have spines in this country. Like the over an agreement that Facebook had many years ago, not to do precisely what it's doing and denying that they're doing what they said, they wouldn't do, but they're doing. And so there's a possibility of fine coming up for Mark Zuckerberg in that regard to their existing laws and existing things like the FTC here in this country. And there's also pry there's a number of privacy laws. There's all kinds of disclosure laws that are that that don't that. Aren't they don't really have teeth to them that really matter to these companies, then there's self-regulation which they could do themselves which is to put out a a series of rules that they would follow and they work to with each other which they never do to unlocks of issues. And but what happens is they end up doing different announcements. Apple will do it different announcement than Facebook, Microsoft, and others. And so that doesn't seem to work properly. And then it's just rules, whatever Mark Zachary wants to do. And so that's a real problematic thing because here's someone. Unlike most people in this country who cannot be fired who runs the biggest communications platform in history of the human race. Absolutely cannot be fired by anybody except himself. He can fire himself. And actually when we did a podcast. I said who should be fired for all this problems at Facebook. And he goes well since I made it, I guess me. I mean, I would be the one I guess, I'm responsible. And then I said, and he said you want me to fire myself. I said sounds good to me. It's just he can't be fired except for themselves. So that's a problem. That's great. But we're getting back to where we. They're not going to regulate themselves. You happen is there should be a national privacy Bill for one. There should be one national privacy Bill that deals with issues around privacy that that that doesn't overwhelm the California law that is stronger than the California law, and that that that covers a lot of issues there should be bills about disclosure of when you're hacked that kind of stuff where they have to tell you right away. There could be bills around non-discrimination online. There could be bills about rules about hate speech. And what's allowed and what's not allowed? That's something government doesn't love to wait into. And because it because that's problems those are problems under the first amendment. But there are things about harm. And what creates they do it already with terrorism? They do it with their recently, the companies have been focused on child pedophile and stuff like that. But there could be stronger speech. Little one is to say what you shall can. And cannot do another one is to say, I'm not going to tell you what you can and cannot do, but you're gonna have to defend in court, right? Right. Which did and did not do that's a different kind of sang. And for each of those things you named perhaps is there is some trust is the question of are these companies too big. And should they be broken apart in some way or not allowed to be in certain businesses should Google be allowed to be in the search business and the advertising business and also by the way, they're in yelps business. And by the way, they're also in this business. It's very Microsoft, and what's going on over who. Will you you? You you don't Microsoft new? Microsoft is good new Microsoft is. Just shocking to say voldemort shirts, you need to tell say the little Ben about Microsoft. She took on back in the battle days of the original gates deposition, and so forth that was covered park salons by Kara Swisher. That's not me. I was pretty young then. But it was it was, you know, there was that was a remedy and it worked really well. We have a really good corporate citizen now which doesn't overstep its bounds. Like that worked really well. And by the way, because Microsoft was pushed down others could come up. Okay. So there's plenty of possibilities out. There of which break up is is only one I was about to say that you. Worked for PBS, which is another idea, which is okay. Well, either way I- channelize ING is another possibility for Facebook where you have subscription channels where you pay rather than advertising pain, you pay. You could imagine one like PBS where the government pays or at least subsidize or it is filling throbbing cly backed. So this idea that you get it for free, and they take all of your data without any rights property rights and give it to anybody. They want to is a particular model of funding that doesn't have to be brought to an end, but it could be diversified. What do you what do you think of that fine? It's just nothing's come up a good business. It's a real estate. Facebook has a really good business that works really well that targets beautifully. And so I don't know why they would get out of the, you know, I don't know why that get out of the business because. There's no incentive to make it less profitable for them for their shareholders the direction I'm headed is an application of antitrust that doesn't require a break-up, but a channelization or diversification within one channel recognizing that as a as a natural anomaly just trying to win the title. Very creative antitrust laws are so antiquated compared to what's happening today. They envisioned drains and telephone and stuff like that. This is something much different. And so one of the issues around anti-trust, and I'm not a lawyer is the idea that causes public harm right called there's some level public harm. Everybody loves Amazon who doesn't love Amazon it delivers your house in fourteen minutes like a bag of gummy bears. Yeah. You know? What I mean? So I think the question is and you like face because you get free things you like Google, you get free maps. And so it's doesn't cause public harm. But it does cause possible competitive arm and then societal harm, and that's really hard to figure out that is. Latter day interpretation of the Sherman antitrust act. I just want to say says surly wrong. But it is a it is something that started in the economics department in Chicago, then in our business school, and it was the idea that the anti-trust in the United States didn't apply unless there was customer harm. That is not something that Senator Sherman would have recognized the good. Well, it's making a serious point. It is a reductio ad calculated. You know, you can you can decide whether there's customer harm or not. But that is not the site. I wouldn't be deterred from any trust. And I'm not trying to make the case for any trust. But it does not that the fact that there is no consumer harm does is not not necessarily supported by a lot of people from from Elizabeth Warren to Donald Trump Ted Cruz break up. I don't break up. Data trust a lot of people are talking about that. I mean, what do you think? What how what are you? Well, I do I am for a mixture of regulation self regulation. I do not despair some measure of self regulation. I think that there's a common sense amount there at all of us who run ins or have run institutions it. You have a common sense rule. You draw a grey stripe down the middle of the chart, and you say everything on that side is no and everything on that side is yes and everything in the middle. I'm prepared to discuss. And that's it, and we all live with those kind of rules in our institutions, and it's babyish to suggest that one can't craft them for almost any you can at least make a try now. So I think something can't be made out of the twenty percent. Maybe United see exactly the same way. But there are leaders out there. And there are businesses out there, which I think are trying to find the way a little bit of encouragement. We'll do it with respect to. A regulation. I think there's so many different opportunities any trust is just one. I remember CARA when I was a kid that when a man and a woman went to bed at night. On TV, wait to see where this is going on TV they climbed in two twin beds separated by a night table with a lamp on it. Now that we look back on that. Now, it's kind of video Arctic. But that, but but at the time that was regarded as appropriate to protect children. That's okay with me. Now that may be on your your the other side of the line from where you would draw the line. But that kind of thing is okay with me. I don't want children afflicted with all of this. And I think those of us who are adults have some responsibility on just like, you have a responsibility. And I did in the defense department US about firing people I fired people who misbehaved, and my subordinates fired people for far less because you couldn't have that kind of thing and that kind of institution and were was it a little fuzzy every once in a while. We'll sure but some rules are better than no rules almost invariably. So I think there are rules around Chiltern on these sites that they do have their own self imposed rules, but some of which are great. But I think the question is how much I think what they wanna do. And maybe you could comment on this. They say if you start. To regulate them too much. We'll ruin innovation for them, and it will ruin the golden goose of innovation in this country. Which is you know, these are these are American companies who have led the way in each and every one of these areas so far doesn't mean that's going to happen in the future. But their argument is that innovation will be harmed by any kind of meddling by by regulators. You don't know what he's doing experience in almost forty years of any benching technology. Okay. My experience is that challenges are what fueled progress. This is the challenge if you turn it around, and if you're can-do person and instead of talking about all the complications. And how you tried for a few minutes and couldn't take it any further because you got stumped by something. And instead, you take it you had the same attitude towards it that I would have towards solving physics problem or something in defense, which is I'm going to keep working and keep thinking and keep trying until I get it through. So why is this so hard? Why is it that the most inventive people can't take on a challenge which is right in front of their face in my face and and win. I'm more optimistic about technology than that. I think we can't invent our way, and this that doesn't slow technology down. It speeds it up. I've seen that again. And again in my career that when you tell somebody do something go to the moon, and they say, it's too hard. And that's what they told president Kennedy wear celebrating the anniversary of that his scientific advisers. I know 'cause I knew of them when younger MIT said that they uniformly told him not to make the speech because they did not do it. And he said, well, no, I'm going to give the speech anyway. And darned if they weren't galvanized, and they and they did it. So I that is not my experience. I've heard people in the tech sector say to me, you're going to stifle innovation, and I have I say, I don't believe it. I've also lived alive of engineers telling me that they couldn't do something. They didn't want to do. And I've seen that all the time program after program not all of them. Most engineers are can-do people. So here's a challenge it out there and Ken do. That's great. But let me say this is a group of people who have who are coddle that grow up in. Very very deep bubble like everyone talks about deep state go to deep bubble Silicon Valley. It's a place. You can't believe the way they live, and they live in a in a way that they don't think that they that they think they're victims. I get a lot of victims stuff right now from Facebook and Twitter people like you're so mean to us and that kind of stuff, and it's Stahnke that billionaires will tell you their victims. That's always my favorite like Stanton. Mike. Wow. Really? You could have killed and dismembered into seconds like or whatever you wanna do. The fact that they don't understand their power. And then a lot of the communications that they are putting out just like Mark Zuckerberg up Ed recently, where he begs for regulation, and to me everyone's like, oh, look he's saying he wants to be regulated guess what he doesn't have an answer is what he doesn't have. And so he's saying I can't deal with these difficult problems. My company has created you all figure it out. And I think that's an abrogation of his responsibility. I think these companies have a responsibility to not just help us understand what the problem is. And believe me, I don't want them in charge of it. Because who knows what will happen with that kind of legislation. But but one of the things they do is they create a situation, and then when it becomes very thorny, such as with free speech, or or or the hate speech or who determines what they just don't want to get involved when they create the platforms that allow this problem to exist. And I think that's one of the issues that I find really vexing with dealing with here. Let's go with that. Let's take your characterization of that particular executive at that particular business. Nevertheless, I I would say that that's not everybody you talked about Microsoft. That's a different kind of leadership. There are places that it's easier to start. I also think that in. Today, we need to try to wherever we can build bridges, and however restricted someone else's perspective may seem to be an I had difficulties with people who for example, thought Snowden was a hero which I need by. Absolutely did not and we don't need to get into that. But I didn't just dismiss them. I tried to reach out a little bit see if I could get somewhere we can't afford to fail on this. And this guy if you're talking about Zuckerberg is the king of this mountain. Should it be that way? Well, I don't know is he and ideal individual, I know him, I don't know him as well as you do. But we gotta get on with it. Said there's no leverage points for this. Now, Microsoft great. But Microsoft doesn't have a social network and doesn't play in this game. The only things that matter this moment on these topics at least our Facebook and Google, that's it. That's the entire and what's happens Twitter? But whatever what Twitter. It's not the Twitter. Yes. But it it's a bit of an echo chamber of itself. I think not it doesn't have as much impact. It's just it's just because Donald Trump is screaming loudly on it that we pay more Microsoft is relevant is because it is a technical technological company with the different ethos. That's where that's not. So he doesn't have a player in. That's the problem. And so what happens with the line, these tectonic and tell you people at apple and Microsoft or just holding their heads of their hands. Because this is not there, you know, they would prefer more privacy. They would prefer more. And then they want legislation like they don't want. You know, it's a really difficult issue. And I think when you get to the really these these are these are just the issues around speech when you get to the issues around AI and how to regulate that. And how to think about the development of that or drone technology or self driving cars or healthcare when you start to get into these other things that are quite serious. And whether it's global Rick repressions for what we're doing and climate change, you could just move onto all these things, what's the technological solutions there. They will make this issue, which is already tearing apart society, even more difficult. We're gonna take a quick break. Now, we'll be back after this to my conversation with former secretary of defense ash Carter. Let's take driverless cars or autonomous weapons vanished about that. All time secretary of defense what about autonomous weapons or a health care or sentencing more parole or any other system that where you have machine aided decision for something rave consequence for human beings. There's another where we got to get some right left hand limits here, then we got to get this thing in a frame or we're going to be living in a world of hurt down the road on that the where we're living now in a world of hurt on socially. So how'd he get begin to get in that inside that frame? I believe they're just tell you what I think this is the same thing. I said about weapons I don't think that in matters of gravity like the application of lethal force that you can have to autonomy. I don't believe that human beings concede their responsibility because I would certainly feel responsible, and I felt responsible. Every time we use lethal force. I thought that was necessary we needed that to protect our people. But I certainly felt responsible in very fullest sense as a human being by everybody might chain it commanded and the president didn't every president. I've ever worked for has felt that way too. And you don't want him feel in any other any other way. But so, but how do you locate human responsibility? In an AI system butts magic, and that's the thing. But let's let's let's work that out because I there's another one where I think it's it said that you can't do it, and you can do it. Well, there's there's certain things like look with policing data right now there shouldn't be any AI in policing right now because the data is so dirty. It is so dirty and we're going to get the same outcome. These people are criminals because these people were criminals, and therefore they are criminals, h is the data is so impossible to put in the system and. There's a famous old engineering session crap in crap out. Right. And so what you're having is that these decisions are being made. So there's very specific a I like that for policing policing AI to me sounds like making what's already awful just terrible world policing. And were I mean. I and lethal warfare. I said at it's still the guidance in extent guidance in the department of defense that we shall we will not have that there will be a human being responsible for the use of lethal force. I think that's right. And that can be engineered in a way that's not the same. As man in the loop to use that expression, and you so we talked about algorithms you talked about data. And there's one other thing algorithms. Yes. The way they're designed, you know, they're layered, and it's very hard. Sometimes to know how did the make this inference? It's hard to go. The other way, it's hard to go down the layers of not just up layers and figure out op, and what is that? It's a problem for a guy to figure out how how I I worked works. I believe that can be done in algorithms, and it can be designed in algorithms data sets would data sets that are so useless that you're never gonna get anything. Good atom. You massage them till the. Cows come home. And it's still crap as you're saying dirty data sets. Well, how do we understand complex data sets? That's a problem for a high. If is going to be used to fake people out how do you devise countermeasures to thinking people out? Why why? So all these things I it some of the things are quite serious. And some of them are very useful. You know, if you're using them for radiology, there's tens of thousands of pictures, and you would really prefer the computer, which can figure out those things pretty well compared to a person that makes perfect sense. And makes it saves lives and saves lives. And then you have other things that are that are useful around climate all kinds of data. That is is that we can start to see patterns, and that it can start to learn and do things that specific AI, certainly as a lot of uses if you as you. But specifically when you get to something like there's there's one that I just heard of that when you have a job, you it takes pictures of you while you're doing your job interview. And then it compares you to the top performers like what like like, of course, people used to do that by site like acai doesn't look funny and. By the way. I don't want that guy to pick someone because you know, you get you get discrimination. You get lack of diversity when that guy picks that guy so people don't do it very well either. But it's really disturbing question of how that should be done. It might be fair knows who's to say. But I think one of the issues is what goes into it like who is the top performer who determines the top performing. And so you get a lot of like you go down some very ugly rabbit holes. And this thing the second thing is who's making this AI is another thing. And right now, we have a lack of diversity in the making the we also have only a few companies at the top of this, and that would pretty much be Google like that Google has sort of the Chinese companies in Google pretty much. And then then I guess open does too. But there's that's another issue around it. And so we have to start to create gore grills around these and we were this morning. It was funny. We were talking about norms. They were creating norms around day. I and all kinds of people have come out with. Statements on a and what it principles of AI, and whether they're transparency or fairness, or there's all kinds of things that you would want to require for. And these are the guardrails you're thinking of and they're called norms. We're going to have these norms. Just like you do around biotech or you would around medicine or anything else, which are have long been used to this stuff. And we have to start create them for AI. And so France is doing some ignominies doing some some companies are Google doing some there's all kinds of different. AI now institute is doing all kinds of groups of people are doing it. But I kept they kept talking about norms. It was sort of laughing. 'cause I've these all these academics saying we have these norms those norms, and these nerves that I'm like, you can't have norms when these people aren't normal like, you know, what I mean, they aren't you to north and they aren't used to. And so what do you do with a group of people again who going back to regulation, we've never been regulated to start to put guardrails in place. How do you get them to stick to those or think of them as a good thing? That's that would be my if I can try a few answers on that. We're ahead of the wave a little bit of AI compared to social so I have a little bit more hope of getting things in at the at the entry stage. And I think it is as simple as being. As knowing how this stuff works, which is Al plus data and scrutiny of both and you can ask at any application. You're going to buy well, wait a minute. That sounds too good to be true and things that are to sound too. Good to be true usually are too good to be true. And so you start digging down, and how can this be and every once in a while? There's a pony in year to quote, a title of yours. But a lot of times it's just nonsense, and it is dressing up something that has always been a matter of dirty human judgment or the accumulated wisdom of judges or something like that. Which is far from fallible, but dressing up or alternatively disguising it with a maze of technical stuff that most people aren't like you and me and could see through, but I can see through it. And I know most of the engineers can see through it, and I expect them to and I wouldn't let me put it this way. Yes. I I can't vouch for all the companies that are working on a, but I'm telling you this. If I were a customer in the defense department or any company that I associated with I'm not going to be a customer for something. You can't come in. And explain to me how this works because I'm going to turn around and get sued or have to explain it in my case to a mother who. Child has been killed or something. I I need to know that you have designed in otherwise, I ain't buying your chilly because I can't I can't buy black boxes for national defense. You can't Bligh black boxes for policing. You can't buy black boxes for picking which people have an opportunity to be employed. It this isn't these isn't like games or something. These are serious. You look in a lot of the tech people not wanting to work on defense department step. There's been a lot of that at Microsoft, Google and some other fair question to be in be accurate. It's not a lot. But it's right. And I I. Is in all cases. And we're talking about Mark Zuckerberg earlier, my approach at odd is this may seem in our day where everybody screams at each other would be to have a conversation with them. And I offered to have a conversation with him. I'll tell you how it would go in my case. I'd say I like one thing you just said, which is you sit you believe that you should be h-have ethically in the application of your knowledge. Congratulations. I'm with you hold that thought and do it with everything. Google does. Now at that point you and I are going to. Go down different paths. But let's start with where we have a common view. And here's what I would say to you. I would say to you. How is the government isn't is? It's just us. It's not a separate thing. It is the way we do things that must be done collectively. And if you know the most about this technology, how are we ever going to get it? Right. If you won't participate, participate canny argument. Go ahead, well participation doesn't mean acquiescence all the time. But there three hundred million of us in this country. You don't get your way all the time. Anyway. But if you're not in the game, some dummy or the will whatever you fear. The government is like is going to make the decision. You don't wanna wanna make? So you are the best getting the game. And by the way, you have a responsibility to do. So this isn't a play pen this. Okay. You have knowledge you have responsibility next. I would say to them care. You ever do any work in China may no I'm upset say. Say employees because in China, they don't tell you whether you're working for the PLA or not and the last thing I'd say is that you live here wherever whatever campus Google happens to be and they're roads that you can drive on in their police who protect you on a good day, which is most days of police, actually, do and they're all these utilities and things that that are this idea that you can stand apart from the environment that and by the way that laws that protect and enable this very that your business and your freedom and your ability you choose where the hell you think. All this stuff comes from. And so I would those are the arguments I would make it I would hope that I would be able to win over some people at least I would have I would have tried. But I I don't know they're all win over everybody. But those are the winning arguments. Keira that's why I said at the patriotic you you've got these lovely roads and stuff like that. They could say that it didn't mean I have to build drones to kill children in blanks internet or by accident kill people or by accident attack people. I didn't want to attack that doesn't mean you don't get to choose within Google what you work, you're saying, no, one in Google, and that Google of total enterprise. Well, none that they were saying that they not only personally didn't wish to work on them. But they didn't think the company ought to work on all of us have an individual choice all of us have an individual choice. None of us needs to do anything. That's against our conscience. I'm okay with that. If you've had an argument with me, and you've failed to convince me, then I stopped. I will follow my conscience even. If I'm okay with doing that. It depends on the company Microsoft's going forward with it Salesforce has gone forward with the stuff that in Google didn't around maybe. Leadership has to be the leadership, and they could have said to these people we're going to do this. And of course, Google and I wanna pick on Cucolo times. Google does has subsequently clarified that they will do the work for the US government and the defense department. I think that's the appropriate leadership decision to make. But I would also say to a kid who doesn't want to work on it, by the way, these were not kids mostly these were people who who were quite advanced in age where part of the original tech generation who started all this. But I would say to them. I'm not going to fire you is long as you can provide something find something useful in the company to do. And we're doing lots of other things, and you don't have to work on something that your conscience. I can't bring you to regard his conscionable. I'm okay with that. I'm okay with that. You don't have to do just anything, but for the company's leadership to basically shy away from a small subset of employees ease on. Any issue? I don't think is the right leadership decision to make I've made leadership decisions. We all have who've run enterprises. And are they universally popular? Of course, not you get nasty letters. You. Get people say dare you can go all the time. If you're not willing to take that one of the arguments, you were making was the one that I discussed earlier today when I was doing a podcast with Mark Zuckerberg one of his arguments about not raining tech in especially him. Is that your only alternative is China like, well, you do you wanna be like China? That's always the well what if China wins? What if we have a Chinese Internet, and I call it the G or me argument, which is like my, and I'm like me who's number three like 'cause I don't like either of these choices. I don't like g more than you. But I don't means. I want you. And so that's often pushed now recently, I've noticed a lot of people in Silicon Valley if we don't get this. We're not gonna keep up how and at the same time. I do recognize the challenge from having the Chinese government owning the next internet age. Age which is disturbing on every level giving how they behave and the the willingness to use surveillance tools, quite volte-face late the way, they do it there. And I think although some people say there's just as much in this country. It really is it's national policy to be doing creating these surveillance economies. They're heading look at China as a challenge in the digital age, especially since a lot of this will translate into war cyberwarfare abilities challenge. It is a challenge. We're still very good. At number one, number two, a isn't one big blob? So we'll they be the best repressors in jailers of minorities minorities in the world. Yes. If that's the race you race in Bill. They're going to win that race. I'm confident of that. But that's not the race. I'm in in the application of AI two things that I think are consistent with values that are part of our. At our best or enlightenment values. Will we apply them best? We'll be show the most prudence in voiding abuse. Yeah. I'm pretty confident the United States of America and our European allies. There will be better at that. And then there are lots of commercial things that we'll segment, and you know, it's not going to be one thing. So I'm pretty confident enough. And I don't I'm not I'm not in a repression race with them. I also don't buy the argument on I hear this all the time. It's a qualitative argument that that it doesn't work by the numbers, which is the Chinese have a big population. So they're going to have all this data that we don't have show me the theorem that says a factor of four in the size of database makes a material difference. Now, I defy anybody to show me that theorem in a is just baloney. But it said then it said again, and again, and it said again and again and innocent, it's a deuce to some sort of proof that the. Chinese are negativity going to be better at it. They will have a larger volume of intimate. Facial recognition things things that it's not first prize for my government to have right in my judgment. We don't wanna get into the front door with the fundamental science and applying to good things that are good for human life, or we going to my pessimistic about that. No, I'm not at all. What do you worry about though, come their k-? Worrying Jan do Americans know, I worry about the same things, you do I believe which is applications that are not transparent. And therefore, we're no one is held accountable. And it is advertised it's a wizard of Oz to blackbox, and it's just bologna inside there, and they're going to tell you that you should buy this or that this idea or that idea is supported by more people, and therefore is more supportable which. Doesn't violate. I mean, violates the laws of sort of ethical logic that you decide what's right and wrong by how many people agree with it. So there's that's what I worry about. And there's a lot of potential for that. And I did not allow that in my precincts of the defense department because I thought I had a responsibility of great gravity in that t- that trap. And that's what I'm worried about. You wrote this book about the five cited inside the five site at box, which I assume you're referring to the Pentagon him teasing lessons from the life Tampa leadership in the Pentagon. What is the biggest worry from a technology from a defense department view? What did they concern being unhooked, which one being unhoped from the global commercial technology base? We aren't what we were in the fifties and sixties and seventies. When I started in those days all technology of consequence for protecting. Our people. Title and all technology of any consequence at all came from the United States and came from within the walls of government, those days are irrevocably lost. And therefore, the only way I could discharge my duties as as secretary of defense, which are not going to go away anytime soon, which are to protect the many against the few the only way I could discharge them competently. It was to have access to the best technology and the only way I could do that was to have a reasonable relationship with technology community where we could be reasonably sympathetic to one another's problems and values and challenges and work together. And letting that go is my biggest fear, but then we'll be ghetto. And then I won't be able to do my job and I'd say that of any important function. I mean, you have to go elsewhere for technology, whether it's Israel or China even. Yeah. But I've got to go. I've. Got to go outside. The Pentagon, no matter what. And it is a government outside the government like the defense, they'd bands research jobs. Yes. And being unhooked. Well, DARPA does a great job of that. You know, I found that out posts I tried to build all those bridges that Fendt innovation board that Eric Schmidt was on Jeff Bezos and Reed Hoffman. And so that was an effort to get a path of dialogue there. So that when we ran into an issue where they were seen at one way or their employees were other tradition was and I was seen in a different way. We had our way to get out of that. Because y'all get live here. And if you don't if you think ISIS is in this conversation with us you're dreaming. And so we've got to got to be able to protect ourselves to be excellent at that. I need I need your help. And that means I need to be reasonable about your values. We're gonna take another break. Now. We'll be back after this with the former secretary. Defense. Ash Carter from Harvard University's John F Kennedy school of government. The Reisen is obsessed with speed an obsession that pushes them to the limits and beyond well now with the rise in five jail. Too wide van Verizon has gone beyond speed a shrink in the air of real time. Now, you can share in real time. Even when everyone else's to play console quality multiplayer games on the go be first to stream four K beautifully for the first time ever experienced augmented reality that feels like reality five G changes everything. And now, it's in your hands. Be I to real time with horizon five G ultra wideband get the new Samsung galaxy S ten five g the first five G foam to harness the speed of the rise and five G ultra wideband get the Samsung galaxy S ten five G ever rise in wireless dot com slash five. G five geologist wideband available. In parts of select cities, q. You think that relationship was damaged by the smart, Snowden revelations? I do I think it led directly as some of the stuff. Definitely was and their relations between tech and yes government. Yes. No was and so when I would go to the tech community as secretary defense. Sometimes I just say to people look we're gonna have to agree to disagree about it. It's not because I do not think he is a whistle blower. I know what a whistle blower is. I support missile players required by law to support whistle blowers. You're allowed to blow whistles you're not allowed to be a traitor and whistleblower supposed to follow some rules. One rule is the least make an effort to get your concern redressed. No record of such in his case second that you limit the damage or exposure, you do to that which will is can reasonably call attention to your problem. He put everything out. Out there. And I sometimes can cared two. We have thousands of nuclear weapons custodians in the United States. Suppose you decided that you didn't like all these nuclear weapons, which are easy date because their glee terribly destructive things and you decided that you were going to demonstrate how bad they were by stealing one and setting one off will. I mean, that's overdoing it you've that's more than you need to make your point. So he didn't follow. What we teach. Here we teach here at the Kennedy School, and I didn't make up the rules of whistle. Blowing have been a good whistle blower, and tolerating whistle. But none of that was followed and he did damage to our security. He did damage to our international reputation, and he did damage to our companies and created a rift between the tech industry discussions that were going on between the tech industry and government because they didn't love being justified upon. True. Yes. I think that's absolutely true. And so was some explaning required on the basis of of what we're doing. I'm okay with that part. I by the way, there is you may not like it. But there there is a constitutional process for that. Which is an executive bridge that follows the laws passed by the legislative branch and subject to judicial review. And so that is the way it was done. If you think their excesses, I prepared to concede that I report so I don't know about that anymore. It wasn't it wasn't. Well, again, I'm not trying to apologize for it per se every little excess that was in there. But we had a process at least for doing that parenthetically. I have had a security clearance for communications intelligence. One thousand nine hundred eighty care, and I've never I don't believe I Google distal death. But I never saw witnessed one case in my lifetime of an American being jailed harassed outed or humiliated, in some way, extorted or anything by the government on the basis of their surveillance. I there's one case that came close to it, which I recall, which I can't really name, but I never saw which is a reasonably good record of conduct. And that's a long time of observing. So that suggests to me that it is possible to have a pretty good track record of. Having constitutionally controlled system where the laws can be enforced with a reasonable amount of surveillance without everybody without everybody being spied on all the time, which I don't favor either. So let's Cushing so get some questions the audience you, and I talked when you are the Defense Secretary and one of the things we talked about was right after apple had declined to cooperate with Jim Komi on the encryption. And at the time, it was really what was really interesting to me is part of the government did not agree with Jim Komi on this issue and parts the government. Did I know President Obama did? Obviously Komi thought he was right. But you had been not on that side. How do you look at encryption right now because he's gonna come up again, it will it will. What what I expressed at the time was my abject dependence. Upon encryption and quality encryption in order to run the defense department. None of our stuff works in less, it it. None of it works without me assistance of computers, and none of those computers work if they get hacked. So I am totally dependent upon really couldn't encryption, and I was making that point and Christians, not a bad thing. I don't want everything open. Secondly. And I wasn't saying this is loudly publicly at the time. But I'm I'm not I'm not I hope you've gotten this idea for tangling with the thriving the private sector of of our country tangle with its public sector. We're all the same thing. The government is you and so if we're having a disagreement the right instinct to the public servant is to say, let's not Malley other. Let me try. To get on the right? Let me try to get together with Tim cook is not an unreasonable person. So I would have taken a quieter. I don't know where you would have gotten in that particular case but a quieter. You you go. Hi like that. And you go public, and the people you stimulate or not the people you want in the conversation. It's all those people have nothing else to do than to get on Twitter. And you know, what the? You get the tails of the distribution Wayne in against the center of the distribution. That's not healthy. So both stylistically and substantively I was in a somewhat different place. Now, you can argue with the fact that some measure of law enforcement access is appropriate and that doesn't have to be detailed enough to wag the whole technology dog. But it is necessary that the country cooperate with the government winning his lawfully trying to carry out the functions that are really important. To us. And so from that point of view, I could see Jim Komi side as well. The thing is to have two big leaders in our society out tangling in public. That's not my style. I don't think it's effective in the long run. That's kind of where I was coming from right at the time. And you still went with something else. Pops up is there an instance where you would see apple half to turn it over to me. They should have other ways to find these things out that they if our national security comes down to one iphone we're in a lot of trouble like we really come on. It's it's a plot of a movie, it's, but I think you say you're going to count on us to be clever ways. There's other ways to do Intel are some there are ways to do intelligence, and we are frequently entirely satisfied with those other ways doing intelligence, and we can't have the moon, you we can't have everything so that we can flawlessly. Protect people against it's going to be a little harder than that. People are going to need to tolerate a little bit of failure. And we're going to need to tolerate the fact that people want privacy and independence, and we're going to have to work harder to get the result that they deserve. I'm I'm fine with with all of that technology is inevitably going to trend in the direction of encryption that is increasingly strong. And so you're going to have to use other methods for collecting in for. Mation by the way, when quantum comes along quantum computing, quantum computing. There's going to be an interesting moment when all of the corpus of information that has been encrypted in a way that is secure today will not go no longer be secure. And you might say to yourself. It doesn't matter because whatever what I say, then we'll be secure that. But are you are you willing to have uncovered everything you've ever said most of us are prepared to say that right? And and so all of your wreck so for and the defense department, I don't want our thinking over time about war plans or the formulation of things to become suddenly opened up even though they may not be are. Then we're plans they may be two versions back. I can't afford to do that. So there's going to be a big trove of accumulates. Added digital information which will done with shorter keys, which will suddenly become break. Honorable one day, and and that's a CS. So somebody's gonna make a lot of money on a it'll make the year two thousand Y2._K thing looked like a small business. They're going to be people who will promise on the at the eleventh hour the eleventh day before quantum makes all your files open to Rian quip that re- Rian crypt. Amusing quantum with longer key legs. And you'll be lighting up with your hard drive. Stab your stuff. Watch that spirit. Why don't you get these free business ideas? There you gave it away get into, dammit. And you know, what the other things so we have questions from the audience food. That's true. That's true questions from the audience. Right here. Go ahead. Thank you so much take care. Mike question is at the beginning. You talked a lot about what sounded like an internet Bill of rights privacy not of nation, but how much faith do the two of you have in congress that can really understand how Facebook or Google worked to actually implement that not regulation Mayfair's. I just I just spoke in front of the House Democratic caucus, and I did a podcast with Nancy Pelosi speaker Pelosi, and I that's a crazy group of people. I gotta say it was I was sort of like, whoa. Whoa. Wait a minute. And what was really interesting as I brought my two sons and one of my youngest who's thirteen fourteen. Now, he said mom, that's like looking at all of America in one ballroom. I was like, yeah. Unfortunately. So so I think I think they're perfectly capable of. It's like I said, I think they're not some of them are up to speed. There are people that were technologists that are in congress right now. Several of the congressman had. Worked at tech, Microsoft and other places there's several physicists, I forget. There was a bunch of technologists there. And certainly congressman like will heard from Texas or congressman ro Khanna. We certainly understand this and their staffs do. And so I do rely on the fact that they they regulate banks. They regulate cars they regulate they don't have to be tech experts to do this. What I do worry about is sort of these loud mouth other people. And it's the Senate. There's a ton of them. There's a ton of the Senate. There's a Senator Bennett is very smart Senator club char Senator Warner Senator Burr, there's there's a whole bunch and there's there's governors too. So there's a lot of very tech savvy people in government throughout government. The issue is can you keep this is a congressional issue. It's obviously not going to be from the White House at this point. There's almost nobody in those roles. They are now, and nor does there seem to be. And so it's going to they're going to have to figure out a way to do it. I do have confidence. They'll figure figure it out. And they do think it's important. It's just it's just when you get on TV with idiot who doesn't own the difference. I phone Google you sort of want to just go like this. That's just that guy though. He won't be part of it presumably. Don't despair these are generalists and they've always had to specialize. And so there's somebody in there who knows something about Syria, and somebody knows something about tech and somebody who knows about this area, and that that area the law. You couldn't if you were a member of congress possibly vote on all the issues that they you be cramming all day all night every single day, you have to depend on your ability to walk down the hall to somebody say, what do I do with this? I have no clue and have somebody trusted. So it's not as bad. When you're when you don't get anything out of him. It's usually a sign that they don't think anybody in the country thinks really wants them to act, and I'm not convinced that the congress is truly convinced yet that we're concerned enough about tech compared to all the other things that Americans are concerned about. So it's on everybody's be list. And they're a list is helping else yet health care overwhelmingly, healthcare and tech is somewhere down. But in other countries, it's not the they're going to act in Zeeland in France and everywhere else. So there's going to be pressure from states that other states are going to all act, and I think that's what's going to be the import with it's going to bubble up. And so it's really isn't a campaign slogan. I'm going to get Facebook. Like, I don't think that's really and then on the Republican side. Unfortunately with a lot of people are obsessed with this idea of being shot at the president. Did it today? And it's just it's just a lie. It's a flat out lie that they're being discriminated against on these platforms. They just aren't it's just not happening. And so that obsession is it's like a fever. It's like a weird fever. I mean, they never I've always thought that people that complain about not being able to speak never shut up. That's not. And so they have plenty of places to have outlets. So it's just that. That that is occupying that side of the they need to stop. They need. They won't stop. If they need to stop. Thank you. My name is David carry. I'm fellow when the advanced leadership initiative, the one undisputed portion of the special counsel's report was how much effort Russia may to influence our election in it was interesting to watch following the New Zealand livestream terrorist attack that Sri Lanka first thing. He did they turned off all social media, perhaps a template for the future. So we are eighteen months away from presidential election. And I'd like to ask both of you. How much confidence do you have in Facebook in particular? But all the social media, you know, in Google with you to to stop what happened last time to really get out ahead of foreign parties. Attempting to weaponize social media influence, the national election, and if the election was held three months from now are you confident they're on top of it. Or do you feel we've made little progress since two thousand sixteen I think they are working on it. I mean, it's not if in fact, they had to do their dumb war rooms dumb fake that they invited reporters into. Did you see that? That was a ridiculous staged the circus by them. I do think they have been working on a lot of stuff that it's really complicated. How to do that, you know, some people think they should stop doing any political advertising. A couple of months ahead. They do that in France. You know, a certain time before the election have a blackout. There's all kinds of questions what they should do. But I do think they happen identifying in working on these problems to solve them. I think probably yes, I do have confidence that they do understand this next election. The twenty two it worked pretty well. In the eighteen election's, the twenty twenty. I just have to be really clean. I do think they will continue to use these tactics. Like, the Trump campaign did in the last one, and I do think the Russians or whoever will continue to try to manipulate these elections and the issues we're never going to know how they did it or why are whether it worked and that's just today. You don't have to Sultan, but Jared Kushner is eight just to complete idiot. He just said it was only he said that the MU. The report was more damaging to democracy than Russian intervention in our elections. I just I don't even know what to say. I would have rushed the stage at that point. Like, are you kidding me? This is ridiculous any foreign government using our tools to ruin our elections of problem might concern too is a voting machines and things like that. There's a Senator Wyden is very that's this big topic the abusive voting machines and the ability to manipulate them. That's I know that's a plot of scandal. But it's actually also a problem. And so I worry about that issue. And I think Senator Wyden, I did a great podcast with him on that. But I do think they have the, and I think people are smarter about these these manipulations too. So I do feel more confident we have effort here at the Kennedy School, which I don't run, but. Run the same center the Belfer center that I'm the director of which just to give you a few runs train ran a training program for the election operators in all of the states and help me out here. Some of the folks that worked on this. I think forty six of the states participated, and now we have been asked by both the Republican and the democratic side's in the Iowa caucuses to help them. And this is not magic, this is basic hygiene and trade craft of it. It's good my concern. For next time is we're getting more resilient people are wise to a lot of tricks that are played on social on them on social media. But their new things coming I worry about new playbook that the Russians are shrewd about a playbook. We haven't seen yet for which we haven't prepared at which people that are not in. You're. To and I knew punishment for doing it. You've got major ministration figures applauding yet Giuliani. The other day you had Kellyanne calm and the president. And so there's not going to be any repercussions. And that's I think that to say those things so erase Monsell it's beyond responsible. As far as I'm concerned. But I think the companies do care they do. Thank goodness. They do. I think they've done a pretty good job around the world. So yes. Hi, I'm Heidi leg. I'm the director of special projects at the Shorenstein center. I'm an enormous fan of yours is a fellow journalist who does profile so thanks for being here. After journalism school. I went to California in the nineteen Ninety-seven for the promise of this thing called the internet. And it was an amazing time we had a surplus Clinton was president. I don't think he Monaco yet. And we thought that this was an amazing thing for free press, independent press, we could create magazines and. I can't believe I'm actually thinking of regulation, but I look at it. And I hear there's so many topics that we can touch upon with tech companies. But you're so close to them in you're talking to them. What's their view on what they've done to journalism because one of the reasons that I would be very pro looking regulation is that they have all of the power now to be able to gain all the ads because of their digital capacity and the factor or no privacy laws. And so you the only what we're seeing that short scene center is the only legacy players that can even come head to head with tech companies in surviving and beam journalism outlets are ones with billionaire backers or large media conglomerates, so like CNN and Fox News or the Henry's by the globe or basis find the post Patrick Chung find that L A times. But otherwise, it's an obliteration of journalism. And I'd like to know when you're talking to these big leaders since you're with them if they believe. That regulation is going to curb their innovation. What about the fact that they've killed innovation for journalism, and what I went out to as a journalist in San Francisco in one thousand nine hundred six they've killed it. And they seem to just have a complete disregard for the fact that they are now the platform, and they refused to be journalists on civility responsibility. I mean, that's the one reason I I'm so shocked that I'm thinking regulation only my personality, my background space. I'm in. But I just don't see any other way. But to regulate them into looking at local news, which would solve a lot of these other problems of our society being misinformed. Yeah. They don't care. I what till selling. Do. We get them to see they still shop you weren't going to. How do we get them? It's better to not have journalists in your child's classroom bore at your thanksgiving table or in your neighborhood and giving you the straight facts in the context, they don't care. I'm promise you. They don't care. They have a lot of newsy. None of road yet. We're going to go to act to them because this is crazy. You know, I talked to them. I think they don't first of all Google and Facebook own all digital advertising rates duopoly. It's pretty much whatever they own everything they own the whole thing. And then they try to reach out. Do these instant articles and other things which have been worse like we wouldn't bought into it? And then put it's like, we're painting their fences. Like, we're giving them our stuff, and that's ridiculous. Like pull out of all that stuff. It doesn't help you. You don't get any money at one time. They Facebook came to me once and said, you should do Facebook live. And I said why? And they said, oh, you'll be better known. I go, where's the money? Like like, where am I going to make money at it? Well, it'd just be good for you. I'm like, no. I don't think. So. And I like why not I go because why should I do something for no money that will help you? There's nothing that helps me and they were like, well, that's one way to look at it. I said it's the only way to look at it. You know what I mean? Like, there's nothing about you vaguely interesting to me as a journalist. And so so we we're on there. I use Twitter. I like some things like for marketing grape, Twitter straight. I just did at Twitter live and stuff like that. But they don't they do not care like let me just if you look to them for. Any kind of help, you know, Mark Zuckerberg is giving or whoever's giving money to local news. It's just whatever. Rich people have always owned newspapers. Guess what? There used to be the Bancroft or whoever on the time. Angeles times. There was a rich person who owned the Los Angeles Times, whether it was the grams or whoever and sometimes you get great owners like the grams in the sells burgers, and sometimes you get shitty owners. Right. And so that's you're going to have a billionaire owner for a lot of these things going forward. They're just not going to be as valuable some of these things. Now, some of them are going to be very valued in the New York Times has done a really good job about figuring out different ways to make money. Now, it's on an enormous business. But he's doing rather I think three million out of three hundred million right there. But they're they're doing well. They're moving in the right direction that way, you know, small, of course, it is. But you know, you able to rain pal jobs are very interesting owner of a lot. I think she'd do more Mark Benny off. Look, I would rather have barked many of owning it then a lot of people. I mean, we're we're tracking these, and we're very excited about these at the sheri- he said it, but it's still if their argument is that they shouldn't be regulated because it's going to stifle innovation. They have completely stifled into dish journalists states. Yes. They don't care. Thank you one more. He don't care. And fortunately, I'm sorry. To tell you that and some of them do. But I think it's interesting though, a lot of them are buying this stuff. Jeff bezos. He's done a nice job at the Washington Post. And I don't think they'll stop in investigating the Amazon because he owns it. I don't think they will. One more. Hi, thank you for taking my question and being here today. My name's Amy. I'm a media and technology attorney in that space and had some experience navigating Communications Decency Act and other online speech issues. And I wanted to follow up on your your conversation about the Communications Decency Act and regulation versus self-regulation of these social media companies. I'm interested to hear what entity or system. Do you think is best equipped to adjudicate those online speech disputes? Do you think that's congress through legislation or like AI through filters or the social media companies themselves or the judicial system and is part of that process. How much weight you think it makes sense to give to the privacy rights of the people who are posting that content that could be problematic in the first place marks creating councils. Okay, again, let's do his work for them. Sure. Meanwhile, he's one of the world's richest people. I that drives me crazy when they're always asking for help rich people asking for help. Always a pleasure. I think that there's a lot of ways you could just make them liable for what's on their platforms. That's terrifying to them. They think it'll ruin their businesses like lawyers lawyers scare them like being held liable for that. That's one it works for a lot of people works for chemical companies that works for gas companies that works for everybody. So I think that's one way the other way is to modify that act I think so that smaller companies do get immunity in the larger companies, don't there's all kinds of creative ways just the idea of removing it his terrified Silicon Valley. So I don't know if there can be outside counsels. Would you be on a council at Facebook to adjudicate things? Do you have other things to do? Things to do. Also, I to be convinced of that. This was real look there's a lot of history here. We did a pretty good job in the matter of decency with there were commissions that set rules. Remember, how many four letter words were there? I don't remember. And you may have maybe today that seems queens stupid, but something like that. Is fair when it comes to children in decency. And we had people said go think of that. And and and tell us what the rules ought to be. Caras? Absolutely, right, nothing. Like, a lawsuit Sobers up the morality, I think and so some relax Asian of CD to thirties. Total of munity, I think is appropriate and when it comes to money and property something we haven't talked about tonight. But, but is when how are we going to deal with the fact that people are trading in what you could argue at least was your property wrong fully surrendered which is your data. That is the big thing that people don't wanna talk about it. We could all talking about freedom of the press and freedom of speech. That's all very important. Also don't mean to belittle it at all. But you started talking money and people really clam up. But at some point we have to face the economics of what is going on here. Which is that there is a transaction between a tech company and an advertiser in which we are batted back and forth. Like a tennis ball in our most sensitive and intimate information. And that isn't the Chinese government that getting it. Okay. That's okay. But it's anybody they're subject to leaks data breaches, increasingly onerous or precision or wrongheaded lead targeted marketing and so forth. So these are different problems, but propriety privacy money. And I we have models in the past for all of these these things. Businesses aren't quite as good as they think they are because they're a little more expensive to maintain properly at you know, they've been allowed to be like guess what? It's better for chemical manufacturers to dump stuff into the river. That's a better business for them when they have to put filters on and they have to put suit some people, and they have to pay off lawsuits it caught it costs a little much, and guess what? That's exactly what's been happening here. They've allowed toxic waste dump into the river of society. And they don't care. And that's that you have to think of it that way because because they don't want you to think of it that way, but their businesses might not be quite as sweet, that's all. And then nobody wants to hear that. Because Wall Street doesn't want to hear the. Nope. Not none of the power structure wants to even know as much as we do about tech without CARA. Now, we're a lifetime of luminated these issues for thank you. Thank you for not getting into a giant war. I appreciate that. Thank you. Thanks again to the former secretary of defense ash Carter for coming on my show, and thanks to you all for listening. You can follow me on Twitter at CARA. Swisher my executive producer, Eric Anderson is at Erica, America. My producer Eric Johnson is at hey. Hey, ES, Jay if you liked this episode. We'd really appreciate if you shared it with a friend and make sure to check out our other podcasts Recode media and pivot just search for them, and you're podcasting app of choice. Thanks also to our editor Joe Robbie special. Thanks to Sara Donahue, Terry divine and Andrew Diario. Also, thank you for listening to this episode of Rico decode I'll be back here on Wednesday. Tune in then. Support for this episode comes from Verizon Verizon is going beyond speed with Verizon five geo tra- wide ban. Enter the era of real time with console quality gaming beautiful four K streaming an augmented reality that feels like reality be the first to real time live a rise in five G ultra wideband and the new Samsung galaxy S ten five g the first five G phone to harness. The speed of Verizon five geometry. Why ban get the Samsung galaxy S ten five G ever and wireless dot com slash five G five G ultra wideband available only in parts of select cities.

Google Microsoft Facebook secretary Mark Zuckerberg AI ash Carter Twitter United States Silicon Valley Apple verizon New York Times president Kennedy School California Samsung
Former Secretary of Defense Ash Carter

Pod Save the World

00:00 sec | 1 year ago

Former Secretary of Defense Ash Carter

"But i think the world is brought to you by better health is there's something they interfered you're happiness from cheating your goals love it yeah federal help online counseling is there for you if that's the regional problem connect with you professional counselor in a safe and private online environment it's so convenient get help on your own time of year own pace schedule secure video or phone sessions plus chat and text with your therapist veterans licensed professional counselor specialized in depression stress anxiety relationships anger family conflict lgbt matters grief sleeping trauma and self esteem anything you share is confidential there for communications both text chat sewn in video best of all it's a truly affordable option parts of the world listeners can get ten percent off your first month with the discount code crooked world world why not get started today go to better help dot com slash crooked world simply fill out a questionnaire to help them assess your needs and get matched with a counselor you'll love it better help dot com slash crooked world welcome back to the world is tommy di tournament's wanna wish you all a happy july fourth special shout and thank you to any and all you us servicemembers listening to the show you guys are the reason that a lot of us are able to be with their families today have a beer watching fireworks maybe grill out a super grateful for all you do infer listener of the show i really do appreciate it today's episode is a interview i taped with a former secretary defense a guy named ash carter he has a new book out it's called inside the five sided box lessons from a lifetime of leadership in the pentagon i talked asked about his book but also tried tried to get into details like what the hell's that job like so we talked about the doomsday plane which is this flying command central that can survive a nuclear attack that the secretary defense and maybe the president's can be onto order return strike any event of the worst case scenario i asked him to defend z seven hundred and thirty billion plus pentagon budget because i think for a lot of us that sounds like an insane amount of money and i asked her to walk me through how it actually works he's written previously that be obama administration where he was the saturated vents didn't do enough to respond to russian interference in our election so i tried to get him to elaborate on that talked about saudi arabia his take on possible war with iran and then i tried depressive a bit on his belief that we should keep a residual jewel force in afghanistan i think he made a version of an argument that i have heard over and over and over again for eighteen years about you know they need to continue training afghan security forces and have a presence i'd love to hear what you guys think if you think that's more compelling but a it was you know good day ticket and exchange of ideas there and then finally we talked about some of the bureaucratic infighting they drove him crazy between the pentagon and asked his team in the nfc staff you will hear that it clearly pissed off and it's fun to hear some of those stories and then frankly pressing a little bit on the underlying policy beefs it seemed to have led to some of that infighting i think maybe that'd be closing guantanamo what's more important than you know some of the process fallacy talked about but we got into it a bit we mix it up i might have annoyed but that's okay without further ado here's the conversation with former secretary defense cashcard ash carter welcome to crooked media of course good to be with you tell me thanks for having me thank you for coming i was hoping we could start width day one of your time as secretary of defense you know you worked in the pentagon for thirty seven years total i believe yes so you're familiar with where the bathroom was nothing but i imagine i mean the first day it's gotta be some heavy stuff like what do you do when you walk in the morning well i don't wanna sound modest but i had been there for thirty seventy years i've been in the sector is office many times and you know it's interesting the furniture is it's exactly the same really yeah the desk is persians desk okay world war one behind it is a card table in fact in the book there's a side by side picture of me at that desk and robert mcnamara that desk and it's exactly exactly the same stuff and exactly the same way out with exactly the same chairs and so i've been in there many many times and more serious answer is that because of all that and because i've been the number two number three before that and i also knew the administration's song from having been number two number three is not the same as being number one but i knew the job and i kind of knew what i wanna do and then i didn't have as you never have in government all the time in the world do what you wanna do but i had the time to start everything i wanna start you never have time to finish everything but i had time to start at everything so i was pretty confident that i understood the job and and could take it all in that sense i may have been a usually familiar with the place if you take some of my predecessors forget that a lot of different government experience of all kinds yeah i'm going back i've you know i knew bob mcnamara but in all wonderful experience but i don't think there's anybody except maybe bill perry who had the same amount of experience in the pentagon yeah i mean within added sense of responsibility oh sure you're making literally feel the weight and i felt that more the last days and the first day telling me i remember as soon as i was out in jim mattis was in there somebody goes off your shoulders because you're not thinking all the time about those two point eight million people you're not seeing all the time what if what if what if an it is palpable and you don't feel the weight necessarily day today you're working hard you feel the gravity city of it but you don't feel the personal wait wait list off it's palpable yeah i bet the pentagon is i think a truly unique building place to work i mean there are giants who have worked in that office who have served who have experienced that is impossible replicating what did you learn over you're you're tenure working at that department about how the place works had a get things done a lot of people try and fail you know one of the things i do and the book is take you to every corner the pentagon it's kind of an executive guide the place so i have been in be acquisition the technology the personnel deep policy these intelligence space cyber every corner of the place in the course of our budget spending money contracting in the course of my career and i'm the kind of person who reads non fiction i'd like to know what a play some i've never been never will be is light in that's especially true when it's a place it affects how much you're life and it is the largest enterprise on earth it has more termed ployees than amazon you ps mc donald's target in g e and by a staggering by it has does more are indeed than apple google and microsoft combined we have the largest real property holdings in the world the size of pennsylvania and so you're doing management on a scale that no other place has and i think a curious citizenship in the ceo who runs a smaller enterprise but still unimportant enterprise i hope young people who were inspired disservice despite everything they see it in in washington nevertheless it's the noblest thing you could do if you're with your life and they get a little glimpse of it may be little part of it excites so i've obviously great fondness for the place after all those years sure i'm sure well let's talk about some of the cool perky things so can you tell our listeners and what the doomsday plan is gets called for be it is the nuclear war command and control playing an interestingly when i first work for caspar weinberger in the reagan administration is brand new so i remember it is and i had somebody do it designing the communication systems on it for example communicate with submerge submarines from there so from the outside it looks beautiful it's a big seven four seven it says united states of america and white fuselage beautiful the full blue stripe it and just gorgeous inside it is nineteen eighties there are big battle stations that looked like captain kirk kind of thing because that was the technology of the time right now all that dead now being used for anything and instead the battle staff sit there battles staff meeting the staff that would conduct nuclear war if god forbid wherever required they're working in ordinary you know laptops and they're these other things it's odd about it is that it has no windows to shielded from electromagnetic pulse from a nuclear weapon so it's a very eerie kind of environment to traveling on the other hand it is media refutable which means you never need deland you you could just get near in cash can't land in washington twenty eight hours later i never after often refuel so it's got his conveniences and it's obviously necessary the secretary defense travel in it i people ask me well wasn't a cool they have you're seven forty seven fly whatever you want and it doesn't feel like that yeah it feels like work i'm sure i'm sure you're gonna get this later but you sort of touched on it you're a physicist by training apple yes csm you i think a unique understanding of expertise of nuclear weapons can you explain what the nuclear triad is end you know i read that it will take three hundred and fifty two four hundred and fifty billion in estimate over that ten years to modernize it can you explain two people listening why we need wyatt furniture every says it's a very good cray will never he's very good question why three different kinds first of all well first of all why any at all if you're if we don't recapitalize the triad eventually intially what we have is gonna age out in will be unreliable and is unusable so let's start with the do we do not need i mean i long for the day with nuclear weapons are not present on earth just like a lot of other people in some states man who came before me who might disagree on this matter but i don't expect that in in my lifetime are very soon at all and i think it's important that we protect ourselves and we be able to the terror attack on the united states so it's it's that simple why three different kinds here's how you get to the three different kinds you need something that will for sure survive an attempted first strike by russia and therefore you need a submarine force and you need it large enough so that if it's the only thing that survives clobber russia in a way that if they see that beforehand and understand that before and they don't do it in the first place which is all they don't deck sit in the first place a full idea of deterrence then bombers well we have bombers anyway because we buy morris river other reasons so then the question isn't really whether you're buying a whole new thing is whether you buy bombs to put on the bombers and that seemed like any comical way having additional hedge and also bombers provide some flexibility in terms of the way there alerted and deployed they turn around big turnaround for sure and also if you want a signal that you're getting concerned you can put the bombers out on the runway armed and do various things witham so that's gimmes but basically you have many ways to the submarines you have to have the bombers you have anyway that's to end the thirty icbm's are at the current moment to inexpensive to worry about they built fifty years ago they just sit in the ground you have a man from statham but that's not terribly expensive now you ask about recapitalize rather that well you gotta recapitalize the submarines are afraid that's the the most expensive part of it got the bombers were gonna have in do anyway for other reasons for example the newbie twentyone bomber which we started a few years ago thee most questionable audi icbm's not because we it's so expensive to buy new missile remember they're out in these silos out in the mid west those turn out to be very expensive if we could simply put the new missiles kneeled silos will be okay it's not gonna be prohibitively expensive if we have to rebuild silos pour concrete structures under around that may prove prohibitively expensive in which case we won't in fact recapitalize will just keep the the icbm's going as long as we possibly can so that's the rabbit there's nothing holy about any of this up but it all makes sense do you think we should adopt and overseas policy when it comes to nuclear weapons no i don't because it is an important part of the are reassurance sure in store european allies in two are asian allies that if they're attacked america comes to it's eight and it's important to them when we say that we mean everything we have even if we wouldn't necessarily sara lee used nuclear weapons against any old attack against our allies and so it's extremely important to our friends that we not make such a pledge the chinese the russians the north koreans e radio they'll never believe that any way nobody's gonna believe that we are going using just 'cause we say so in peacetime so here's something that means nothing to you potential enemies in disturb dear friends how does a policy that does that recommend itself the question and i we had this discussion actually in the white house nor does present rap rap asked that question i gave him this answer and he seemed to accept it but there is a crowd around that's been arguing first juice and i respect them but it is not a policy that adds up when you consider what it's affects would be do you feel hopeful about are ability or likelihood of negotiating additional reductions fashions nuclear arsenal what the russians i know i certainly hard to see us getting anywhere with vladimir putin that domain i've known vladimir putin is the book says since nineteen ninety three when i would go with president clinton two summits with boris yeltsin and ladimir putin would be sitting in the back taking notes he is not a mysterious person he says what he thinks and if you wanna nobody thinks just read what he says in a lot of it is respectfully flee argued in cogently argued but i don't buy i mean there's an american i can accept much of what he says in particular he seems intent upon fourteen united states in itself as and objective which is in easy objective negotiating wealth i do however i think it's important that we not lose contact as the expression goes with me you gotta keep talking and i'm a little worried about the low level love to which dialogue has has some just in terms of magnitude and russians are capable of believing really wild things if you don't stay in touch with them we have an issue at the moment with the credibility of our own cells within our own country in and and so as a result of the election and we have plenty of pushing back to do in russia so there's rough work to be done with russia in my judgment in nato with respect to a standing strong against hybrid warfare against acting in response to cyber attacks on her country and so forth so there's gonna be some some rough house but you have to accompany the rough house with some dialogue and you could get yourself in a real trouble i never really get anywhere towards making things better if that's possible yeah that sounds right so i mentioned one of the challenges you have is the defense is keeping a handle on enormous budget the congress is currently working on eight i believe it's seven thirty three billion dollar defense budget for this year i mean that's just it's a staggering amount of money and i'm wondering if you think that that level is sufficient or necessary in whether you could make the case for why it is to likely liberal audience that hears that eyepopping being figure and it's a very good question and the first thing is that people have to hear that there's a real effort not to waste a lot on this i i did in that one of the things in the book and by the way one of the things at all the president's i've ever known were embarrassed by is they're asking for a substantial defense budgets at the same time their stories about toilet seats and so forth across you can't keep a straight face an asset if you know you're wasting money so when it came to the joint strike fighter and things like that i was a real talk about getting costs which was which happened indicating right strike fighter under control and running me acquisition when i system when i ran acquisition system with a some discernment an iron fist so we wouldn't waste that money that said there's several reasons why they american defense budget is large and give you some perspective the first is we pay people a lot we don't have a draft for reasons we could discuss i don't wanna have a draft therefore we compete in labor markets for good people who have debates in that connection we for example have very generous medical benefits which also are escalating faster than the cost of living in cost so there's some reasons why if you compare hours to other countries it's just more expensive eight strategic connection is this we have five big current actual or potential military challenges china russia iran north korea and terrorism think about each of those they only have us all the chinese think about us all the russians think about it this uranian thing about us nursery and so forth so we have me unfortunately but necessarily diverse portfolio in some things you continues for all those purposes but not everything so counterinsurgency and counterterrorism most relevant to the war against isis but it was very important to me to wage and we and we did both afghanistan and so forth they're demanding but not at all the same way the war with china would be if god forbid we were war with china so we find ourselves running in a number of different lines of defense budget at the same time but you're right there's a debate now going on between seven hundred fifty billion dollars on one side of the debate in seven thirty three billion dollars it's a little hard for even me just see a big difference if that's all the debate is about a but it's a fair question it's a lot of money a one other thing i think it's important to say i always refused and maintain this did you ever to trade my dollars dollars of other government agencies i was invited to do so many times because i think education isn't important investment in the future i think are indeed isn't important investment in the future i think infrastructure spending is and i was never willing to say that they were not important sources of american strengthen the future and go ahead give me more money money at the expense of somewhere else we you know we need to be realistic here discretionary spending his only thirty percent of the federal budget were really gonna deal with some of these spending issues we need to get the real roots of the witcher revenues and mandatory spending and not put all the pressure on discretionary spending that is very accurate i think people understand that you hear about these big ticket items you have thirty five to but there's a lot of more mundane matters that are probably driving costs like healthcare costs or food or housing all the things you're document i mean it's a huge enterprise and are people matter people in technology erode make us the finest fighting for us the world has ever known and if you're the secretary of defense the people are what make you wake up every morning a obviously the ones at war particularly and if you go to hospitals on weekends like my wife and i did a coat dover when they're falling and you greet the families there that creates a sensation of responsibility and closest to them that is very profound and i she had do all the personnel management for the largest workforce in the world and there are all kinds of wonderful aspects these are fantastic people all the way from young kids who were you know eighteen nineteen years old and show up at boot camp and we take their smartphones away from home and could have been a novel open sending back home to their mothers and that's a transformation yet for the beer at i wish we could do that with every seventy maybe a year older we do it with arson they become a lot better right up through are senior officers who were excellent you know the joint chiefs we would sit around the table we're all kind of my age at this moment still all male but that'll change over time but people who'd been around i just is jim mattis for example fallen stick an example gemini i have known each other since he was a major announcement assistant secretary so he's been doing this a long time to so these are pretty accomplish people right through are veterans who i always say that if i were secretary defense dream vietnam i don't know what i'd do 'cause i couldn't stand the cr people treated that way and people now treat veterans very well and that's not just charity it's because they recognize that when you hire a veteran for example you're getting someone who is a good leader is disciplined planned will get his or her tail out of bed in the morning show up for work for sure which you can take for granted if everywhere and so the the people is basically what keeps you going every time i got fed up with washing i got on airplane and go visit the troops i yes i imagine that would be a much better role then sitting in a deputies committee meeting or a some situation that meeting all day yeah one susan rice called the nfc median late afternoon in center around this big thick binder and this is the only job about two three days and i called her up and i said susan unappetizing reid this stuff before four o'clock meeting with the president and she said well this is the most important part of your job and and i said no it's not policymaking is one part of my job but you know the president's also expects munich carry out his orders excellently and he also expects meter run half the federal government so it's just a piece of my job and i gotta do the rest of my job and i can't reid you're stuff that i know when i must say it's one of the things about susan rice's i could always argue whether and she took a driver outlet lotta lotta respect susan and we could have that kind of conversation there would be no hard feelings about it but i i was right it was a third of my job positive world is brought to you by stitch fix however you dress stitch fix has expert personal stylistic and help you look your best they sure do stitch fix is an online personal styling service that delivers your favorite clothing brands right to your door tickets start at stitch fix dot com slash world answer questions about your preferred style in your personal shopper will ship you a box closed shoes accessories all the good stuff there's no commitment required and you only pay for what you keep shipping exchanges and returns are always free plus the twenty dollar styling fees automatically applied towards anything you keep from your box you'll never have to think about looking good again stitch fix get started today stitch fix dot com slash world and get an extra twenty five percent off when you keep everything in your box i love it is really funny tweet i should've a funny tweet guys yeah that's a good podcast and right there that's dot com slash world stitch fix dot com slash world world is also brought to you by door dash what's the one dish from your favorite restaurant you could never be created home revenge will love it door dash there dasher will never serve you revenge cold on dasher it'll be there on time prancer that's 'cause they connected to your favorite restaurants and you're city ordering is so easy you the door dash app and choose what you want in the dasher will bring it to you anywhere you are i say if you're a small medium sized business reporter blitzen super easy for that to grade for group orders yeah if you're a bunch of reindeer with crew do you order prancer donald donald donald is not arranger not only that burger place you'll love on door that's already been over three hundred and ten thousand amazing restaurants are two door dash connect you with door delivery over thirty three hundred cities in all fifty states in canada don a diner order from your local go to accuse me a favor chains like partly wendy's chick fillet and the cheesecake factory don't worry about dinner like dinner come to you with door dash right now hammett our listeners can get five dollars off their first order dollars and more when you download the door dash app and enter the promo code crooked world that's five bucks off your first order when you download the cash app from the app store and enter the code crooked world again from a cooking world five bucks off your first order from door dash get that revenge you were in government when the russian interference happened i seen you talked about how not enough has done to deter them order respond what options were left it's on the table well if you wanna know why if you want evidence by the way for whites and not enough was done by the obama administration or yet by the trump administration you only have to look to vladimir putin is not a man who is been pushed back on at all so that's the proof not much wisdom is just terrible i mean yes he's he's in that sense he's rational and that's why you need to push back on that we talked about the chinese yet but that's true too they respond to counter pressure and people who were afraid to apply counter pressure thinking wrongly about safety it is safer to push back i wanna be reckless about it but you wouldn't be steady inconsistent consistent about it otherwise they will get the idea that they could do something it turns out that they could press you to a point where it turns out they cannot and that's a formula for trouble so they rate no we did not do enough i not entirely sure i'm quite sure i was not privy to all the consultations because were very appropriate reasons the president never involved me in political discussions and this was in the midst of a campaign an important part of the discussion must've been if we raised this to very visible level will that become a campaign issue ed is it reasonable for it outgoing administration to burden presidential campaign andy next administration of whoever wins nobody knew at that time width crisis with the russians at the very end so those considerations i'm sure president obama was dealing with i wasn't privy to them but i respect their magnitude but i think it's quite clear we haven't done enough now you say what can you do in return could be a few examples first of all it's a fallacy that you have to return cyber cyber you don't be never after respond like for like somebody attacks us i always used to say attack and attack and i'm gonna do whatever i want in return and it wouldn't people who've airplanes indoor buildings we didn't fly airplanes in their buildings somebody jackson you cyber i won't necessarily attack back in cyber one thing ladimir proved not to be made to think about is it to couldn't play the game of fooling around in one another's internal affairs and now he resents greatly and he lives in a glass house are sponsoring in gmo's and so forth that question his central dictatorship of russia russia and some of the lies that he tells his own people and we could play rough in that area we could do much more with nato and in europe russia is hey vast country without as winston churchill might have said hey soft underbelly and i wouldn't let them forget and i could tell you but in planning that i directed 'cause i put together the first word were playing with russia in twenty five years that must have been fun well that's unfortunate but it's necessary and 'em you have to look at the vast missive russia and say why wouldn't like the job of defending that yeah and so as i got plenty of i don't wanna talk too much about this but there's plenty weaken due to the russians if we wanna get rough i hear you on the political consideration discussion and i think look i think a lot of problems were today are probably the results of national security experts making politically judgments and then executing on them i'm thinking about jim komi for a second but setting that aside if i'm glad reboot and i look at the outcome of my interference campaign the propaganda hacking john podesta whatever and i think the benefit has benefited me maybe more than any covert action but they've ever undertaken against us i'm trying to understand the set of actions against him that might be onerous enough that they would deter me if he doesn't really face a real election per say he already blames the us for the panama papers which i think he found humiliating might be the wrong word but there's a lot well that's exactly the kind of stuff that is an example i just gave you an example of something that will surely rile hip hop is anything that exposes thee way his political machine works and thee auditor awkward which there certainly are aspects of ladimir putin's rules have to come play this game and if he wants the respect that we'd have generally shown him and he's not gonna show show respect for are politicals system while i take the gloves off for a little while and see how he likes it till i think we do have options and we've just not exercise and we could all go back and rationalize white may not have been done i can't i don't fully understand why it has not been done now obviously i'm not in the government but there's plenty weaken do i don't believe there is it's like this with china north korea and and so forth there's there if you think about these things long enough and i've been thinking about for a long time you know there's much to be done well yeah you you mentioned china earlier i so you know xi jinping as tougher cookie as there is on the world stage he's now marrying up absolute iron grip on his country's leadership way of big data in in surveillance technology that is allowing him to control people in in ways like never before i mean how much do you worry about him in the rise china versus some other great power challenges as it has to be you're biggest worry because it's the biggest dog out there and it has turned out to be hey communist dictatorship not what in the nineteen nineties people had hoped it would com which is something larger but relatively benign and increasingly like us it is not becoming increasingly like us and i news she shouldn't paying obviously i knew who didn't doubt i knew john men i've known the chinese gone back to the nineteen nineties and i have seen as you go through those three leaders a steady progression where the point of view that it is china's not just an international power but his be over weaning power of asia has taken the place of the view that hey this international system works pretty well for us why don't we joining it rather the challenging it challenge rather than join has grown in intensity and you see that fully incision thing and when it comes to technology like hey i and people ask me who's gonna win the competition and i i i say well they're certainly gonna win the competition in who creates the perfect repression machine right because we're not aspiring today application of i i don't think they're gonna win yeah i raised side there for that matter of and it's all other story story but not only the technological but he could not making idiological competition with china is going to be the story the next generation i in a couple of things to keep in mind is you contemplate that the first is that we had a cold war before it was with the communist dictatorship but we aspired to changing their way of government which most americans don't aspire to do in chinese goods but the real difference was we never traded with some rain are economists have not given us a playbook for trade and you see us group bead yeah towards a play but that's the best description given the tariffs business there and ingredient of the solution but they're not really also what do you do about students who were paid for by the uss federal government what do you do about things like hey i what do you do about all of these challenges that are have strategic strategic implications butter really bad conomic says well we need the economists gives all they have is free trade or any permeable membrane which is what we had during the were not there those fits this particular model so we've got some innovation to do respect a policy make it in china has not done yet there's been a lot of work done by both you bama in the trump administration to call out in tried to suppress the threat of of chinese technology companies like while way which are potentially building out five g infrastructure in places have done working career with allies do you think that's the right approach should we be trying to take out their companies or should we be building up our own or both i mean how do you how do you think about it i think of it as a play in the playbook but you said v way of dealing with it and it's like i feel the same way about terrorists and so forth we keep a lady upon one thing shrine is this the policy now i met international economist but i've been around a long time and i could tell we don't know what we were doing in this area for a long time multi economists believe guidance they ever gave the president's first i could tell was don't do anything that upsets the markets markets which may have been fined for them and their clients but isn't much good for the average american and we gotta get a better deal for people i actually agree with that proposition i think that are companies don't expect us to be confrontational but they do expect their government stick up for them when an even playing field is presented to them same thing is true with other friends and allies another little other countries remember before one gets to exercised about china china's heft that china is only half of asia if we retain friends in good trading trading partners and some counterweight to china india their half of asia will be fine they're not all there is to asia they're only half of asia and so i would be very careful not to sacrifice are relations and are trade made with those others that's why it's only ancient history now but tpp was such a good idea because it was all it was every buddy clustering together around a set of principles if you leave the battlefield field to bilateral contests a network of bilateral contest you see deemed a battlefield to the chinese that's where they're the strength of a dictatorship comes in they can bring military economic politically power jointly to bear in a way that are societies cannot do and so if you play the game on their terms they're gonna win a that's a mistake you agreed you're a defense expert nuclear physicist it's expert so the trump administration apparently authorized several years companies to begin sharing some unclassified nuclear energy technology or information with the saudi's is that a good idea it's not a good idea leads to the saudi arabia be a beginning to aspire to a nuclear weapon yeah i do not think that the salaries look at an indigenous technical capability as their path to a bomb i think they look to pakistan and the way saturday's do everything else using money by rather than their own ingenuity it is not a hard working populace that's a problem that the kingdom has which is all they've done is had other people pump for them and build their houses and clean their houses and so forth and so be indigenous this artist zainal and managerial capacity is not the same as it is another place you see taking off in the world industrial stage day like india which obviously it has the cape pasadena make nuclear weapons 'cause demonstrated so i at the same time i it's a mistake distort anybody flirting with that i think and to begin to stimulate all the inevitably exaggerated rated fears of everybody else in the region that saudi arabia is gonna do that so we have always been very careful about not getting the saudi's hooked in any way psychologically on sunday and they can't can't do by themselves anyway which is therefore pointlessly going to get their neighborhood exercised that is why we have shied away from it historically it's a tough neighborhood imagine you've done a lot of travel to the region done i work at leaders there i mean when you look at mohammed bin solomon's behavior over the last couple of years from the civil war in yemen to the murder of jamal shoghi to recent report that they're buying some sort of ballistic missile technology from the chinese does it make you think it's time to recalibrate that relationship in any way i think it is because it is no longer true that we are as abjectly dependent upon them for energy stillborn global energy markets it's but it's not the same thing this idea that our arms sales to them which i value arm sales you're good thing they help are industry and they're reflection their way we strengthen then are friends and allies which is a force multiplier that's a good thing but the idea that it's a favor they're doing to us which is with us idea they seem to have sold recently successfully as the former chief arms x border of the united states i can tell you it is it just a transaction yeah and if they think they're doing is a favor they ask for a lower price so that's a favor yeah and then last is would they never come through militarily their ground forces are not very capable they're only cable ground forces that which protects they monarchy itself which is quite small so they're not like be emirates whichever very good special operations perations forces saudi's do not they have any big airforce 'cause they've spent a lot of money on it they're working on their navy but it's not a hugely capable military and they never do anything that we've asked them to do i asked them repeatedly it in many different ways and in many different modes to help us against isis and they didn't and i even said okay let's do it the old fashioned saturday wages catcher wallet out and help rebuild mazel and all the towns up the tigris river valley that have been destroyed either by isis or the war there you're sunni co sectarian and you have the money to do it and that's a way to make a contribution still not so i think we should reset out i haven't even started on yemen yet where we didn't actually work with them at all but their military is hard to work with because they're ready fire aim you saw that when they started their coalition against islamic extremism they went out and announced it know what in the muslim world ever heard of it before her hadn't had ever had agreed to join so they're like that but that is my best explanation i'm no expert on this and i don't have access to all the facts for the kashogi murder you couldn't possibly a plan that thing it was to botched it'd be player and you can't have been plan that to have turned out that way another words do you think they were trying to render him or am i think it was a ready fire aim thing it reminded me of try and do a military operation with them as they hadn't thought through the game that's the only explanation i could and again i have no particular law enforcement information but it reminded me of tried and work with them so i think i'm having them as are friends and partners in a dangerous part of the world don't get me wrong but we're not the petitioners in this relationship and i think we can ask for a reset as you called it and i think that's appropriate but i think the world is brought to you by simply safe there are over two million burglaries reported every year that's one every thirteen seconds in what's crazy is that only one in five homes have home security maybe because most companies really don't make it easy that's why simplisafe simply safe is my top choice simply safe protects your whole home every window every room every door twenty four seven monitoring just a fraction fraction of the cost simply safe even sent pundit a special helmet keeps her safe inside that she walks around river walk around his helmet on this it looks are true you take protection seriously dispatch is up three point time three point five times faster because they used video verification there's no contract no hidden fees no fine print designed the blender right into you're home there's no wires there's no drilling it's easy to order easy to set up only takes about an hour simply safe is one all the big awards words seeing that award at the new york times wire at oscar the prices are always fair and honest around the clock monitoring is just fifteen bucks a month visit simplisafe dot com slash crooked world you get free shipping sixty day free trial there's nothing to lose go now reverend canneries went whoa and it was like a thing like a real big cultural moment was he went wall that those joey now they're joey had a while but that was that one from well there's a matrix well anyway i go to simplisafe dot com slash cooking relative they know your show sent you that simply safe dot com slash crooked world don't let joey or ashton right my or any of these actors in the nineties breaking through yeah tell no i let's see obama white house in twenty thirteen the president's spent most of the first year or two focused on afghanistan including a very significant search of troops on two different occasions to the region i suspect that if he could have that decision back he would it's hard for me to see what major benefit to you as national security came of sending tens of thousands more u s servicemembers to afghanistan but you know better than i do and i'm i wanna factor that benefit is that substantial progress very substantial progress has been made towards building afghan security forces that are capable of keeping the mode order within the borders of afghanistan that's what we did with afghan army any afghan police and of course when i was under secretary though my job was to run the wars in the engine room since snap the up of the bridge sense built two hundred and fifty eight bases in afghanistan the summer of twenty did you remember these times in in those days we starting to build the afghan army and you would get a recruit they would not know the date not only the date of their birth year of their birth they were all named my hamad many of them with no other last name imagine trying to enroll them they could net count the number bullets in the magazine being of their rifle that was the human capital we were dealing with us at the start and we've built them now until they not perfect and they don't they're rich doesn't run throughout the country don't get me wrong but the ability to maintain a motive come out of order within the country and i think that if we stick with that project not by substituting for them but continuing to help them that is the benefit and that means two things tommy farrar security one is no more attacks on the united states emanating from afghanistan but there's another thing that's very rarely discussed which is upside having a friend lousy part of world look at a map you have pakistan to one side you have iran to another side you have central asia and on to russia to the north here you have a government the government of gunny in afghanistan wants to work with our military i suppose gas that if we weren't there we would be trying to figure out how to get back there and if you want all of that upside in one anecdote think of this we could not have gotten bin laden in a bottle bod without jalalabad in afghanistan we could never have gotten there so heavy place from which you could operate and a friend is it important thing for protecting our country and keeping the peace this by the way is an important principle just unfortunately needs to be said 'cause it's been contested people say why are we still create we've been there for fifty years why are we still in europe we've been there for seventy years that is to me a success there hasn't been a war on the korean peninsula for fifty years end we have had eighty foothold in asia an american foothold in asia that's been a great benefit for us in europe there is not a war for fifty years so the reason they were put there was successful they were in wasted there they did exactly what they were supposed to do and so i'm quite comfortable as long as americans are dying in afghanistan anything like the times i'm sure you remember i very much remember because i was every weekend at the hospitals yeah if are simple being there and helping them out is not burdensome i hear people say to me people come to me and say i'm tired of afghanistan and i wanna say to them just exactly what are you tired of redone about watching it on television maybe the friday no people who were tired of afghanistan yeah well i mean look i i think there's maybe a middle ground here right which is you could have i think at the time there were maybe seventeen thousand and thirty three thousand servicemembers there certainly there could have been an additional training capacity that went in that didn't include tens of thousands of marines going helmand province in the south for example is it seems likely that if the trump administration cut the deal with the taliban has some sort of power sharing arrangement the taliban will have maybe some control over those regions right i mean i think the territorial taking in losing in retaking of areas is i think what maybe leads people the question policy z reason we went in large scale was to reset the balance there the afghan security forces were not not strong enough in we had harmeet karzai right who's running the country at which set the whole thing back for the year yeah that was hard fighting in very bitter friday night would have liked to avoid it also so but i think in retrospect it was a necessary step to make so this is one of these situations where history is handed us pay bad situation but again is longest were not dying in large numbers and spending large amount of money were just sticking with enterprise we began i don't see walking away from it at this point we're not gonna turn the place and to switzerland lint and by the way you mentioned the idea of reconciling with the taliban i do not believe the dead as possible i think the way that you if negotiations could ever work with the taliban will be when they're afraid they're gonna be beaten not when they're confident americans are tired of it and they're gonna leave haven't we made that argument for eighteen years yes and it's been true each and every year so what do we do that means north vietnam no no i just said we don't need to go back do the fighting no we just need to stay healthy afghan security forces all but to the very serious question of we'll negotiations with the taliban succeed in an environment where they think were leaving nuts stain i'm say no because they think that their situation will be improved over time people don't negotiate unless they believe they can't improve their situation by continuing to fight that's the only way the war's end and the only way civil wars and so they have to come to the view that negotiation z only way they can admit if they think were leaving i'm gonna band any afghan security forces then they'll play the game of negotiation and i believe that that's what they're doing now and that's the price we pay after all this time for saying that were going to leave why would you ever do that saving you're gonna leave yeah i mean because you have is great in obligation to the u s tax payers in service members and their families and the people that you're ultimately council to as afghans well the same thing applies is there which is is not the right policy to leave if again if we were paying a lot more in blood and treasure than it would be closer call him but now eight definition definition of success is possible for a relatively small continued investment we're just fatigue yeah with a war yeah well that's not a good strategic rationale now i'm fatigue lots of places around the world we haven't talked about north korea have a lot of north korea fatigue but you can't afford to take the point of view there every year year after year the wonderful north koreans and it drives crazy but you've got a stick with it yeah so this was a microcosm of a maybe some of the debate that might have played out in the situation room during this the af cancer discussion you talk about some of those inner situation room politics in the book and in a fun way that i think is illustrative of broader story could you tell listeners what table dropping was at a meeting and why you got it so much yeah i tried it in the book which covers a lot of things but does do a little bit of the traditional washington situation room stuff instead of saying who said why did what particular moment which i would never do anyway i don't violate president obama's rather people's confidence is lightly at all i just tried it tell some interesting stories about what it's like in one of them was when some nfc staffers so called table dropped table drop means you cabinet members come in and somebody walks around the table handing out eight proposed policy that nobody in you're department is ever seen before you've never seen before and they have cooked up and i think that the president's been present at that moment he would not liked it either because i think president by matt if their sense of process about him but i really offended you know you don't do that to me before i come to a meeting on something serious i study it i expect a piece of paper i expect discipline process so i balled up and threw it at the who gave it to me and i said don't table drop you know what right and i later gotten the newspaper which is fine with me because it was a story i was proud death toll in in my understanding or at least this is what the washington post reported was about whether or not the transfer detainee out of get mo by a certain deadline and make a decision by certain it was to create policy that detainee decisions about whether to transfer which means taking someone out of guantanamo bay detention facility and giving them into the custody of another government that you trust to take care of the at the come down the battlefield which is a reasonable thing to do in some cases whether there's gonna be a timetable for doing that will under the law i'm the one who signs off on that that's the law says the secretary of defense signs off on that now i took that really seriously i'm not gonna sign off on sending somebody off somewhere who's gonna come back in hurt my people i know people wanna closed kuantan mobile i wanna do all bay detention facility i did too but only if it could be done safely so they were essentially trying to put a timetable on my decision making on a grave matter or which is a matter of law it was my responsibility and am i gonna take that from some pip squeak in excuse my no russian company in a no no i wasn't it's offensive okay now let me be a pitch swing the pushes you on this agreed that the process foul is there ever a bit of like agrees process fouls credibly would not have done so i would never know but i guess it gives a funny example to me because like there's a finite number of individuals and they've been rotting there for a decade plus intel files had been gathering dust right like isn't it also offensive that there's this like irreparably broken justice system has these guys in limbo it like how do we push these people out because what you're talking about i think is the risk of recidivism and returning to the battlefield but isn't there always gonna be some risk of that don't we have to execute on that at some point well we we did transfer suffer and i authorized a nut quite a number of transfer and i studied those cases each individually and i studied be person detained and there were cases where in our concern over are road counterterrorism situation in the early days after nine eleven we sort of grabbed a lot of people who turned out to be minor flunkies and so forth and were not really very threatening true the great majority of them including including people who have returned the battlefield released in previous years in fact well before the obama administration came in let alone as secretary of defense but i didn't wanna see any more returned to the battlefield but there were a number of who could be transferred and that was fine out and i would get they recommendations of the chairman of the joint chiefs and the director central delusions drug national intelligence sector state and i would take their recommendations on my own views together and make the determination and you're right there were cases but they're also cases in which i read the file an determined that there was no government whom i would trust that individual given the gravity any of their acts and their continued in tensions with respect terrorist action in the united states now so that's the situation not a wonderful situation at all and not an easy answer to it i'll tell you what my answer was one moment but you asked whether there is a good justice system for dealing with it will lose not because the geneva conventions don't quite apply in a prisoner of war and swapping at the end of a war and so forth they usa legal system for variety of reasons does and end the justice department ever showed any enthusiasm taking that are fickle carris so perhaps and so we had ac system which is costing student a lot of money and not getting anywhere so you're right the no concept of justice was working here my view was that i would probably be able to safely transfer suffer some additional detainees but there would remain about forty that i would not transfer got and if we wouldn't have closed get low we need to find a place to detain them and if didn't like being in gone out of obey cuba then we need to find somewhere else i begin lookie somewhere else with the president's i told the present this i said for closing gitmo butts only safely and safely lee means finding places to put the people who can't be transfers are safely and so we began looking around and i looked in leavenworth kansas where we have a military facility senator pat roberts it's called me up and said ashley i just gave a press conference to the kansas press and told them that over my dead body would you ever built hey prison forget mo and this is somebody who is resolute lee opposed closing get mo but he wouldn't let me similarly in south carolina senator lindsey graham who's usually quite good on these issues and i worked with him by broached the idea of charleston also big military facility and there wasn't a whole lot of nimby enthusiasm their eyes there so the practical matter is were that i think the right policy was closed it and transfer people to another kind of detention facility and when you got to that second ingredient you got no enthusiasm for it and president obama they understood all this entirely i had many many conversations without any allowed me to design and then try to find a location fern alternative detention facilities i still think that's right it's a lot less talked about now than it was back then but they're still there now nature nature is meanwhile moving them into advanced age and i think ultimately they will pass away if this situation continues you hear a lot from you know former cabinet officials tolls there's there's evidence low i think in terms of whether white house's nfc's or too involved or not enough and national security affairs i'm curious what you think the right balance is we got this a lot and he obama white house by gates wrote about it but you know it's wasn't lbj picking bombing run targets in vietnam right this was determining how many you a service members will be sent to afghanistan in the troop surge something like that i mean how do you over you're thirty seven years you what he appropriate appropriate balance was it's changed over time in when caspar weinberger and arbor caspar weinberger he wouldn't allow us to tell the white house anything he thought that there is one in only one contact and that was him to the president and many of his successors felt the same way but that was the ear of nuclear war and in that is released such a narrow decision making channel it is still the case but it's basically me and the president and the commander of stratacom and nobody else really matters in that critical chain yeah and there isn't a whole lot of complexity discuss but wars you're different today tommy so i never objected to the proposition that operations that we were contemplating could not be shared under appropriate securities restrictions with the secretary with people in the state department or the intelligence community 'cause sometimes i need to know what they thought because this wasn't a purely military question in under appropriate security guidelines as happy to have him what i did not experience that bob is a good friend of mine did experience was micromanagement and i give the best explanation i could in the book which is that i discerned very early the president obama had the suspicion that when the secretary of defense sent over a piece of paper to him that he was passing on her sometimes seem to be passing on the recommendations commendations of his subordinates and not looking at it through the president's eyes and of course the secretary of defense is supposed to be the president's eyes what's the difference between the president's eyes at a commander size well commanders really busy fighting the war he's deeply involved in technical and tactical details a president has the whole world and the whole country to worry about and so secretary the defense is supposed to be bridging those two and that takes work yeah and i tried to establish with president obama and i think i succeeded be reputation for having scrub things very thoroughly self i'm proposing him eight night raid or hey airstrike more array hostage rescue and it's risky and he is ultimately the one responsible person league morally and also politically that i ash carter have assumed before i passed it onto him that political and moral responsibility ability and i've been up all night asking all the questions and making sure that we had good answers that seemed reasonable expectation and when i did that he didn't do what he'd have to do if he came to doubt me which is turned his staff and say would you guys check this that is what someone who doesn't fully trust what he's getting from secretary defense does i didn't wanna be someone he didn't fully trust now i'm not gonna say that you know he trusted me in all things at all times and so forth but i worked very carefully over time convincing them that i wouldn't send lightly send him a proposal unless i had really tried to put myself in his shoes first he deserves after all he's out a president's out doing all kinds of other stuff and so in my lifetime it's changed over time i think you have have oversight of complex ops today that's not wasn't true during the cold war and it was just kind of all or nothing and yet as secretary defense don't want people in the white house or people around town iser jump being the chain of command on me but they best way to avoid that has to be a secretary of defense whom the president feels is scrubbing things as much as he would have any you knew present upon credits bama was eight demanding person and i respected that i think you should be demanding of you're stabs demanding i need my staff is nice to them is always courteous to me but he was in patient sloppiness any darn well oughta be darnall it'd be i went way over time i was a two into this the book is inside the five cited box lessons from a lifetime of leadership in the pentagon there's a million other great stories in the book everyone should read it if you wanna know just a piece of what that job is like ash carter thank you so much for doing it thanks really good to be with you as always nitrogen and about the world happy july fourth

pentagon president secretary ash carter obama fifty years eighteen years seven hundred fifty billion do seven thirty three billion dol seven thirty three billion dol eighteen nineteen years thirty seventy years twenty five percent thirty seven years twenty eight hours twenty five years thirteen seconds thirty percent two three days seventy years
Amanpour: Ash Carter, Mavis Staples, Frank Rich

Amanpour

57:52 min | 1 year ago

Amanpour: Ash Carter, Mavis Staples, Frank Rich

"It's an image of your seat thrill ride that will change over seemed movies forever. The movies starts July seventh nine PM on CNN. Hello, everyone and welcome to on one fourth. Here's what's coming up. I'm not sure the current president listens to the secretary of defense. Former Defense Secretary ash Carter tells me what it takes to run the Pentagon, and why he believes China and Russia, this administration's biggest foreign policy challenges. Then all what a world. Would live in celebrating eighty years of gospel and soul music, legend, Mavis Staples on why she is still trying to sing America together and later, the truths about power Washington about the cynicism the politicians and the people around the nose. They grasp for power that just hold up and produce a Frank. Rich tells us all about the, the smash hit comedy, which sheds a brutal light on political game playing in Washington. Welcome to the program everyone. I'm Christiane Amanpour in London. The horizon is crammed with security challenges. Not least the escalating tensions with Iran and the United States is sending more military forces while still having no Defense Secretary following General Mattis, his resignation in January in May President Trump nominated the acting secretary of defense Patrick Shanahan for the job. But this week he withdrew his nomination due to a domestic violence incident and he's being replaced by Mark Espen secretary of the army. Now the need for strong leadership at the Pentagon is something. My next guest understands all too well Ashkar to served the secretary of defense under President Obama, and he's worked inside the Pentagon on and off for the past thirty five years. His new book inside the five sided bulks sheds light on the complex in a workings of the organization, and it offers a blueprint for defense in an ever changing world. And he joined me. For meal to talk about it. Six thirty Carter. Welcome back to our program. Good to be here with you Christiane. So you got this new book out, and it's really looking at leadership, and particularly concentrating on your time at the Pentagon, and you make a blanket declaration, so that we all know where you stand. I love this Pentagon. I love this organization warts and all why do you feel the need to say that one of the woods? It's two hundred forty years old. So it's got traditions and people tend to think of the place as stodgy, but and there's a certain part of tradition. That's really good. But also, the Pentagon is this on the proud of, and this is not a word a learning organization. Let me give you a couple of samples counterinsurgency and counter I e d obviously, we were caught flat-footed on them initially, and we had to learn how to do better. We got really excellent, as it does have warts there, some ways in which we're still haven't made. The transition strategically where we need to go from the year of our preoccupation with cantor, terrorism and counter insurgency to our the need to focus on China and Russia. And the high end we haven't yet. Linked ourselves to the tech community completely which is an important part of our future, and continuing to be the most technologically advanced military in the world, we have we're not, we haven't dipped into all the pools of talent that we need, and volunteer force. You may not know Chris jam, for example, that a large number of our recruits, come from just six states in the United States, and that means that they're forty four states where we haven't got enough presence yet. So there are a whole lot of things. And this is what I wanna things I describe in the book. There are a lot of managerial issues. And you think about the secretary defense being in the situation room or, or are helping the president make decisions. That's a piece of the job. And it's just a piece of the you're running the largest organization in the world. And your secretary defense not only today, but of tomorrow, I gotta make sure that I leave to my successor, the excellence that I received from my predecessors. Okay. So you're working against that future all the time, but I just wanted to, you are a theoretical physicist. I believe by training and backgrounds so you thoroughly steeped in the fact based world, and I guess you make your decisions on facts and evidence. How difficult is it because you write about this in your book? You talk about how very difficult it is to make informed and fact based decisions amount of policy in these highly emotional, as you call them vitriolic political times. What are the key issues that you see? Well, you've got to make it clear to all your subordinates. You have to set an example. That I expect from you, not only good conduct and professionalism. But also the truth, and you need to therefore stick up for your subordinates when they do the right thing, or say the right thing I was lucky all the times, I was involved in Republican Democratic administrations that there were presidents who were all very smart, and they took their responsibilities. Seriously? And they would read and steady Moore Bill Perry coming back from a meeting when he was secretary defense with Bill Clinton, and he said it so embarrassing. He says Clinton's always the best prepared person in the room. And I had in President Obama also when I was actually secretary defense, somebody who is demanding. And didn't suffer fools easily at all. See need the appetite at the top. And I, I don't I haven't worked under the current president. I don't quite see that appetite. And of course he's talks casually about the truth. And whether it matters or not what the president. I don't know. I don't think I put completely I pathetically. I've been asked about. I think I think not because you have to believe that you can help your first duty as a cabinet member is to help the president to succeed. This is a president who doesn't seem to listen to his cabinet members, and so it doesn't look like I'd be getting into situation where I could be helpful. I also have to say this, this separate matter. I don't like all of his conduct. Well, let me just because the idea of, of being loyal soldier, so to speak, and being a helpful constructive member of, of cabinet is an inch. Interesting line at an interesting needle to thread. So you when you in the Reagan administration, you criticized quite publicly the centerpiece of Reagan's ministry in the Cold War, which was the Star Wars program. What was the reaction to you for doing that? And how does the secretary of defense thread, the needle between disagreeing and dissenting and being accused of trees and either and shutting up while there was a little of that when I? Publish my report on Star Wars people saying, well, this is the president's policy. How can you say it's not scientifically correct, which just wasn't I would like to build a missile defense based on lasers. But we didn't know how we by the way, who still don't know how, but there was another side to it. It wasn't considered partisan death for anybody. The scientific community stayed loyal to me and supportive of me. But more importantly, I worked after that for Paul Nitze, who was President Reagan's arms control negotiator. It wasn't regarded that descent was regarded provided was based on fact and truth. And it was done. Respectfully as a, a respectable contribution, it didn't disbar you from public life. So that was a time that I hope is not bygone where partisanship didn't matter in that sense, and people who are running national security understood, there'd be there'd be debate. I guess I wanted to ask you, then because you bring up Russia and China and these other issues as real strategic threats for the future. Let's just talk about Russia under President Obama and clearly under President Trump. It's been a major issue. I wanna know how you assess what? Consumes an motivates president. Putin. You've written about it in your book. Well, I as it turns out, I met him for the first time in nineteen Ninety-three. So I've had up to observe a note taker for Boris Yeltsin in the summit. And I was an assistant secretary defense, but I've observed him and all those years and one thing Christiane about Ladimir Putin, is he says what he means and says, what he's thinking you can just read what he says, and you probably do that as well. And I understand where he's coming from me, laments, the end of the Soviet Union, he thinks the United States has made mistake after mistake by toppling, governments without any idea for what is going to replace the math awards. So he says all this stuff, and, and I, I don't agree with all those positions. But I understand where you hard to work with with Ladimir Putin. Is he a sets it as a Russian goal to frustrate the United States? How do you hold talks with somebody over their desire to frustrate you? That's not a place. That's not Syria. It's not arms. Troll. It's not non-proliferation. We can discuss these issues and agree to disagree where we disagree worked together where we agree. But it's hard to build a bridge to a guy who's out to frustrate you. When you say frustrate, I mean, I think you mean in five challenge America's presence and its influence around the world does. Affoil affoil, exactly. And I wonder whether this is even doubly troubling because you also and others actually have said that, even though they're not bosom buddies, and they don't always view the world through the same lens, China and Russia, having these same thoughts about Marika they are. I don't myself really by the prospect of them working all that closely together, we've been afraid of that for a long time Russia and China, are very different. They're very different interest. Very different futures. The only thing they agree on is the desire to challenge the United States, but they do it for diff. Reasons. And so they'll, they'll both be challenging us. I don't see them for me to block or a failings. But you're right. China has an agenda and you can talk to them about their gend understand where they want to go there communist dictatorship number one. They want to keep that going. Number two, they want to spread their economic and maybe increasingly political influence around the world, which I don't wanna see happen, but he's certainly an understandable objective. They don't set themselves. The goal of screwing the United States per se. They set themselves the goal of stab wishing themselves as an equal, and maybe someday as superior. Tonight's, they're a little bit easier to work with and those objectives. They're both competitors. But it's that aspect of Putin. That is kind of spiteful that makes him particularly difficult. That's really interesting because clearly China, though has been the main big power. Power in the cross has this administration, Taras the trade wool, pulling out of the TPP all those things. I mean obviously angry about the of intellectual property while read about wow way worried about the territorial ambitions in the South China Sea, etc. You have said that you regret pulling out of the TPP, because in some way to you. It's, it's as valuable if not more than an aircraft carrier in the region had strategic importance. I mean, let let's remember important everything you said about China's. Right. I agree with that. China's however, only half the economy and half the population of Asia. So there are a lot of other countries there that collectively are very important to us. And TPP was in effort to first of all, enlist them with us it establishing trade rules with China, and by abandoning teepee TPP you leave the world to a network of bilateral trade relations. Now, think of all that feels if you're a small, South East Asian country, and you're negotiating with China bilaterally, and there no rules. It's all about force and you have a communist dictatorship against you. That's huge. And that can bring communistic data ships can the political the military and economic all to bear down on you. You don't stand a chance in that environment? And that's means that these trading partners, which are half of Asia are put at a disadvantage. Advantage with respect to us. So that's why TPP was a was a good thing. And it's gone now. So we can't cry over spilled milk. But it's why some multi-lateralism has to go along with bilateralism in trade relations. Bilateralism is the Chinese plain field is not our plain field. You don't leave the plain field to the opponent or the competitor. Would you agree that in fact, it was under the president USA, Barack Obama that the idea of deterrance and red lines has been rented meaningless no matter what you think about interventional, not in Syria, putting a red line, by the United States America and then not enforcing it? Reduces your credibility and your deterrents now. I think if we could go back and do it over again. Or, or if I'd been secretary defense and, and been able to advise President Obama at the time even if he decided to accept this. Russian deal where they'd get rid of the chemical weapons was used the issue without us having to. Carry out the strikes, that we had planned, by the way, I was deputy secretary was indecision making mode. But I was already to go. And I thought we were going to go that night. Down inside down in the engine room. But if you're not gonna do that in order not to suffer the strategic harm that you're talking about the loss of reputation. You have to go out and explain and one of the things President Obama was great in many, many ways. I want to be too negative. Give the wrong impression. But this was not his strength when he thought he had done something right? He thought explaining that to somebody who didn't get. It was. Kind of a waste of his time. And I think that in this case, you had you've just done something that really surprised the rest of the world, you better have a good explanation for that otherwise the surprise. It said, it's not it's not going to be judged on the merits is going to be judged on the appearance and he is a very mayor. It's based kind of guy, and that's that's respectable, but in public life, sometimes you have to worry about appearance as well. That's fascinating insight. It really is. I just want to sort of end in the Middle East. We understand the tensions with Iran, who knows what's going to happen that, but I want to ask you about Saudi Arabia because you've been in the room around the current crown prince Mohammad bin Salman, anytime. Yes. And so I would like you just tell us the US under President Trump seems to put all its eggs in this Saudi basket right now in terms of Middle East security and Middle East policy. And you have said that you feel. That they haven't proved themselves to be reliable competent military allies, and that he himself doesn't seem to be massively prepared. Saudis, constantly say you know what a wonderful thing it is to have them as friends and allies and it's nice to have friends and allies. But first of all, all isn't what it used to be second of all. I appreciate that. They buy our arms, but realistically, they have no other choice, and they pay for them, and we give them it's a transaction. It's equal. It's not a favor to us. And when it comes to us asking them to do something as a partner sorry to say, they haven't come through, for example, I asked had been some on my met with many, many times, many, many conversations with him and tried to have good working relationship with what he do something about ISIS, and they never did anything about ISIS. Instead, they if you remember, they declared a coalition one day without telling anybody else in the Islamic world that they were starting to Slavic coalition which was a good idea. But this was a ready fire aim kind of initiative. And so their performance has always been what they suggest it's been, and I'm not trying to be too hard autumn. I'm just trying to be realistic. Don't tell me that. This is a relationship in which they give much more than they get that, just not the case. I think we ought to reset the relationship. A little bit. And, and ask more and demand more of Saudi Arabia. Hey, you are again, going back to your theoretical physicist, background. I just want to ask you what you make of the miniseries Chernobyl, which is taking the world by storm. And with seeing in real time how the Soviet Union lied about what was going on. How these people from the firemen to the scientists to the reactor personnel to civilians didn't know what was happening and then try to do everything they could to mitigate what was an enormous catastrophe. I'm just just talk about that. Well, I remember those days, a friend of mine was Yevgeny Velikhov, who who's the guy that Gorby? Gorbachev put in charge of the clean of the cleanup. I remember them flying helicopters over dropping buried in concrete and so forth. And I remember the, the lies and the cover up. But that was the Soviet Union, then you spent time in. The Soviet Union back in those, those days, and I think this documentary so realistic and so. All the, the, the sets and everything are so Soviet it takes me back to those times. I remember and I knew a lot of those people who did it pretty young yet, but I had relationships with their scientific community. There's one moment. I'll never forget that was reported. The New York Times where a New York Times reporter goes out on the train station citing in Kiev. And there's a guy with his whole family and all their belongings, packed up waiting for the train, and the reporter goes up to him and says, why relieving Kiev the government says everything's okay? And the polit bureaus arriving today in Ukraine. And the guy looks at the New York Times reporter and says if it's bad enough for them to come. It's bad enough for me to go that was the Soviet Union amazing Ashikaga. Former secretary of defense, thank you so much for joining me. Good to be with you, as always Christiane. Hi, I'm Bill Kristol feeling confused about politics, who isn't. That's why my podcast conversations with Bill Kristol. They have thoughtful conversations with leading figures, and politics and public policy, we reflect on where we are. And we consider where we're going subscribe at I tunes, or wherever you get your podcast and check out our archive for conversations with guests like Mike, Murphy, David Axelrod, Ron brownstein, and Paul Begala. No spin, no soundbites just thoughtful real conversations pleased to subscribe today to conversations with Bill Kristol. Remember to create an ad like this one, visit pure winning dot com slash CNN the right sheets. Can take your sleep and your style to the next level with Boll and branch. The upgrade has never been more affordable. Every set is crafted from one hundred percent organic cotton. They get softer and softer over time. That's why they have thousands of five star reviews and even three US presidents have Boll and branch sheets. Try them. Thirty nights. And if you don't love them, send them back for a full refund. Go to bollandbranch dot com today for fifty dollars off your first set of sheets, plus free shipping with promo code CNN to spelled B O L L, andbranch dot com. That's Boll and branch dot com promo code CNN, too. Now something to soothe the soul Mavis Staples has been singing gospel music, since she was eight years old. She's performed in front of America's most iconic leaders like Martin Luther King. John F Kennedy and her powerful vocals, provided the soundtrack to the civil rights movement. In one thousand nine hundred nine she and her family band, the staple singers were inducted into the rock and Roll Hall of fame, and in two thousand sixteen she became a Kennedy Center, lifetime on ary. It's one of the highest accolades in American culture, this year as maybe it's gets ready to turn eighty. She's out with a new album. We get by she's had an extraordinary life in Korea. And as I heard she has no plans to slow down. Maybe Staples, welcome to our program. Thank you for having me. You about to turn on L. Thank you. You're about to turn eighty years old. Nobody would tell by looking at you, by the way, and you've been a professional musician all your life, just about was there, ever a time that you doubted the cost, your life is taken. Well, no. Not really. I've had two stumbles but I always kept the faith that everything would be. All right. So. I've been just fine and tell me how it all began for you before you became famous and being singing with your family of the where was the first maybe Staples performance, for instance, the first performance was at my uncle's church in Chicago, actually. My father started us singing. Because he was disgusted with the group that he was single. What he was singing with an all male group, the trumpet jubilees and these guys there were six of them. They wouldn't come to rehearsal. Pops would go to rehearsal. There might be two of them their next time you go to hersal. It might be three. So he was so disgusted. He came home one night and he went into closet pulled this little good. Tar odd reclose it and called us children into the living room citizen the floor in a circle and begin given us voices to sing that he and his sisters and brothers would saying when they were in Mississippi. Wow. And yeah. One one one night. My aunt Katie lived with us, and she came through we'll into rehearsing, and she says, show cts y'all sound pretty good. I want you to sing at my church Sunday, and we were so happy, we were going to sing someplace of other than on the living room. Just sounds so nice. What about your the family who let's meet the Staples, for instance, who were the family kids around you. The family was my father pop. Staples, my sister. Cleo -ther. Staples, my sister. Yvonne, and my brother Purvis. And of course me that was the staple. Singers, pops taught us disown, the very first song, he taught us was will the circle be unbroken. We saying that at my uncle's church that Sunday and the people wouldn't a sit down. We didn't know what an uncoordinated they kept clapping and someone told us they wanna hear you can the went. So we ended up singing that song three times, because it was the only song that pops, it taught us all the way through, you know, so pop says shucks, we're going home and learn some. More song these people like us, and that was the beginning of the staple. Singers, it's pretty amazing. Just tell me also how you became the lead. I think it has some issue with your brother and his voice changing. Yes, indeed, my, my brother Purvis. He's saying the lead Purvis's voice was, like Michael Jackson's voice real high, but he could really sing, you know, and I was singing baritone and my father overnight. It seemed at Purvis's voids changed, and really heavy. So pops Mavis you're going to sing the need for some reason. The Lord blessed me where my voice I could say hi and lo and untold pops up saying, no daddy. I don't want to sing lead. I think I wanna sing baritone baritone was most beautiful voice in the group. He kept telling me say Mavis you have to sing lead because you Purvis can't get up there higher in the more you have to thing, and he kept saying, no no no pops. He had a little piece of leather about lit of a rule that he had cut. You know, and that was to get my little legs. When I was bad, you know, and I saw him region for that movies to lever. And I said, okay. Okay. Daddy. I'll see seeing and that from that, that time on, I was thinking the I let me just pay a little bit of a gospel song. You sighing trout day. Let's play a little bit of that. No. Got. Got a whole. Maybe it's really incredible. And I can see you rocking and swing. I mean, it sounds like a very, very professional mature voice, how old were you? I was thirteen years old then. Wow. Had just turned thirteen. I mean that sounds like a much more grown up voice. Yeah. I was I what I get my voice to from my mother's side of the family. My mother and her mother, my grandmother, they had very strong voices. You know pops. Now get the music ability from pops because Pasha's voice was really high in smooth. And so I was blessed. That's my give my, my voice, but you know, we would feel fool the people, the people when we started traveling the disc jockeys would say, tesla Mavis Staples singing, that part of that song. And people would say, that's not a little girl. That's got to be a man or a big fat lady that no new girl has voice like the limited sauce coop. You grew up in Chicago. But you'll father's routes were Mississippi. Right, right. How did Mississippi enter your repertoire, my father would? Yvonne to Mississippi to stay with my grandmother did. So he could have some help, you know, and we would go to Mississippi amount bio, Mississippi and all black town. You know, and, and I would to school, I was the may Queen, I would fight a lot in Mississippi because the kids would would tease me a lot. You know, tell me sounded like a boy, my voice was so heavy, and I'd get into fights. But Mississippi, we would walk every Sunday to my grandmother's church in miracle and that had to be about eight miles from her house and Mississippi was a whole lot to me. My father would take us back down there to Dockery's femme show was he showed us where he proposed to my mother, and he would show us where he grew up as a boy? I just went off you about that, that sort of period if your life. I mean. In utah. D- the segregated south a lot and that must have been quite difficult and very challenging, and your father said that you'll mission as a group was our aim is to get across a message while we're entertaining people. Tell me how that mission statement played out, especially in some of the really difficult areas during the civil rights movement. Oh, we were we, you know, the songs the people when we would would sing they loved it. They needed that they needed those messages that we were saying, and the civil rights move, we, we started singing freedom songs, and writing freedom songs because we had heard Dr king's message. And my father told us one day, you know, if he can preach this message, we can sing in our voices were like the soundtrack of the civil rights movement. We would Ma. March we would sing and. Congressman John Lewis. He told me he wrote my line of notes for my freedom album that I made with. Right. Khuda. His said, maybe you'll family kept us going kept us motivated singing your songs you inspired us to keep keep moving in. Oh, we would just happy happy doing what we would doing. You know, you say that you were the soundtrack. And that's indeed, right? That's what so many people say, you'll father himself said, if you want to write songs for the Staples singers, well, just look at the headlines. So one of them you did. Why am I treated so bad watching the news, one night, and soul? The Little Rock nine which was that tragedy of the nine children. Locked out of Little Rock central high school during the desegregation time he wrote a song, we're going to get a little bit of it. Okay. So the video of is from a later performance, but nonetheless that song came from that time what, what was it like did you feel? I don't know any responsibility. You, you played. I think for for Dr king, right? Yes. And that particular song was Dr king's favorite. We would sing before he would speak at all of the meetings, we would sing before Dr king speak, and every night, we're on our way to the church or auditorium, wherever we would be, he would tell pops he'd say now state, you're going to sing my song tonight. Right, and pops say, what will you Dr we're going to sing you song, and that was why am I treated so bad. I felt very sad. A lot of times, you know, for people like the Little Rock nine watching those children, tried to go to school and board that bus, these children walk every day, every morning, they'd have the book. In their arms. They walk into a crowd of people who would throw rocks at them. They was sped up on and call them names, but they kept their heads high. And they walked they books to that bus that they wanted to board when it went on for so long, the, the mayor of Little Rock the governor of Arkansas, and the president of the United States said, let's those children, go to school, and this particular day that they were to put the board the bus, we will watch it, and all of a sudden they get all the way up to the bus, and policemen put his Billy clinical cross the door and wouldn't let them. And that was when pop said, now why they do that. Why did train them so bad? And he wrote that song that evening. Why am I treated so bad? I've had a opportunity to meet some of the Little Rock nine and. Fact in Detroit. I remember two of them came to our concert into they have fathered us, just like we will follow in them. Maybe I wonder what it is about your music, and the music of that era. What is it about the lyrics and the B and the rhythm that was so absolutely suited. The civil rights movement is well you see the lyrics. The lyrics are truth. When you sing the truth, you know, people when they are here in truth, there respond to that they, that's what they want. They wanna hear songs of truth. They wanna hear and we told all the time of our harmonies, I, we was found in, you know, a lot of people when we first went on the row, they thought we were all people, we were kids, we live stair steps, but, but people thought we. And I guess it kind of reminded them to of when they were young and they were hearing, these sounds Sistema. Hey, you Jackson was just. Says way Jackson with the very first female voice that. And her voice moved me into the living room when my father was planned, and he told me who she was. I've just fell in love with and choose my either. She inspired as so. Sistema Hagan Ruth Davis from Davis's, and don't they love coats from the gospel harm hominids? These three ladies, that inspired me. Fast forward a few years. You also eventually formed sort of a professional relationship with Bob Dylan. You entered a whole different group of singers and musicians. How close were you to dinner? Well, Bob Bobby, and I we were we were very close. We, we in love with each and but we, we had to Bobby wanted to get married. You know, he definitely desperately wanted to get married and I had to keep telling him turning him down because we were too young. I knew I was too young. He didn't think we were too young but I was too young. I was I wasn't twenty years old. And he's he just wouldn't. We that was the very first day that I met him that he proposed. But he'd been hearing us he'd been hearing us all the time, you know, because his manager told him Bob, I want you to beat the staple singers and his, I know the staple. Singers, I've been knowing the staple singers since I was twelve years old. So my father actually means that, how do you know us, so? Well, he said, I listened to Randy and Randy was a station. In twenty fifty thousand watt station. That went everywhere everybody listened to Randy. And he even quoted a verse of a song that I was saying his Mavis babies she sings rough, you know props. You have a velvety voice a smooth velvety boys, but Mavis she gets rough sometime. Mavis. He quoted, he quoted this verse Mavis young become the nave it when there's a lot Rockin slain at a wanna meet him. He's a dangerous man and a wages couldn't get over. Dylan. When we found any went into the concert, he was singing and pops wait you all this into what that kid is saying, and Bobby was saying, how many roads must have man won't down before you. Call him a man and pops would tell us stories about how he would walk down the street in Mississippi. And if a white man was coming towards him on the same side of his street, he'd have to cross over, you know, he couldn't walk on. So he could he eats. We can sing that song. And we went back home to Chicago. We bought Dylan's albums, and we learned on into win this quite a lot of crossover between the freedom songs you a singing and the freedom songs that he was singing in another generation. So it's actually really interesting. That's right. Yeah. I wonder what you feel that you have continued, and even in your. Latest Alva missing about faith to sing about freedom and love whether that will continue. I mean you don't sound like you have any intention of slowing up at all. Oh, no, no. I still have plenty of work to do. I've things worse today. I mean, then they were in the sixties now you know, so no, I can't slow down. I can't stop. I've got work to do. And I've got a lot of more messages to deliver. And I intend to as long as I can. That's what I plan on doing. We'll be listening. Maybe Staples, thank you so much indeed. Oh, you. Thank you. Thank you. I'm while Mavis Staples represents the best of America, Selena Maya titled character of HBO series, veep, may well represent the worst. And that's according to Frank rich. It's executive producer the award winning show now over off seven seasons is well known and well, loved for its biting, satire of Washington, and it cynical parodies of politics and theater themes that are also the cornerstone of his other series. Succession, that is loosely based on the modem family when Machiavellian family members by for power of a media empire. Frank rich down without Walter Isaacson to discuss the fine lines. He's treading between fact and fiction. Frank woke him to the show and congratulations on succession, which is getting renewed on HBO. Thanks, a lot wilder great to be talking with you again. Lifetime in conversation. All these years of looking at the intersection of theater in politics, a loved, your memoir, go slide, which is about growing up in Washington loving power theater politics that can fluence. And that's what we're kind of seeing, and these TV shows you now doing veep and succession, it's interesting. I haven't quite yes, it sort of happenstance. But you're, you're right. I mean, I think in the case of veep, it really conveyed my feelings about Washington growing up there being outside at a power, because my family wasn't in politics, but living in the city and yeah. And so it's great to. To sort of distill it Joel's v. But reflects a Dreyfuss another native Washingtonians ideas about DC. We grew up not far from each other. And in succession, yes, it's about media power. It's also about family to a great extent, which I also understand, and families that can be difficult. But it's, it's sort of amazing to me that been able to play out some of my passions in the world of fiction, not just journalism. But you also playing some of the experiences that we keep having the amazing thing about veep is every new episode is like, oh, some something we've been dealing with. In fact, I wanna show a clip if we can or. I'm still I'm not sure about this part where I say, I want to be president for all Americans, do I you know, all of them, how about real Americans. That's good. And then we can figure out what I mean later. I don't copy of. Okay. I don't know what she's saying. So. Voters need to know clearly and definitively why you want to be president words if you want me to use my own goddamn words, and write me something to say, okay. And take out the stuff about immigration because I feel like is a little too issue. How do you adapt something that's happening in the real world and get it into a show like that? So quickly. Well, the, the writer concept of the show from the beginning from Amando, you Nucci who created and continued by the later show, runner, Dave Mandel is we never mentioned, the political party. We never mentioned any living politician. We mentioned later than the Bragan. And yet, they're certain attornal truce about power Washington about the cynicism politicians and the people around them as they grasp for power that just hold up. And you know I feel it's weird. We've had the situation as many of noted where we've created actual storylines that didn't come true in real life. But that wasn't our intention, what happens when a something that absurd that you doing on the show come true in real life and had to keep up with the absurdity we live in, we're in the can we have to we have to air what we have. And but we did try in the final season was just aired to make it a little bit darker. Make the humor, even darker than it was to recognize at least unofficially, that the culture's changed under Trump. And so, but we never mentioned Trump or Obama or anybody. But the that ratchet up so much we had to also ratchet our humor and stories to capture this moment. Ise tells us a little bit about power, and how it operates. What do you mean by that? I mean the power can become an end to itself. And you look at a character like Julius catcher, Selina Meyer. She has no fixed ideology, she'd, as you see contemptuous of her constituents doesn't care about her family. She has no friends, but you want to hold onto that power because she loves power, and unfortunately, you may disagree, but I suspect that's more often than not the case with politicians, regardless of party, or, or they're at least stencil convictions. We had a moment in the pilot of veep eight years ago that we didn't use to meet sort of symbolize the whole show, which is that a potential higher in her office is waiting for his appointment and he gets to a into a battle with a receptionist about who's going to use the. Outlet to plug in whose blackberry, and that was the ultimate Washington thing, even fighting over the power of where you could recharge your phone. How did veep the show evolve based on politics evolving doing? Period was on. Not that much until Trump, I would say that veep started with a solid basis of a handful of six seven eight characters. And that was always the root of the show. And Amanda, you Nucci you created it is, among other things, a dick and scholar. He in fact, has a film version of David Copperfield, that's imminent and to me, his characters are Dickensian there, so sharp, and there's such have such strong human traits often despicable ones, but you look at characters like Selena are Jono or Gary Lena's bag man. And I feel that character was the basis of it. And then. Politics in a way way secondary. Keep in mind the creator was British. He was looking at it from a distance, which I think really worked was not inside baseball at all. He was looking at the absurdity of it, which happens to be a talent of his did the recent movie the death of Stalin which you may have seen Blaine about that kind of politician. And so we will we're we're of current events but it's not it's not Saturday Night Live. It's not that kind of satire, one things about your TV shows they seem to me to combine sort of politics and court live, but also Shakespearian drama. And especially with succession, which reminds me, not just of the Rupert Murdoch family, but of king layers, family. Well, I'm that's very much in there and I think it's very much a tribute to writer named Jesse Armstrong, British writer who created succession also worked briefly on veep. And, and definitely have his bones. And we have a number of playwrights British and American playwrights on the writing staff. And so, I think that's there. I don't think the show would work without it. I think as satire of Murdoch or something to Redstone or any media mogul, you want only takes you so far. And in the end, I think it is the, the I don't wanna be pompous or pretentious, but it is the King Lear thing of father, with his adult children trying to please him to get power from him is what makes the show work. Let's show a clip from that. And then you can help explain the underpinning. Okay. What have you had you entire life that I didn't give you. I'm not getting into it. I'm doing this thing. Okay. I don't own anything. Myself. I spoiled you. Now. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. You're hothouse flower. That you're nothing. Cream. Maybe maybe you should write a book or collect sports cars or something. But for the world. I'm sorry. Not made for it. So tell me about the show. It's entering its second season. It is. We're just finishing up shooting the second season which goes on August. But the right you know what I'm prejudiced because I- producer of the show. But I have to say the right that writing is way that writing holds up between a father and son. Even if you don't know what their profession is or what their business life is one of the tricks of the show is, we want to tell the business story, but never let the business story takeover because it really is about these people, but it is very connected to the Murdoch family saga right to certain extent. But if you went into the writer's room, which is in. Put the show together in Brixton in London. You'd see Robert Maxwell files. You'd see Disney wars by Jim Stewart. You'd see, of course, Murdoch stuff Marach material, but also Sumner. Sherry redstone. All of this is such grist for us. These are great media moguls, powerful medium. Right. And often were had their families involved in the business in some way or another and or had had struggles. But something, like, the, the Eisner catch and Berg struggle over Disney may turn up in very different form. But it's all sort of mashed up, you take nonfiction material. But then you fictionalized heavily drawn. What's in your heart and mind, not just what's in the facts of yesterday's news, but there's a political undercurrent to succession of somebody who is manipulating our political system. Absolutely. And as an his basically right wing and. And there's some of Murdoch in that, but there's no we have no Roger Ailes character. And we don't again, we don't talk about contemporary politicians have not been yourself. He has a political agenda, but it's quite cynical and a little, you know, he, he believes some of it, but not necessarily all of it. And kind of again, this is like the Murdoch's. Although we were there ahead of them having their public disputes. There's some dissension dissension among the siblings. From their father's political point of view. Do you think more? Knock is cynical. Yes, I do. And I think that, that's one thing we've played within the show it in the end is more about power and money that it is about necessarily conviction to me has some convictions. And I'm sure Murdoch does too, but I think that. Central core is what's in it for me. What can I get? And this is this is the part of Murdoch would allow him to have a fundraiser for Hillary Clinton or cotton, Tories and conservatives. And, and that makes them more interesting if you just if these characters, including Logan, ROY are fictional character would just right. Right wing ideologues and three interesting drama. It's what's happened along around the edges of that. It's more ambiguous, that makes people interesting. What fascinates you about Murdoch and the whole Fox News empire? Well, Murdoch, I, you know, I think it's an incredible success story. I mean it's just amazing. He's been unstoppable. I'm less. I'm less interested in the cable news part of it. I mean I feel. Fox News is in some ways, overstated story in that, I don't really believe that Americans are brainwashed, by FOX's I feel the people who watch Fox News, very much like the people who watch MSNBC are there, because they already believe in what the, the slant of the network is and, and one their their believes validated, but that Murdoch was able to come to. I to England and then here to America and created this empire with a lot of odds against him is. It's a great story. Whatever you think of him, it required a kind of ruthlessness intelligence and cleverness. And you don't really know what is beliefs are, but he has this drive. That is compelling to watch that many careers away. Famously as theater critic at the New York Times, political and cultural columnists at New York magazine, what do you think the state of journalism these days and what's caused it to become so fractured and balkanized? I'm not sure if I know what you mean by the bulk, lows Asian that we become more polarized as a society feeds into it. Yeah. I don't think that's the, the presses fall. I think that they're always Chicago Tribune was always a very conservative paper, that New York mirror was a right wing paper, the Herald Tribune was a Republican paper, the times as a liberal democratic paper, more or less that whole that hasn't changed. The names change some of the politics of switch. I don't think I think that's always been there. And I don't think it's caused by the press. I think that's just the way it is. And there's always been a partisan precedence country. I think the balkanisation is more from our politics. And if I had to say. Sadly, tragically the single biggest factor. The two single biggest factors are raised in class. And I think that's at the bottom of all of it class and case and somewhat race in the case of this populace rebellion. But, you know, look look at the story of rates in this country, it's tragic it is unending. It is going on for Mendis-led in the Trump era. We had a terrific in my view, African American president. We all thought, oh, we turned a corner or not, we all, but a lot of people did, including briefly me, and it turns out. No, this, this original sin of this country. Underlines all the visions you look at something like Charlottesville. That's, that's the problem. It's not the press. You look at that melee and the forces at work. There is a microcosm or us. Template for what's going on L somewhere in this country and not just in this country? It's, it's, it's very upsetting that seems intractable in your TV shows veep, and succession in India columns in New York magazine to what extent can you and are you trying to push ideas that you think will nudge the country into a better place. Well, I think anyone who rise certainly your classic example. Wants to do that. And that's true, also working in fiction and television, you court, you want to advance those ideas, and I'd certainly spent a lot of time. Particularly a columnist years trying and you've got to keep trying. But you have to recognize we how. Early. Perfectly examples gun control. How many people do we know including myself nights, sections, written, countless pieces about gun laws in this country? But it doesn't it hasn't hasn't affect-. Even the actual mass murderers, have had marginal vex foreign actually changing the laws. And so you have to be humble about it. You have to do it. But in the end, it's going to have to happen in the political arena. And if I say, if I had a great hope for the end of this story, not the end, Dan, but hap- ameliorate situation. It really is. With younger people, I really do feel. I think I know there's a lot of people contentious, millennials. I don't really feel that I feel young people. I know some of my notes my now, adult but young adult children are very committed to changing this very committed to being part of the in the arena, not running for office, but voting trying to deal with issues like race climate change guns. I feel very strongly, not in the way they're doing it. Not in the way my generation did. They may be doing it in a better way. But that's gives me hope about that Frank. Thank you so much. Thank you. And that's it for now. Remember, you can always listen to a podcast and see us online. I'm on dot com. And of course, you can follow me on Instagram and Twitter. Thank you for watching and goodbye from London. The manhunt for the Golden State killer is over. And there's a suspect in custody. How long force finally idea him after searching for over forty years who exactly is the suspect. Joseph James liangelo how did he fly under the radar for decades? And what are some of the victims and their families saying about the arrest? I'm Biagio Messina. And I'm joke Vinci's and those are some of the questions, we explore an all new episodes of unmasking killer. Subscribe now at apple podcasts or wherever you listen to podcasts. Hi, I'm Bill Kristol ever wonder what the godfather films breaking bad can tell us about the health of the American dream or what it was like to be in the Pentagon nine eleven or how supreme court justices talk to each other, when they get together at a conference, these are the kinds of questions. I ask topics I discussed with guests on my podcast conversations with Bill, Kristol, subscribe at, I tunes, wherever you get your podcast and check out our archive with guests like general David, portrays David Axelrod, ion her CLE, Ron brownstein and Justice Samuel Alito subscribed today to conversations with Bill Kristol.

president Mavis Staples United States secretary President Obama America China President Trump Rupert Murdoch Mississippi Staples Christiane Amanpour Washington Pentagon Frank rich Chicago Bill Kristol Soviet Union London
Morning Joe 6/12/19

MSNBC Morning Joe

41:48 min | 1 year ago

Morning Joe 6/12/19

"I just went to the Oval Office and found this beautiful letter from President Obama. It was really very nice of him to do that. And we will cherish that we will keep that. And we won't even tell the press what's in that letter. They letter was given to me by Kim Jong and that letter was sir nice letter. All would you like to see what was in that leather? Would you like how much how much? That she agreement that everybody says, I don't have. No, because I'm gonna let Mexico do the announcement the right time for Mexico. They wanna go through. But here's the agreement is very simple agreement. This is one page, this is one page of a very long very good agreement for both Mexico and the United States. President Trump, obviously very excited about his love letters from dictators and secret agreements, especially the very secret agreements, and we'll find out actually if they're agreements or not. But anyway, good morning. Welcome to morning Joe. It's Wednesday June the twelfth. And with us this morning, we have MSNBC contributor, Mike barnicle national political correspondent for NBC news and MSNBC, and the author of the red and the blue Steve Kornacki. It's gonna be great to have him with us this morning. A lot of polls, and also, of course, back and forth between Donald Trump and Joe Biden all day yesterday. We'll tell you what it means also Washington bureau chief for USA today, the author of the matriarch, Susan page, and NBC news. National political reporter, Mike, minimally. So Joe Biden continues to maintain its lead in the democratic primary field. According to the latest Quinnipiac, poll thirty percent of democratic voters said they support the former VP. Putting him eleven points ahead of Vermont. Senator Bernie Sanders, however Biden's down a few points since last month. Nineteen percent of Democrats say they back Sanders. He's up three points from last month and fifteen percent back. Massachusetts, Senator Elizabeth Warren, she's up two points, a percent support mayor Pete. He's up. Three seven percent said they support Senator, comma, Harris and three percent support, former congressman, and of course, Texas Senate candidate Beto award, but will be with us later on this morning, Willie. Look at the bowl and so many of these polls seem to be breaking in one direction that is you've got, you got your top tier, then your top tier is Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren and it really is starting to shape up again. Maybe it's pole position. I don't know exactly how early. This will prove to be to mean anything but boy, you really see Joe Biden taking the lion's share. But then you have Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren with Elizabeth Warren doing what we all thought she would do at the beginning, and that is cut in two Bernie Sanders, massive support, and the Democratic Party. Yeah. And it was probably inevitable that vice president Biden would dip down a little bit from his Astra nominal numbers before he got into the rates. And then the early days and weeks of this campaign. Bernie Sanders is kind of been holding steady. But you're right. Elizabeth Warren is the one who's come up to that top tier mayor pizzas somewhere ticks below their Steve Kornacki. We were talking before we came on the air about Joe Biden sort of coming from that forty percent space down to that thirty percent space. What strikes you, you look at that latest poll? Yeah. I mean, I guess one thing that strikes me too, is when you take a step back and you realize there are twenty four people right now seeking the death. Critic, presidential nomination and really, you've just got a handful who are registering at all in the polls right now, I think one of the things we've seen the first six months of this year is there's been such a logjam there've been so many candidates. It's actually been very difficult for anybody to break through outside of that top group Buddha. Judge got in there. Comma, Harris Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden outside of that. Nobody's registering that much, there's an opportunity obviously coming up for them. But when you look at Joe Biden, look, I think it's sort of in a holding pattern right now. It's a question of what does Joe Biden look like what does he sound like what message does he have what response does he have for his opponents when he gets on that too based stage in a couple of weeks? I think that's sort of test. And then as soon as that debate ends soon as he's off the stage. He accelerates. I think we're expecting his campaign schedule some. So then what is he looked like when you're getting more of a permanent almost data day campaign from Joe Biden? I, I was struck yesterday, just watching from afar, these events. He did at Iowa started out, you saw him at the. Radium reading from his text looking down at prepared remarks looking down at his notes in very subdued seemed like in some ways, you know, not a very zestful performance. Then I looked up an hour later, he walked away from the podium at the next event. He's looking into the crowd. He's wal walking pacing the room right there. That's the Joe Biden. I remember from past campaigns, and that's the Joe Biden. I think you know, who could tap into that very vast goodwill. It exists from among democratic voters, maybe so, and that does seem to me at least to be a pretty good formula for Joe Biden, actually reading notes at the lectern staying on script the lectern. And then when he goes out shakes hands with people connects in a positive way. That's pretty powerful and and probably his best path forward. But Mike barnicle you know, a lot of people will love to dismiss polls that are coming out in the summer of two thousand nineteen oh, it's not going to have. Big impact boy, but let me tell you something when the next FEC filings are dropped then you will know it makes a difference if you're sitting at one percent. If you're sitting at two percent. Good luck, getting the thirty five forty forty five million dollars. You need to survive till Iowa, you just won't do it pretty soon. We're going to see that these polls actually do matter, they do Joe. And it's, it's really striking with Steve pointed out, because I think a lot of people noticed Joe's initial presentation yesterday reading off the notes, and then an hour and a half later, you know, out in the crowd, speaking, except marina, so it was almost as, if there were two different Joe Biden's, and the one Joe Biden later in the day is the one you recognize but back to raising money in the importance of polls. Now. In speaking to a lot of Democrats over the past few days. A lot of people are struck by a couple of things Elizabeth Warren's rise in the polls in here, intensity in terms of issuing. I've got a plan. It is really taken hold, I think, is hurt. Bernie Sanders as we've indicated over the past few weeks. But the other question, that's raised that I hear repeatedly in Steve. I don't know whether you hear this is what has happened to camera Harris. I mean she came out of the gate like like wildfire and seems to have stalled in this frozen at seven percent and can't move from there. Yeah. And it's, it's interesting. The hair strategy to there was some news in the last week or so that the campaign is getting ready to it in his now, investing in Iowa aggressively it, and I think the idea is, they're going to try to move the numbers in Iowa in the leadoff caucus day, in there's that there's that theory with, with a Harris, that's always been there that it's sort of like the Obama path back in two thousand eight there's a slow. Link shot effect from Iowa from exceeding expectations that could change everything in South Carolina overnight. That's what happened with Obama twelve years ago that has existed in theory for common areas. But you're right. I think look, Elizabeth Warren lately, has been getting a lot more attention before that. It was judge in between. You had the Joe Biden launch, and she's really kind of squeezed out lately, on the question of elective -bility Comal Harris. Like many of these Democrats is doing very well in a head to head matchup with President Trump that new coupon shows President Trump lagging far behind. Joe Biden and five other top Democrats in general election matchup, Quinnipiac, university poll taken between Thursday and Monday shows Trump trailing. Joe Biden by thirteen points, fifty three to forty Bernie Sanders beats Trump by nine points in the poll fifty one to forty two comma Harris ahead by eight points. Elizabeth Warren by seven points, Pete Buddha. Judge in Cory Booker each lead the president by five points with President Trump failing to break. Forty two percent against any single one of them, he's general election results pattern of people who've you Trump favorably in the poll as forty two percent approve of the president's job performance forty-one percent credit, President Trump for a good economy and only forty one percent approve of the president's policy toward Mexico, which he pours his touting as a big victory. So Joe we go back to those head to head matchups. It's stunning to me, and it has been in all these head-to-heads over the last several weeks that Donald Trump is no different against Joe Biden, then he is against comma, Harris or Cory Booker mayor Pete or any of these candidates. He is a forty percent forty one percent president, what he is. And you know leading up to the mid terms. When Democrats were so concerned, everybody was so concerned, it was important to remember that, despite all the sound and the fury despite all the tweets despite the daily controversies you had to focus on the fact that Donald Trump was forty percent. President that met six ten americ-. Did not agree with Donald Trump, and what he was doing and his presidency that, of course, would that lead to in the midterms led to the biggest vote, total route, and the history of the United States of America for Democrats against Republicans and Susan page your look at the president here and he's sitting at forty forty one forty two percent. You can go back. You can see everything that is done. You can see everything that he has said since January twentieth two thousand seventeen when he did his American carnage speech, and you can see that all of his words and all of his deeds, and all of his actions have been focused on one thing. Solidifying his base. Well, congratulations, Mr President, you've got forty percent. And that's all you've got. Right. You know it's, it's in some ways a sign of the president's drink that he has had forty percent support regardless of what he's done. Those are people who have been with him from the. And are likely to be with him forever in the question is, is that the ceiling is, is forty or forty two percent the ceiling for President Trump. Because if you hear sealing his forty two percent the only way you win. The presidency is in a three way race not impossible to have a three way. But if we have to race, you're not gonna win with forty two percent. And if you look at the ability of, of President Trump's level of support look at where Joe Biden's advantage comes in this Quinnipiac poll, it's interesting, the quip Trump and Biden are tied among white voters. They are tied among male voters. Those are the groups that delivered the presidency to Donald Trump last time run. And the reason that I think the White House is so focused on Biden is because of how competitive Joe Biden is with those particular voter groups. You know, they porn thing, remember, make is that polls stone always reflect the breadth of Donald Trump's support. We noticed in two thousand sixteen we could be talking to a thousand people, and nobody would mitt that they were voting for Donald Trump would actually talked to him afterwards. And they would all come up saying they were voting for Donald Trump. This is a little different. He's, he's now running as an incumbent politician who hasn't kept his word on Mexico paying for the wall, or on healthcare for all universal healthcare, and improved healthcare cheaper, healthcare, or tax cuts for working class Americans. So there's all of that, but at the same time when it is, Donald Trump onstage against one, democrat, it is going to tighten up. But for now he starts as a forty percent. President he does. And Mike was talking. About the different Biden's. And how when Biden stuck to the script, it seemed different I will say doesn't matter stick to the discipline and you make this point in your column in the Washington Post because, you know, for a brief moment in his presidency, Trump stuck to the script in Normandy, as you say, and it worked, and that's exactly what we need Joe. Writes this President Trump drew praise from editorial writers and thought leaders across the political spectrum for a day, dress that temporarily soothe the nerves of NATO allies and foreign policy analysts alike, forgive Democrats being less than impressed by their nemesis is reading skills, but they should not forget that their ability to dislodge the Donald from sixteen hundred Pennsylvania Avenue next year, may depend on the certain Scranton, Pennsylvania native doing the same considering Joe Biden, the Democrats best hope for twenty twenty has a chequered. Bath as a candidate for national office. His supporters can only hope that when the former vice president gets on stage. He smiles for the crowd reads, his speech, and exits stage, left waving as he goes, that's because Biden has proved himself, uniquely challenged going off script taking twenty minutes to answer a question, and causing himself in his staff on necessary political grief. If you think I'm trying to send Biden a message with this column, you are correct. Too much is riding next year's election for any democratic candidate to shoot. From the hip rhetorically, America's future will likely be left in the hands of which ever seventy something politician, sticks most closely to the script that is handed to him and the difference Joe between Joe Biden sticking to the script and Trump. Is that Joe Biden at least is intellectually connected to what he and his team, or are fighting for, and it wouldn't hurt them to do that. While with Trump, you see a glaring. Difference from being in front of the cameras in front with the crosses in Normandy, behind him talking to Laura Ingram and calling people, names and acting reprehensibly, and then walking up at stage and looking presidentially presidential, because he actually stuck to the script. It was almost jarring what we would be. We would be real served if the president continued stimulated age groups that are handed him for the most part, quoted in the column, a Napoleon, quote that David Ignatius reminded me of Normandy, and he said, great generals, or those who can do the average things when everybody else is going crazy and Mike mentally. There are a lot of people who support Joe Biden who talked to me, and I'm sure of talk to you, and talk to all of us off camera saying my God. I hope he sticks to the script. I hope he doesn't start rattling off things that are off message. Stick to the script look down read your notes, and that you can shake hands with people and be the old Joe. When you get out in the audience. Yeah Joe I think what the past week and a half has shown us is that the only person who can disqualify Joe Biden is Joe Biden himself. I was talking the other day with one or the other democratic presidential hopefuls, who was in Iowa this weekend at that dinner where you had more than I think it was nineteen candidates, speaking, his read of the room was that the Democrats who went after Joe Biden actually hurt because of that, that the, the room turned against them when they went after Joe Biden, we also saw yesterday the president playing into the Biden campaign strategy. President's attacks on Joe Biden only elevate Joe Biden when his campaign's primary focus has been about his electability argument. And so what we did see yesterday in the three events, Joe by did yesterday was that his strong event, perhaps. Was the last event of the day where he was on the teleprompter? I've been covering a lot of the Biden events so far and his performance hasn't been as strong when he's reading from notes, he does better when he is speaking extemporaneously, but he's strongest in a room full of enthusiastic. Democrats fees off their energy, and when he's reading from the teleprompter, and I think we saw him at his most effective there. The challenge, of course, is going to be in this debate when other candidates go after him and his record, which is he's very proud of will he have the discipline to brush those attacks off. That's the big question I think, heading forward. All right. Mike, thank you so much. We really appreciate you being with us. And of course, nobody has better incites Joe Biden, the campaign trail than you. We preach with this this morning. I remember he's funny. Mike's talking about teleprompters in smaller events. I remember seeing John Kerry in two thousand four studying teleprompters, who's putting them up before relatively small of it. And I was thinking what why would he do that? Well. I did it because he was smart. That's Biden needs to do where two or more Democrats gathered there to should be his teleprompters make as good Lord. My gut tells me though, that Biden needs to obviously work hard on staying focused and being on message, a who am I say, but I, I like Joe Biden, and I don't want Joe Biden to change from being who he is. Because that humanity is very connective today American public. And we saw that through some challenges. He had earlier on in the campaign where, you know, people were were trying to bring him down, and ultimately, Joe Biden won the day by being a good man. A good guy that you can connect with Steve Kornacki. The polls that this at this time and in the race. President Trump's not doing so. Well, having said that it worries me for any democrat to say gleefully because there's a lot of time ahead. No. I mean. Absolutely. And of course, for a democrat, y'all need to think back to twenty sixteen. It all the poll numbers you saw about Donald Trump, look, he was losing to Hillary Clinton in the head to head, but when he was within striking distance throughout the campaign, and you had all these underlying numbers about Trump in two thousand sixteen. I remember going through these, when you'd ask voters is he competent enough to be president. Is he qualified to be president? Is he honest enough to be president de trust them with the button, those kinds of questions, and he was getting numbers on those on those issues by and large that were substantially worse than Hillary Clinton substantially worse than any winning candidate? We'd ever seen before. You add it in the fact that he was consistently trailing Hillary Clinton in the polls in, that's where that widespread expectation came from the Donald Trump wasn't just going to lose an election day, that potentially he was going to lose badly on election day. So. I think that's the cautionary note, everybody. It's not just Democrats that I think everybody has to carry into twenty sixteen and I think the question that sort of at the heart of that is in terms of Trump victory scenario is he able to create that same sort of level of polarization that was there in two thousand sixteen where Hillary Clinton's negative numbers are favorable unfavorable election day. They were not that much better than Donald Trump. And ultimately, they were close enough to Donald Trump's that he was able to get enough voters in just the right places to look at Trump. Look at Clinton say I don't like either. But I don't like her more don't like her party more. I don't like you know, sort of side of the cultural argument that she represents Moore that seemed to be what drove him over the top at the end, and it is an open question. He's gonna covered in twenty twenty that's different. But there's no question of whether he can recreate that and Susan it really did yesterday just for a day, look like a general election, having both Donald Trump and Joe Biden in the state of Iowa. Joe Biden focused on Donald Trump. Donald Trump focus. Almost exclusively on Joe Biden among democratic contenders, and Joe Biden's message was on the one hand about policy. He was talking about tariffs and their impact on farmers there. And but he did go back again, to sort of that, gut argument he's been making, which is this is not who we are. How are you feeling about these two and a half years? Do you want another four years of this? I can change that I'm the guy who can beat him now the poll that we showed shows that a lot of other people may have that cases. Well, that other Democrats say, well, if you look at the polling on beating him by seven eight ten points as well. Steve makes smart point to remember, which is President Trump one last time, even though people had concerned about he goes into this race with one huge new advantage. And that is the US economy. He's the incumbent. You look at that Quinnipiac poll, three out of four Americans said their own personal financial situation was good are, are good or excellent seven out of ten Americans said, the US, Konami was good or excellent. We do. We have no history in modern times of defeating incumbent president. If people are feeling that good about the economy. Now at the moment, Trump is not getting the benefits from the since the economy is good in this record setting recovery. But it's possible that, that is a very powerful court gets even though there continued to be these deep questions about his competence and fitness for office kind of things that Joe Biden was trying to strike yesterday. That's a great point. I mean unemployment at three point six percent. So many. The other so many of the parts of the economy humming along very well. This is a recovery that started in two thousand ten and it has been roaring for nine years now, which, of course, is unusual in and of itself, that the cycle has been up for nine years, so we'll see what happens, but really despite all of that great news again, I just want to go over the head to head matchups in one, we didn't show before let's put the head to head matchups up on the screen if we can Alex, just show, again, this Quinnipiac poll, Donald Trump getting pounded by bind by thirteen by Sanders by nine hair losing by eight war, and losing by seven mayor PD's losing by five Cory Booker, he's losing by five as well and one that we didn't even put up our good friend Benjamin dry. Brought it to our attention. Waxy yellow build up forty eight percent. Trump forty percent you have waxy, of course, Benjamin dryer of dryers English. But yeah. Wow. Three point six. Employment and waxy yellow Bill saying that just ahead. By the way. Why is the margin of error really when you're talking about waxy Ellen Bill and stay three percent? But at this hour of the day, I think the image of waxy yellow build up, it's not what I'm looking for or speak for sex. You're saying you prefer more before happy. Later in the day. All right. Well, thank you so much for Benjamin barrier for bringing that important poll numbers onto for the day. Benjamin, I think Benjamin, you can go back to bed and sleep all day, by the way, redraw years, English is good and stuff. Hi, it's Katie ter- want to keep up with MSNBC while you're on the go. Subscribe to the NBC daily newsletter. You'll get the best of what you've missed during this unprecedented era of news, text MSNBC to six eight six six to subscribe. Welcome back. Here's a look at some of the other stories we're following this morning riots in Hong Kong continued to erupt as police used tear gas on demonstrators who attempted to storm. The city's government buildings aren't with bricks and bottles. The protesters clashed with riot police who used batons pepper spray, and rubber bullets to suppress the demonstrators in the city's downtown, the political unrest comes amid backlash over a Bill that would allow people facing trials and mainland China to be extradited legislative councils vote was scheduled for today. But has since been moved to next week amid the ongoing clashes, we'll stay on that a former Stanford University sailing coach is expected to be the first person sentenced in the college admission scandal today. John van damore pleaded guilty to record tearing and honest fraud services for accepting six hundred and ten. Thousand dollars in bribe money for the university sailing program in return for falsely qualifying three students for admission. God van damore, did not directly pocket the cash himself and his alleged role in the plan ultimately failed when the students did not attend Stanford. Prosecutors will ask for thirteen months behind bars at his sentencing hearing this afternoon, that's according to the Boston Globe, and as for some actual athletes that depending champion US women's national team made quite the statement in their World Cup opener in friends, defeating Thailand with turnament record. Thirteen nil victory today. Seven US women found the back of the net including a record matching five goals scored by Alex Morgan, as team, USA finished with thirty nine shots ten corners and seventy five percent possession in the blowout, actually. Barnacle you always complained that saw is like a one to nothing. You know, sport that that's incredible. That's incredible. It's I mean, sure they missed an extra point after their second touchdown but thirteen to nothing pretty impressive. Well, let me ask you heard of such a huge disparity in in scoring a soccer game. It's been a why not even close. Yeah. It was. All right. Still ahead. It's been more than a month since President Trump announced Patrick Shanahan, his pick for secretary of defense. But according to NBC news, the president may be rethinking that idea Carolee joins us with their new reporting. And we'll talk to someone with a bit of experience in the role Fulmer Defense Secretary ash Carter joins us next on morning Joe. Welcome back. President Trump, maybe second guessing his choice of Patrick Shanahan for secretary of defense, according to NBC news while enormity last week Trump as at least three people what they thought of Shanahan and whether they had any suggestions for different candidates. That's according to four people familiar with the conversations. Joining us now, national political reporter for NBC news. Carolee with Moore. Carrol. Good morning Meco. Well, we learned is that President Trump, never really wanted Patrick Shanahan as his first choice for this job. And he went back and forth about this for several months. Shanahan's been serving in acting capacity since January's, and James Mattis, left president was sort of, pushed into making a decision because people felt it was not a good idea to leave this open as an acting position weakened Shanahan. They couldn't do the job properly. So he announces on may ninth that he's chosen Shanahan, and yet a month or so later, he's asking people what do you think of Shanahan who else might I nominate or do you have any other ideas and looking for alternatives? And this is all happening at the same time as the White House has not sent up the nomination to the Senate, formerly. So it puts Shanahan and a really precarious position, you know, we've seen this before the president has gone back and forth, about aids where he's second guessing them and ask people what they think of him, and who. Else might be able to do the job. Certainly anyone who served as President Trump's chief of staff news with that feels like but because she had ahead hasn't wasn't the president's first choice. There's been a little public daylight between the two of them. She had a hint took a very different stance on the decision by the White House, or that request from the White House to the navy to obscure the US s McCain, while the president was in Japan, he called McCain, a patriot. That's obviously very different from how President Trump views late Senator, he also said that North Korea violated, UN Security Council, resolutions with its ballistic missile tests. That was a difference with the president. So, you know, the president seems to be second guessing casting about looking for alternatives. And the problem is no one really knows who that alternative is good. Lord. NBC's carolee. Thank you very much Willie. New York Secretary of defense under President Obama ash Carter. He's the author of the new book inside the five sided box lessons from a lifetime of leadership in the Pentagon. Mister secretary good morning. Good to see to be here. Thank you, a lot to talk to you about want to get to the book and just a moment. One ask you about President Trump and his approach to North Korea yesterday talking about a beautiful letter he received from Kim Jong Hoon? What do you suspect is up here? Why President Trump treating the dictator the murderous dictator Kim of North Korea with such flattery. Well, the only possible explanation, I can offer is he's hoping, we'll get progress on you do clears ation of the Korean peninsula. Remember something they promised president. I've been around this long President, George Bush won in nineteen ninety two so this isn't a new promise what we need is a plan that goes on the promise and what we haven't gotten yet as a plan that is actually underway. To get rid of their nuclear weapons. So that's his our president style of diplomacy right now. Everybody's happy, except us the North Koreans are happy because we're going to author back. China's kind of happy because we're not threatening war and South Korea, which happens to have an administration right now. Which is. Sort of a peace Nick kind of ministration that's politically convenient. But we don't have denuclearization yet, knowing what you know about North Korea knowing what you know about this regime. Do you think this approach works in some way because we haven't seen any evidence really that North Korea slowing down its approach to nuclear, well, I've been part of previous efforts, ninety ninety four ninety nine right into this movie, two thousand sixty thousand seven when Condie rice, and Colin Powell gave it a try. We, we didn't give it a try during the time out secretary defense because I didn't see any way to make it work out in the president didn't either. We've tried it in the past and made some little bit of progress. So I'm I'm for talking to them and pressing them on this as you using the leverage. We have an hammering China to get in the game and sticky with Japan which is a good ally and friend is threatened. But so far, the action has followed. What is really the drama of the two leaders meeting? Remember President Bush won all the president's after would not meet with the leader North Korea, unless they had a deal to sign their position was, I won't I'm going to give them the gift of a meeting with the president United States until less. I have deal. President Trump is taken, of course, opposite, the opposite of protect the underlying question to all this mister secretary is why would North Korea give up its nuclear program? It doesn't have much else on the world. It has leverage in any other areas, tickly economic leverage. Why would they give up their weapons? Well that back in the earlier times when you're talking to them, they didn't have them yet right now they've had the taste and in two thousand six when the as I said the Bush administration was talking when they exploded their first bomb. That's when they crossed the threshold, and now it's going to be hard to get in. We have some success in doing that. Remember Ukraine, Kazahkstan? Belarus, Iran that program during the nineteen ninety three countries that did give up nuclear weapons acids possible. But it's it'll be tough. It'll take a huge amount of pressure. And carrots, and sticks much larger than we've Marshall before to get him to make a move that big, what's, what's your view of our relationship today with China, given the fact that they that we drew from TPP, the Chinese, apparently think they own the South Pacific socialization, and we have a tower for ongoing seemingly escalating with each passing day. What you've you of that situation. I it, we have it's not a Cold War, but it is a sustained competition with what is after all the communist dictatorship? Now last time, we had a sustained competition with a gun mystic dealership was the Soviet Union. But we didn't trade with them. This is this is all we need a whole new playbook for this. So in the Weiwei thing in whether students should Chinese students should go back to China or not in the trade talks. We need a new playbook of which tariffs is one part. But I think only one part and I've watched the Chinese. Now, I've been dealing with them, and their military leaders since nineteen nineties, I knew Zhang's in June tau, and now sesion ping and over that time Mike. The tendency to of Chinese to be sort of overweening look to dominate Asia has taken over there earlier view, which is hey, this system, international system. Works pretty well for us, we get to be. We are run our country our way. And we get to trade with everybody and develop our, our country, and we all hope this view, would prevail, but it didn't. And so I did it may be was faded that way, I could always tell when I was talking the Chinese military that they were thinking this way, but they weren't allowed to say things that way. So it always existed it grew I do believe that we need to protect ourselves. And by that, I mean, when are the Chinese could bring to bear on an American company or American ally? That combination of military economic and political power that only a communist dictator. Ship can bring that creates an unlit level field, and I think companies expect our government, not to be necessarily confrontational but to be protective of them. So I think the things that we're doing to push back on the Chinese are necessary. And I think that's true militarily also were doing much more in the military. We started that some time ago doing more for their and so forth and south China's. We need to push back also. Mister secretary wanna talk about your book inside the five sided box and you call it. Are you publish your calls it in port users guy, to the military, industrial complex, of course, that phrase coming from Dwight Eisenhower's warning in his farewell speech to America in January of nineteen sixty one? You see often congress and the president United States supporting weapons systems that depend gone doesn't even ask for that. The Pentagon doesn't even want, but the military industrial complex does one, I saw Armed Services Committee, where there's always straight party line votes. But then, you know, another vote would come away saying their voting for Raytheon. Wait. Are they on the side of Laki more? So it was hard to follow it all you just knew there was a ton of money there. How do we break the grill of the military industrial complex and make it? So it is about running the leanest military organization that we can run without basically, throwing billions of dollars every defense contractor that writes, five thousand dollar checks for of congress where you write the book isn't a memoir, two different kind of book. It's guide to the Pentagon. Cluding how to buy weapons and I had that job. In addition to the deputy secretary Defense Secretary defense worked there and every layer. Over time and. Look, we don't build anything in the Pentagon. We don't do things the Soviet way. We buy all our weapons from private industry, and that means when I was the acquisition executive, I had to make business deals with the defense industry, and I was sitting on the tax payer and the war fighters side of the table. And they were sitting on their shareholders and employee's side table understood that it's not at it's just business. But I need to stick up for the taxpayer in the war fighter. And you need to be skilled negotiator with them. I need them to be healthy. I need them to do. Okay. On Wall Street, and so because I need a healthy defensive, by the way, I need a, the tech industry to participate more in defense because one of the reasons we have the best military in the world is we have the best technology in the world. And we, we, we can't get that anymore, just by working in the pen with with our own programs. We have to reach out to the tech sector and that was another. Big thing that I. Did. But we have good acquisition executives I had tough negotiations with industry. I had cordial relations with them, but they didn't push me around. I was the customer. And you mentioned congress congress gets involved every once in a while, but I'll give you an example of the tanker competition. There was huge congressional interest in that nevertheless. I was acquisition executive at the time, we ran a fair competition, that one party one and the other party didn't even try to protest because we hit we had clean, and so you can do it right people. See waste waste is inexcusable, particularly when we're asking for as much money as we are to protect the country, but it doesn't have to be that way. Good management. In deal with gold military industrial complex serve the tax payer in the war fighter. I felt that that was possible. And we have a lot of people know how to do that in the department of defense. And so one of the things of says, is don't have to be this, where here's some, here's some tricks, for how to manage the military industrial complex for the taxpayer in the warfighter Susan pages with us. And that's a question. Ashkar given your long experience at the Pentagon is there an impact on the way things work at the Pentagon when there is no, permanent confirmed, secretary leading and in particular drawing on the story that care, the NBC story that Kerley talked about just a few minutes ago when the president expresses maybe some cold feet about going forward with the nominee has announced to leave the Pentagon, does that have an impact on how things work there. Well, does your in a weaker position if you're not confirmed? I don't know patch, and Eoghan. Well, he's the first secretary of defense designate that I haven't known I worked for casper, Weinberger in the Reagan administration. So I've known known them all it does probably. We get into a little bit in Washington. The department of defense, however, is very orderly place thrives on order and clarity. And so, I think people looking upward at him and the department will regard him as their secretary of defense as long as he's the acting. Secretary defense, I think internally things are probably going to be okay. But in the larger Washington world doesn't help, Pat, if pets can end up being the secretary of defense to go through this period that I don't have any insight. I I'm not sure anybody does into whether he'll alternately get the job or not, as I said, I don't know, more personally gymnasts was an old friend of mine, and I were known each other for twenty five years. We used to sleep floor of a secretary defenses plane in nineteen Ninety-three when his flu around the world. So I've known Jim since major. The book is inside the five sided box lessons from a lifetime of leadership in the Pentagon. Former secretary ash Carter, thank you so much for being on the show this morning. Great to see you coming up transportation secretary, Elaine. Chao was the latest Trump administration. Official to be involved in a potential conflict of interest scandal, her husband, Mitch McConnell appears to be shrugging it off. Of course. So he's. We'll show you what he says about the allegations ahead on morning, Joe. New podcast youth Rosenberg, is based on a simple premise thoughtful conversations with interesting people like Jim Komi. Lisa, monica. And pre Peru are each of them. Took an oath as I did to support defend the constitution of the United States, the oath with Chuck, Rosenberg. Listen for free wherever you get your podcast.

Joe Biden President Trump president Joe United States Senator Bernie Sanders Mike barnicle President Obama ash Carter Steve Kornacki Donald Trump secretary Senator Elizabeth Warren President Iowa vice president NBC Susan Mexico Pentagon NBC
The Art and Being Mike Nichols

Kickass News

00:00 sec | 1 year ago

The Art and Being Mike Nichols

"This is kick ASS news. I'm Ben Mathis the work of Mike Nichols Pervades American cultural consciousness from the graduate. And who's afraid of Virginia Woolf to angels in America the birdcage working girl and primary colors not to mention his string of hit plays including barefoot in the park and the odd couple. And if that weren't enough he was also one half of the timelessly funny duo of Nichols and May as well as a founding member of the original Improv troupe over a career that spanned half a century Mike Nichols changed. Changed Hollywood Broadway in comedy forever. But more than that. He changed many lives now. One hundred fifty people who worked with new Mike Nichols best recall the intensely human connections. They had with the director in a new book by Ash. Carter and Sam cash ner titled Life is in Everything Mike Nichols as remembered by one hundred fifty of his closest friends and today salmon asked join me on the podcast to share. What they learned about? Mike Nichols youth as a German airman Jewish emigrant growing up in New York the crippling illness that left him completely bald from boyhood on and how it gave him a unique perspective on humanity. Eh that shined through in all of his films and plays. We discuss his early years as one of the founders of the Improv group that would become second city the story of how. Oh he teamed up with Elaine May to form the comedy team of Nichols and May and how they're deeply personal and at times subversive act broke new ground in comedy. Them and ash also get into the creative differences that broke up nichols and May and opened the door to Broadway and Hollywood for Mike Nichols they reveal how the first time I'm director got the nerve to stand up to movie. Mogul Jack Warner during the filming of WHO's Afraid of Virginia Woolf why he originally wanted to cast Robert Redford and the graduate and how Orson Welles tried to usurp him as director on catch twenty two. Then they also talk about Nichols courtship of the news anchor who had become his wife Diane Dan Sawyer his lavish life is many friendships and a lesson. In how Di with style coming up with Ash Carter and SAM cash ner in just just a moment third Ash Carter's a writer and editor whose work appeared in esquire vanity fair town and country and the New York Times Sam. Cash Noor is an editor at large at airmail and was for many years a contributing editor at Vanity Fair magazine. He's also the author of several books including the recent New York Times bestsellers the Fabulous Bouvier sisters. Here's the tragic and glamorous lives of Jackie and Lee and furious love Elizabeth Taylor Richard Burton and the marriage of the century. Now Sam Cashmere and Ash Carter have teamed up to shed some light on the life of one of the all-time greatest directors of the stage and screen in their new book. Life isn't everything Mike. Mike Nicholls as remembered by one hundred fifty of his closest friends salmon ash. Welcome thank you just for the listeners. You know I had had former secretary of Defense Ash Carter on the show awhile back so I feel like I kind of have to preface this by clarifying listening here. This is not the same Ash Carter by the way is a common mistake. The Internet there is a New York Times book. Review that Mistakenly mixed this up and they had to print a correction afterward. Oh you're sitting. Yeah now for anyone listening who might not know the name Mike Nichols. I guarantee that they know his work. he was the multiple e got winning director behind behind the original Broadway productions of barefoot in the park the odd couple Plaza Swede Anne the real thing hurly-burly and spam. Lot as well as movies like who's WHO's afraid of Virginia Woolf the graduate catch twenty two carnal Knowledge Silkwood working girl Alexi Blues Postcards from the edge regarding Henry and read the birdcage closer. Charlie Wilson's war and angels in America. Gosh did you guys watch all of those when you decided to write this book. Yeah absolutely yeah. Yeah some of them multiple times and and by the way. There's also his his. The first thing that he kind of became a household name for was his comedy album for the lane. May Yeah and I want to get to those You know but at first I'm interested in the subtitle of this book because it sort of underscores how everyone seemed to feel that they had this intimate relationship with Mike Nichols and how in the every interaction that people had with him whether there was personal or professional whether it was over the course of decades or just a single film everyone who knew him felt that they got something personal from Mike Nichols true. Well he just. He had a gift for friendship. He was actually often thought that we could call this book. You know seduced because I mean he was his it could be the most charming seductive Entertaining the best dining companion. You could imagine in In New York which is which is saying something You know I mean so he He did have these very often and long live friendships and relationships with also equally complicated people. I mean you know Natalie Portman who. I started to cry when she was remembering Mike and yes and Meryl Streep who who still to this day finds it very hard to to talk about Valium without breaking up. So so yeah his his want one of his agents said that you know there's a lot of people in show business. Who can they're sort of your friend as long as the movies being shot and then it's over but the Mike have this gift for maintaining really maintaining gaining these dry and turning these relationships into genuine friendships and Yeah I mean there really was no if any we really had to cut ourselves selves off. At a certain point the we could have gone on and if our sub publisher hadn't threatened to cancel our contract. We probably would have so I. I'm an incredibly considerate person to. I didn't know him terribly well but I remember being in his house in admiring a first edition of the letters of Oscar. Kerr wild for example. Wow and the two days later there was a messenger with a package and it. Was You know a first edition of the letters of Oscar Wilde. It could have come from his library but but also maybe not you know wow. That's incredible thoughtful person and we weren't great friends or anything you know. Oh but He had a very classy way of also showing his appreciation. You know actually I I should say that you know part of the reason. We wrote this book that he didn't didn't write his memoirs but all the time he spent not writing his memoirs was spent within the company of these people Yeah I mean this is a guy who had so many great anecdotes. It's kind of disappointing that he never wrote a memoir arm and many of the people in the book say that. They pleaded with him to write an autobiography but he never ever did. Or why do you think he didn't. Well there's different theories about that and we kind of instead of we let the different theories Aired in in the book. But but I think that one. He's he actually. He didn't like to he he. He had a He was known for you know he he really lived in the present you know he was not somebody who just only wanted to tell tell great stories about old in his early days in Hollywood and so forth so I don't know I think that he was sort of always focused focused on whatever the next thing he was doing and just I don't think I think you say in the book that at some point I guess Diane Sawyer who was his wife said to him. You can't talk about the past anymore. No more anecdotes from now on tonight. He he directed that way too. I mean interesting. Yeah he This is something that the great director Elia Kazan sort of believed in to is kind of a great presider for Mike in in his relationship with actors. which is you kind of direct by sort of indirection by anecdote by revealing something about himself? You know Natalie Portman told us that you know when they were making the movie Obvi- closer they would spend two weeks not talking about blocking a scene or or even the characters but about the the the actors real love lives and romantic life. And Yeah I think Natalie Portman also said something along the lines of he would ask actors to name the moment in a scene and it was kind of a way of mapping out a player of film. It's funny for such a sophisticated guy. He seems to have really understood that a story only resonates if it taps into these most basic of human emotions motions. Where do you think that Mike Nichols God? His emotional intelligence from from his childhood really. Yeah I mean. He told his his friend. Renata Adler who kind of had a similar background on some Mike Mike's Parents fled Berlin with him. They actually came over I and he and his brother had come over by themselves but he told Renata Adler that when you're a refugee you can read people's minds it is early experienced. Just made him hyper attuned to human behavior. Because that's how how he needed to survive and it was something. He really carried with him for the rest of his life and that distinguishes all of his work I think and when did he come over to the US us from Germany from Germany Germany from Berlin in fact he was seven years old. I think his brother his little brother Robert Three three alone on this gigantic ship Called the Bremen which docked in New York from Berlin in fact Robert Nichols who became a physician. Dr Robert Nichols told us one of the the last echoes because Germany that they heard before boarding. The ship was Hitler's voice over the loudspeaker. Oh Wow you know and it. It always stayed with with especially Mike. Although he didn't talk about that much that they really just barely escaped with their lives. And it's interesting because you talk about how he kind of had two hits against him coming to America in the fifties because he was both Jewish was a German speaking Jew and so You know that was probably the least popular language in America and that point. That's right yes he's right in fact is just off of the Bremen. He's early on when his father came to pick them up. He saw the Hebrew letters in a in a shop window window and he asked his father. Is that legal here. So I mean I is on top of that. His He is it's kind of stricken with some. It's not fully clear what caused it. But he gets alopicia when he's a young boy a- all of his hair which becomes a lifelong condition that he has to deal with by kind of apply painstakingly applying wigs every morning and then his father dies when he's ten who had previously been a pretty successful doctor and so not only does he lose his father but they also kind lose their their their standing and the mother's forced to really struggle to make ends meet and they kind of standard of living really plummets and spends the rest of his adolescence in poverty essentially so it's a lot to overcome in in his early early life later in the book. A lot of people talk about an interesting period in his life where he became obsessed with money and he was just convinced that he was going broke even though he had made all these movies and all these shows that were you know just pouring money into his gophers yet. He thought that he was going to die. Broke and he just just with the people had to show him his finances and even that wouldn't convince him that he was secure. Yeah is that where that comes from some kind kind of like depression Europeans. Actually it's very common people who who had that kind of depression experiences children. The fear never goes away and that was definitely the case Jason with Mike and even though he was became addicted to this sleeping pill with these horrible side effects called Halcion Like a lot of people in show business at the time actually It the the the mania manifested itself in different ways with different different people and for him. It just brought out this kind of latent childhood fear of returning to the poverty of his youth. How about the baldness? I mean. He was bald his entire adult life or even before all of his hair all over his body and he had to wear apparently wigs into pays every day. Fact he I think you said that he had different to pay pretty much for every day of the week and they were always perfectly groomed. And all Latte. How do you think that shaped his personality? And maybe even some of his work well I mean it his brother Robert Nichols Nichols said. You can't understand my brother unless you understand the trauma of his losing all of his hair and we mean eyebrows everything everything yeah and You know which paste on in the morning as it was just it was just fundamental to to who who he was and it didn't stop him from being popular in school as the boy with the baseball cap. You know In fact I guess you can the psychiatrist but you can make the case that you know he needed to be charming and seductive as possible because there was was this sort of physical deficit in a way you know and and also this is a man who kind of worship beauty and was around. You know the the most beautiful people on the the planet You know Meryl Streep exactly exactly. Yeah and and I mean several people said you know we all have to create ourselves but in his case it was quite literal. I mean he literally had to create. I mean you know. His is not his original name and he's kind of putting on all the the he's dressing himself in the morning I up up to including his his hair and so forth so I think he he's just very aware of of He's just that side of human behavior and and it'd be kind of people creating themselves because he he was so dramatized case and I want to talk about the early early days of the creation of Mike Nichols He goes to college at the University of Chicago. And that's where he gets into Improv. At the very beginnings of Improv and he eventually eventually ended up co founding. What would become second city? What was it about Chicago at that time in the fifties and particularly you have see that made it a prime breeding ground for Improv? Well he actually was not involved in second city although there was he would often put that in his bio but Paul Sills was the CO founder of the compass end second city. So there's definitely alleged there. I mean the people who were at second city worshiped Mike and that also includes the founding cast of SNL. You Know Lorne. Michaels told us that the compass really kind of led directly to to the creation of SNL in certain ways but the your university Chicago is a very unique place. At the time it was had one of the youngest College Presidents in America Guy Robert Hutchins. who was just hyper intellectual? He got rid of the football team and basically reoriented what had been kind of a middling school Onto the great books program and the policy. Where you anybody could get in if they pass this test so you had some people who you know really young like in their fifteen year olds sixteen year olds also soldiers on the GI bill? Oh so you'd have somebody sixteen and somebody used thirty in the same classroom but basically the the the group who started this thing they were all just kind of hi very precocious group. They really read all these books. They started out doing all the classic plays and then they just kind of became their interest in being influenced owns by kind of you know Beckett and Brecht and things like that and I think they actually staged some. There was some in the first people to Sagebrecht in America But the the compasses was formed by these guys. Paul Sills and David Shepherd and they were shepherd's very political very guard. But they didn't they were. They did not intend for impromptu comic form and it was really Mike and Elena. Allison has the Shelley Berman. Just he's had his innate comic gifts who who made it a comic form. which is I think what many people think of it as today Eh? Yeah and I have to ask of course about the comedy team of Nichols and May and I just love the story of how he and Elaine may meet. I think that they briefly were introduced backstage once and I think someone warned warned him about her and then a few days later I think they run into each other and and that's when they really meet and it's almost like a perfect movie moment. How just everything seems to fall into place with them? Can you tell improvisational really no way train station where Elaine was already seated and And but you know I started in ways of improvise kind of spy spoof. You know where he said. May I sit here. You know and the lane would say if you wish as you know Like they were like it was an assignation of to to agents and yeah maybe that that routine eighteen by the way wound up on one of their records but Yeah they kind of improvise all the way home and they just were you know as their future. Future Manager Jack rollins would say ham and eggs. It was just like a match made in heaven from the very beginning and other people in the theater would say you know they true. Improvisation just means kind of being in the moment. Not You know you're not supposed to just go for a laugh but they were so verbally gifted and could just kind of these one liners would just come pouring out of them and in fact later they had this one when they left if the compass. And we're doing the nightclub circuit in New York and later on Broadway. They would close their act by taking requests from the audience and so they would ask for a first line in a last line and a style style shows. Just how highbrow these guys were hello and literate. They were because when they say style they mean the style the style of Shakespeare or the style of abstinence they would Tennessee Williams area. And that shows you in a way how the culture's changed because Julia Pfeiffer told told Ash of Y- you're not going to hear people if this were done today yell out in the style of Henry James Hostile you know. It's just AH forget it. It's not going to happen now. Their first sketch that really hit big was something called the teenagers. Why was that so groundbreaking in that era? Ashley loves that sketch. So he's so first of all You you if you and if you remember in the graduate when in the first scene where Benjamin is kind of you know rented this hotel room. And he's in there Ms Robinson he's feeling a little awkward and she takes a puffer cigarettes it and then he kisses her and then releases and she lets the smokeout after that bit of businesses actually from that team. It's a really it but basically I. It was considered very groundbreaking at the time because it was a recognizably human scene that was about Out Sexuality in a way that was really not done at the time. I mean. Let's if you think back to nineteen fifties television you know if any seen in a immune marital bedroom is. They're they're sleeping in separate beds with full Pajama sets and it just really didn't reflect people's real experience but the the way that they so that they're they're playing to teenagers in a car in the and he's kind of trying to get her to put out essentially but the it was done in a way that was so Y- funny but funny because it was so uncomfortably recognize you you recognize your own experience in what was being put on stage and the yeah and he he they were not afraid to show however in most embarrassing human moments you know. I mean in that sketch when and says you know but you don't don't respect me you know and he'll say and he said no no all respect you over his victory like crazy That wasn't done then. And also these other themes there another famous wonderful sketch you can see it on Youtube of the cheap funeral. You know this was the era. Also books like the American way of death and and was the loved one. You know these were these. These were areas where it's one thing in literature but to put them on Tel- in in early television or even in nightclubs is extraordinary. Neria probably the I mean one of their if maybe the signature sketch was the the rocket scientists on the phone with his mother. And in in a way that encapsulates the difference. What a revolution comedy? This was at the time because as so many people told us from you know woody Aland and Tom Lehrer like the previous generation were got you know guys like Bob. Hope Alan King who would make mother-in-law joke But couldn't make a joke about your mother and so that was a kind of a boom the punchline. What they were doing it was since they they didn't come from Vaudeville? The borscht belt they had a theater background so they were really doing these scenes. And you know. They're they're both kind of part part of this craze for Freudian analysis. News sweeping the eastern seaboard at the time. And so the that. Sketch the the the that they could do something about your own relationship with your mother. The woman who gave you live who was seen as sacrosanct figure in one thousand nine hundred thousand America and be so ruthless about it on you know both her and the sign and just so penetrating in terms ends of just the. The dysfunctional dynamic was really not anything that anybody had seen before that time. Yeah I guess it was sort of the invention mention of the archetype of the Jewish mom guilt trip out. Yeah and and you know that that sketch we learned in in in the book you know doing research for the book it really had its basis in Mike's relationship with his with his difficult if not impossible mother really yeah. In fact the the the first line of the sketch came from an actual call. He received from his mother which I don't know if you're familiar with the sketch begins. Hello and so anyway Mike. One day gets a call. He answers the phone and and this voice in the other end that says is hello. Mike this is your mother. Do you remember me. And it must have been such a departure from the traditional Tuxedo. Oh comics who worked in the nightclubs in the fifties and when I listened to old comedy albums I do find that Nichols and may are way more timeless than the other comedians of their era. Because it's tied to human emotions. Not Current Events Surrey topical things. You're a good company or he ears because Paul Simon feels as you do that that he said you know I used to worship Lenny Bruce. Lenny actually seems more dated to me he said than than than Nichols and May. Yeah what we're talking about the shift in comedy one thing Lorne Michaels told us was that so you know. He's is it. Whatever teenager in Canada at the time and said that of this group Nichols and may among them of Comedians that this is really the for the their their as opposed to the previous generation of Comedians? There where you had joke writers and performers these are writer performers. And it's a little that analogous in this is what Lauren said to what was going on in music. Where suddenly you've got these groups like the Beatles who are both writing and playing the songs and it just completely? It changed our expectations for kind of what it meant to be a comic and and he he really credits that to that. Being like the beginning of what led to SNL. Yeah I think Jack Rollins the entertainment manager in here who represented Woody Allen and Rob Robin Williams and Nichols and may a lot of big big big people he tells the story of how Woody Allen approached him and said. Hey you know I really really want to write for for Nicholson Yay. And he's like I'm sorry they the material exactly now I in fact I mean would he would. That's the So that meeting you know he says well would you represent me and and He says bronzes while we don't represent writers. But we'll we'll give it a try and woody would-i would kind of come in and read read material in the office in Jack Rounds. This found it so funny the way that he did it. Even though what he never thought of himself Salva's performer up until that point and he practically pushed him on stage. So you know the that's the beginning of what he's career is is really right there in that office him. I'm trying to is incredible. May We're going to take a quick break and then we'll be back with more when we come back in just a minute over fifteen years orest has been making purely mechanical watches in Holstein Switzerland. Staying aim true to a rich heritage. Oriss is one of the few Swiss watch companies to remain independently owned and operated because of that independence or as has the freedom to follow its own path. They're focused on bringing change for the better. Which means making choices that are ecologically socially and financially responsible that includes conservation and recycled plastic partnerships? Of course that's along with or says more than century long commitment to making inventive high functioning adding Swiss made watches that serve a real purpose at a price that makes sense the best possible watch for the money comprised of four themes diving aviation in Motor Sport and culture or as watches or made for everyday wear shop the many different unique styles at O. R. I S. Dot C. H. Slash slash kick. You're sure to find one. That's your style in suit your taste. That's oors dot C. H. Slash kick and now back to the podcast and some of the people in this book. Talk about the fact that Elaine may wanted to be a pure Improv Act and Mike Course being the director type wanted to script out there sketches and she would sometimes drive him nuts when she would go off script was is that what eventually led to their break up. Yeah I mean. She didn't want anything to get stale. You know she. She grew out of few improvisation. And that's why they. They weren't even though they appeared on early television show called omnibus. which was you snow? kind of helped make them household name but they weren't great in a way great on television she she baulked at it that she baulked at the the sameness of it the the repetition I mean he could have lived with it. I think But she made her very restless. Listen kind of CLAUSTROPHOBIC. Yeah in fact by Bob Newhart told us a story about so when they They take their nightclub back to On on Broadway. And it's his show directed by Arthur Penn and. He said that they needed to put their routines on paper. So that the lighting people would know you. Yeah and she comes over to Mike and says we can't do the sketch it's not funny and he says what are you talking about this one of our best routines and she says it's not funny. I just saw it on paper that that that kind of gives you a sense of what her attitude was. And after the break-up He goes through a little bit of a period of depression. And then he's hits it big because he teams up with Neil Simon and directs three monster hits on Broadway barefoot in the park the odd couple and plaza suite and I found something really interesting that Neil Simon inset in here he said. I'm paraphrasing here. But he said Nichols could find new depths of meaning in scripts that even he hadn't realized yeah his scripts. Yeah yeah he said he'll he is he's you know he'll never work with he. He was the best ever worked with. And you know that I mean I. It's important to point out by by the way that Neil Simon was not Neil Simon when Mike teamed up with them and he had he was on the show your show of shows or whatever TV writer and then he didn't is one play called. Come Blow Your Horn. which is you know was not a massive hit so it was really the the combination of sensibilities that that made the shows so phenomenal heads? I mean there is a point where they're all three. There are three of them running on Broadway at the same time which was totally unheard of. Wow yeah now he comes off of these monster hits on Broadway and goes to Hollywood to direct. Who's afraid of Virginia Woolf? This was his first movie yet. He's able to get Jack Warner or to agree to give him six weeks of rehearsal which was totally unheard of in Hollywood and at one point Warner wants to make the film in color and Nichols insists on keeping it in black black and white. He gets away with it. Where did this guy? This first time director get that kind of Chutzpah he was you know incredibly willful and and he was also young but usually explain how he linked up with little well it also he had the tremendous good faith. Yes and cloud of Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton. Okay you know The the An evening with Nichols and May. Hey and camelot wasn't it. We're kind of cheek by jowl on Broadway. And they would you know he and Burton and would still smokes in Schubert's alley now and And in fact we begin the the book with Within an an excerpt from which would burton diary where he does all the great figures that he knew Churchill and Cosso Costco and Somerset mom and even Edward all be you know who and he calls it the Burton stakes for sort of greatest personality. New and he kind of settled on decides. It's a tossup between Mike Mike Nicholls and Noel Coward they were just so yeah so dynamic and charismatic. Great wet but couldn't have been more different. I mean go a waspy you know. Gay Englishman an effigy Jewish immigrants from Central Europe. Who almost was obsessive over women although although the a Lotta people invoked coward with Mike because he was just such a Bon vivant he was so? Just the Zina sophistication then. He could speak in kind of these devastating epigrams which is a very all kind of know coward qualities. You Know Maureen Dowd in a way kinda summed it up perfectly. Yeah she said that Mike was a null coward figure with the Jersey Kozinski pass so he has a huge hit with. Who's afraid of Virginia Woolf and then he follows? How's it up with? Perhaps his best film graduate which he won an Oscar for but when he pitched around town. No Studio wanted to make the movie. Why not well? So Larry termine We actually just came from lunch with Just now but he larry's the one who optioned the book and he brought it to Mike before he ever directed a movie and So at the time just no studio media would take a chance on him. Essentially now while he's lying on the subject matter on him okay on Mike because he just wasn't well known enough and and so while he's still struggling to kind of lineup. The Money Mike gets the Virginia Woolf job because of his relationship with Liz and Dick and so by that point I guess it was enough but it was still really kind of an independent movie And you know he termine termine got this guy. He affectionately refers to as a Schlock meister. Joe Levine to put up the money basically and it was made. Hey for not a lot of money and made a hell of a lot of money on the on the other side so and he originally wanted Redford for the lead. Novelist in Hoffman. Yeah and terrible. Passer auditioned together. I mean it would've made more sense if they had if they stuck to the original idea of the book about these actually actually wasps from blonde loss from Pasadena. Okay Yeah Yeah But you know they decided to sort of flip it you know Mike Buck Yeah. It's kind of funny that you have a Jewish director Jewish writer and a Jewish star making a movie about wasps in Pasadena. Exactly Zaken. You know he they don't change they don't change the names of the characters or anything like that. They don't make any but just by casting this a Jewish actor and I you know not Paul Newman. Either I mean this guy is. Nobody's idea of leading man at the time including his own Yeah he turned down the part hearted I because he said Look Mr Nichols WanNa guy like Robert Redford and Nichols said. You don't WanNa do it because you're Jewish and Hoffman said. Yeah and Nichols said well. Well maybe Benjamin Jewish inside and those that that kind of that was a complete. I mean that's really not in the book and it Really Eliya. It would have been such different movie if he had gone with the traditional leading man. Type that anybody else would have gone with Um but he just by by putting hate a more a guy like off in that part he just made he closed the distance between the I and the characters instead of just looking at some you know teen idol on the silver screen this is a guy who they kinda conceal themselves in a little a little bit and and it just changed and changed everything. Yeah Yeah now after that he does Joseph Hellers catch twenty two. He brings that to the a big screen He Casts Orson Welles in the film. What was it like working with such a big personality and someone who thought that he and perhaps rightly so that he was the grace director of all time? Yeah well apparently. It was kind of hellish Thorson. Well first of all in every conceivable way larger than life you know and larger than anyone else And he thought he should be directing the movie and finally he got. So what kind of disgusted. He did something that he would have been appalled to do with any other. Wouldn't have allowed it then. The other director. which is I think it was the scene where he's either? You know pinning a metal on you know and I guess what would be a naked your serian anyway. He actually had mike give him the the line readings off camera. I'll just do it exactly like you. You tell me to you know so it it was really impossible and then I think Bob Newhart told me. He had a scene in which I'm probably going up but but the idea was anyway he was so I don't think it ever made it to the screen. We supposed to be sort of practically under jeep. And he kind of realized that Orson Welles was sitting on it. You know sitting on the jeep was probably made it twice as heavy. It's something like that anyway. So it was kind of a mixed blessing to have to have I mean mean and when they weren't shooting So was there for two weeks. Basically because he demanded that all his scenes shot in sequence and He when when the cameras were enrolling Austin Pendleton who was a totem whose son I believe in the movie? Yeah he's just toss. He's he described as being like tossing fish to a seal where they were. Just throw out of the name of another director and see what he would say. And so you know they would they'd say of Stanley Kubrick and or smells just go online about how overrated he was and how he would. He wanted to teach class just so he could show his students every everything that was wrong about paths of glory and said Oh two thousand one just come out and he said I'll have likes to short. I'm not going to go see that. And he said finally Mike said Orson. Promise me you will not come to see this movie when it's finished you know if if you'll indulge me you know Bob Newhart spoke to us. He wasn't known as an actor at all. You know there's another interesting compelling kind of choice you know casting choice and but Mike did ask just as he asked Garfunkel. You know to to become an actor way and He he asked Bob Newhart to to play a Major Major and Bob Newhart says to us. I was really surprised that Mike wanted me in. Catch twenty two because you surrounded by really great actors. Alan Arkin Jon voight Orson Person Wells. Which had Benjamin Paul Apprentice and I was a stand up comic? I wasn't known as an actor so I took that as a compliment. They asked me to play major major and we went down to Gama's Mexico where they built an airfield over the Sea of Cortez and curiously enough newhart was also offered a part in mash which was the more really a kind of undid. The attention paid to To catch twenty two but he turned it down because he felt kind of loyalty to Mike. Who had who had asked him and this is fascinating? I remember one of the first things was mike goddess altogether the cast and crew. And he said you have to understand that you are figments of your sorry Arians imagination which was certainly a departure from the book. I just played it for laughs. But then the making of the movie started to take on kind of surreal quality eighty and so many people l. like Bob Newhart and others talk about. Just how much fun. It was to work with him. And what a happy experience. It always always was it almost sounds like doing a movie or a play with Mike Nichols was Kinda like attending this really great month or two long dinner party with them. Yes that's well said The I mean not not wasn't always joy. If things is people were screwing up or or you know not meeting their marks. He could be pretty withering but if people kind of really pitched in then yes. It was a great experience. I think that comes out with a working girl. I guess at some point You say that Melanie Griffith. Are Melanie. Griffith says that she showed up drunk on set and he actually asked her to pay. Think something. Like what eighty thousand dollars simplisafe's shooting and and they and they felt they had to punish or or there had to be a consequence and it cost her Eighty thousand dollars thirty years ago. You know still a lot of money but I mean and she kind of learned a lesson from it. I mean they. You know Yes she she credits that as being a real turning point her kind of struggle with substance abuse yeah and on the other hand he could have ratted her out to the studio and he chose to ask her to pay that instead of ratting her out to the studio which that would have ended her career have done that but he he could be and was his entire life ruthless about decisions affecting his his work stage in film work. Yeah now I have to ask about the woman who was his fourth wife. Now his widow and the love of his life TV news anchor. Diane Sawyer Pantley. He was obsessed with her even before they met right. That's right yeah He you know he taught Tom Styron William Sirens Son told story about. Mike was over at their house in Roxbury Connecticut and suddenly sixty minutes comes on. This is right when she had just joined the show and he was just kind of you know thrown thrown back in his chair as says the most beautiful woman I've ever seen and so Bobby greenhut he who produced. Use a number of Mike's Movies said that he was having lunch with Mike or something and Mike said so. You know I just had a date with Diane Sawyer and Bobby Green has said in. I'm good for you. Do you get any but anyway. Yeah I mean it really was that he's a guy so I mean we You Know Doug Wick. The producer working girl said that that Mike had this real romantic side which comes out in that movie which he made while they were going out and so but you know this guy who also made carnal knowledge in heartburn. Some of the really kind of most You know hard to watch movies about this. The horrible ways men and women can treat each other But he he said to many people well he he kind of finally got it right with her and and you know look you. They were married for how many years so well I mean the American died five years ago and some you know he described himself as As Pinocchio But Pinocchio who became a real boy you know and and Candy Bergens other people called it the Diane effect on his on his personality that it made her made him a better. Nicer Person Peggy Noonan you know the columnists urines and speechwriter for Reagan This is Peggy. Noonan I said to Diane ones who were talking about marriage and she had by that point been married long happily and I said Oh Diane. Don't you think you were made to remarried. And she said No. I don't think I would ever have been married if I hadn't met Mike. Wow now she is one of the few people who didn't participate in the book consuming that you did approach her though yes well. We certainly couldn't have done this book without her in a way her a kind of benediction addiction. You know a really Yeah the example we give is Samuel. Beckett's response to his biographer deirdre Bair She wrote him called She Sir Young writer and he basically said. I'm not going to help you but I'm also not going to hinder you and at the beginning this was. I think Diane's approach approach but when we really needed her When we needed her to go deep in in our into our bench and find somebody that we wanted to talk to she she was she was willing to be? Yeah interesting now. He had this rather charmed life both in terms of the people. He's rounded himself with but also just the lavishness and the style with which Mike Nichols lived. What was it like to be? Mike Nichols I wish I know or You you. You met him several times. Well the candy. Bergen said that he really you know. No one really lives like that anymore. But he did live like a prince. I mean You know he he. He bought and sold Arabian horses on. And we'd have kind of beautifully lit and choreographed Horse shows you know To horse ranches you know one in Santa Barbara and the other was in Connecticut and An and are a quite an art collector. Oh I in fact I say quickly. An anecdote was on non. The book involve me I was at their home home and I thought I would kind of show off and there was a painting hanging in the bathroom or or right in front of the new way to the bathroom and I came back and said you know that really reminds me of of It's I forgot artist's name now. All my proper nouns are going going somewhere to die but I might have been a RONCO. Yeah you know it really reminds me of a Rothko and well I hope so because because it is his longtime assistant director told the story that they're having some meeting in production phase of some movie and He was kind of meeting with production designer and trying to explain what he wanted for the Color Palette of the movie in sort of struggling to find the words and so he says to these director. Just bringing bring in the small Matisse story really extraordinary The the way the way the way that he that he lived and it's ironic because at some point I forget who says this but someone recalls him saying I'd love to know what it's like to be rich. He always felt that he needed more and he just I wanted to be able to acquire so many things the you think that he agreed to do some films just for the money that he may be later regretted. Certainly there are some people who told us that and you know those people who said that they really only said in in a spirit of disappointment because they knew they just felt he. There's nobody more capable table and more brilliant and it Kinda hurt them when they felt like he was being hit compromise a little bit in his his creative judgments I mean just to give an example example He he was originally supposed to direct remains of the day. And and and Might even he has. He asked the studio media for twenty five million to make the movie at the nowadays. In the era of like three hundred million it doesn't sound like much but it was also for merchant i. This is a lot of money runway. More than anybody else would have made that movie for. And so he he is a with his friend. John Kelly who the the studio head of the time and John Kelly is. Let me ask you. Does it make you nervous. Remains the day twenty five million and Mike Says I. I can't sleep at night and he says well. Why don't you just get out of it? Then you know. Because I'm telling you the studio would rather you do wolf. And so that's basically what you wind up producing directing wealth. And you know that I don't know if that was a great choice so But but even though he I certainly we're not Making making the case that his his filmography is without blemish. But at the same time he was able to he knew when something wasn't working and invert ver- in over and over again kind of coming off of a failure would would in a way lead to his next triumph with his probably one of his most disastrous movies onset and Lee successful was What planet you from? which that Garry shandling wrote and starred pardon the did not get along on said and and it just you know it was not a happy experience for him? He felt he kinda gotten talked into doing the movie of Although of course as you know his choice in the end but it was that that kind of led him to do start working at. HBO and I with wit and and then with angels in America and kind of a real rebirth to his career. Mom You know he he he did he. Those jobs that paid paid a lot less than the kind of commercials doing but it was important to him to find to get back in touch with the the reason that he he was doing this work in the first place because it wasn't all about money for him. Some of his final movies were his best. Yeah I am and also by the way he he You know as somebody told us a lot of directors used theater as a steppingstone to get to Hollywood with Mike that was a parallel career. All the way through and That was not about money because the money was not as big as it was in the movies but that was just a you know a kind of a love affair affair that that never remained undimmed till the end in fact some of his finest work at the you know his death of a salesman. Production was was a real kind kind of high point right away more often. Yeah and it was really interesting. Casting at the time was exactly younger than the role is written. I mean frank rich said that Just nobody would have cast. Dustin Hoffman in the graduate heat. Nobody would have felt Phil Hoffman. Was Ready for for salesman and it. It's kind of call back back to what God Mike Interested in theater in the first place because he saw I believe the second. Ever performance of that show The original originally Kazan directed production when he was a teenager and he was just completely kind of changes life. Eventually I mean we were also interested in in in our book not about the glittering great success you know which he had but also how did he handle failure and disappointment and and you know I in a way. That's what the title is about. You know this Something was kind of a motto of his. When things didn't really go well you know and And Joe PAPP the creator of the Public Theater Producer Said of Mike early career said to someone you know Mike. Nicholls is not the success and the person said why not this is after some tremendous success and he says well because he hasn't had a failure yet and and his His brother Robert Nichols told us that when when they asked about it he thought for quite a while without a comment and Said said you know it's true you have to prove yourself by rising from the ashes it's why he called his production company acres productions you know and he sailed very close to the sun at the beginning of his career but he but he did he kept at it you know oh you. Reinvented himself many times and kept you know he would ask coming back from from the ashes exactly well before we wrap up here Mike Nichols just did everything with style and his final weeks on this planet were no exception. Really I. And I think there's something wonderfully constructive in here about how. He went out in the final weeks before he died. Can you tell us a little about that. His last Birthday for example he. He died two weeks after his last birthday and Christine Baranowski who we'd worked with I in the real thing on Broadway in Nineteen eighty-four for Tom Stop called him up and I've got a few days off from the good wife can't let me take you out to didn't lunch for your birthday. And so you said Great. So then she. She called called up Cynthia Nixon who is also in the real thing and said. Why don't you come? She said great one in Cincy said. Why don't you call would be 'cause he had discovered what be that year and and took her to Broadway and and Glenn Close? WHO's also in the real thing wound up coming? She mic shows of the restaurant. And here are these four actresses. This is that he directed in the year. Nineteen eighty fourth. which is thirty years before this birthday Kind of you know all gathering to to wish from a happy birthday and she said the lunch went on for like four hours or something and He I just you know he really went out with a full dance card. Yeah you got all these lunches. Apparently with friends just connecting with people laughing. Talking for hours became a running joke with Asha myself. That we one of I would interview someone like Tom. Stoppard or the artist Eric Fischl or it would always be you know wait. He just had lunch with Mike a a week before he died in a while. He Sean said you know it's a it's a fortunate thing when you can die in a good mood Um well once again. The book is called life is in everything. Mike Nichols as remembered by one hundred and fifty of his closest friends. Sam Cash ner and Ash Carter. Thanks for talking with me thank you it was a pleasure thank you thanks again. The Ash Carter Order and Sam cash for coming on the podcast order their new book life. Isn't everything Mike Nichols. As remembered by one hundred and fifty of his closest friends the Amazon audible or wherever books are sold. If you enjoyed. Today's podcast be sure to subscribe to us on Apple podcasts and rate and review. US while you're there five star ratings detailed reviews or one of the best ways for new listeners to discover the show you can also follow us on facebook or on twitter at At kick ASS news pod recommend us to your friends on your social media. Rumour Funds Duff visit kick ASS News Dot Com and I welcome your comments this questions and suggestions at comments at kick ASS news dot com for now. I'm Ben Mathis and thanks for listening to kick ASS news uh

Mike Mike Robert Nichols Nichols Mike Nichols director Mike Mike Nicholls America Ash Carter Hollywood Bob Newhart Elaine May Diane Dan Sawyer writer Virginia Woolf Natalie Portman mike New York Nichols Orson Welles Meryl Streep Mike Buck
OA247: Status of the Trans Ban

Opening Arguments

1:34:55 hr | 1 year ago

OA247: Status of the Trans Ban

"Gee, ever elected to congress? The machinery of democracy at work for everyone everywhere, not just in certain places and not just on the certain day. Power. Sees nothing without a demand. It never has an never will. We still have to be willing to show up every single day and demand our seat at the table. King proud of you guys. Welcome to opening arguments. The podcast that pairs inquisitive interviewer with the real life. Lawyer this podcast is sponsored by the law offices of p Andrew Torres LLC for entertainment purposes, is not intended as legal advice does not form an attorney client relationship. Don't take legal advice from a podcast. Welcomed opening arguments this episode two hundred and forty seven I'm your host Thomas Smith that over. There is Andrew Torres belts suspenders lawyer. How you doing? Well, I'm doing a little bit better after that fantastic introduction. And I was already doing great. So I'm amazing. How are you Thomas? I'm doing well. I feel like our country's not as good right now. Currently we got is was one of those not great news shows. Unfortunately, they happen. A lot these days probably too much these days. But that's okay. We got to we've got to cover the ins and outs. We've got quick Andrew was right slash wrong. I like those those are always fun take we could celebrate. And then scold Andrew in the same segment. I always enjoyed doing that. And then we're gonna talk unfortunately about the trans band that in the military that I guess is now going through, and I I don't know what's happening. And that's why we have Andrew Torres. I can't wait for Andrew to give us the breakdown. Although I say that. And then I'm worried it's going to be really bad news. So maybe maybe maybe it's right now, it's the Schrodinger 's trans. Gender military band. I don't know is it happening or not. But I guess we're gonna we're gonna check the superposition of that in Andrews gonna tell us, and then finally we're gonna talk a little bit more about the shutdown that is still going on. It's absolutely appalling that this is still happening. But it is. And we got some more questions about that some more points for Andrew to talk through. And that's it any nouncement anything from you. Andrew. I just wanna promote your appearance on episode one seventy nine of godawful movies doing the movie one more round, which is typically, you know, the level of hilarity we that opening arguments listeners have come to expect from one time Smith. No, you are you are super funny in it. And and if you like to hear clown horns without the clown horn head on head on over. We'll we'll get the show notes. Everyone should check that out. It's really really funny. Yeah. It was really fun. And I I love doing that show. One of my favorites to do so fun. But now, it's not fun stuff. We'd better talk gets onto with the rest of the show here. Hey, this is a reminder that we are gonna have our monthly QNA this coming Tuesday. That is January the twenty nineth at seven pm eastern four Pacific. We will get announcements out of the YouTube channel, which you can fight. Find on YouTube, and we will post as soon as we go live on social media. Anybody can attend the QNA if you are a patriotic supporter, you can head on over to the thread that's up and post the questions that you want to see answered and up vote with the heart the ones that other people have posted that you'd like to see this is a lot of fun. And at to be honest. It's a lot of fun in the comments sections. You know, sort of among folks watching us live. We we always have fun with it. So if you've never showed up to QNA give it a shot that is this Tuesday this coming Tuesday, January the twenty ninth seven PM eastern four Pacific. Anybody can watch and patrons get to suggest the questions a lot of fun. See there. I'm asking you. If you know the difference between right on wrong. Maybe not okay. State of the union. Now. It sounds a last. I saw sounds like Nancy Pelosi's holding firm on the no state of the union right until the shutdowns over. But what were you perhaps right in wrong about so a couple of things here? Right. We got a a message from Joe d who tells us you said that the first president to deliver the state of the union to a joint session of congress was Woodrow Wilson in nineteen thirteen. This is mostly right? However, the first president to do so was actually George Washington followed by John Adams. But that tradition did not last very long Thomas Jefferson delivered the state of the union as a written report giving speech reminded him too much of a king addressing that custom lasted until Wilson revived the speech format in in nineteen thirteen. So really good historical point there. That's because I had seen the same thing. And I thought I I agree with you. I was like, oh, yeah. I read that the Jefferson hated it. And therefore Wilson was the one I did it. But I guess, you know, Jefferson wasn't the first president of the United States. So that'd be that'd be the flaw in that logic for for me. Anyway. So yeah. All right. Minor point. But but good correction. Yeah. And then I also predicted that although Nancy Pelosi had the power to deny Donald Trump access to the house of representatives to a joint session of congress to deliver the speech uh speaker the house that that the president would find an alternative NU and as of this morning that looks wrong to it looks like the president is backing down, and and will not deliver the state of the union during the shutdown and will deliver it once the shutdown has has been concluded. That's a thing. I am super happy to be wrong about because I think I sort of backtracked from from week to week. So you you really wanna talk about superposition. The the first time we talked about the shutdown. I predicted that the the political circumstances would be likely to kind of bring Trump to the table. You were pretty skeptical about that. And then. I declared you correct and meet wrong. The next week look like things had sort of moved backwards, and I would say over the past couple of days that the things certainly seem to be moving in a direction where you know, Trump is you know, he over the weekend floated a what was described as a compromise position. There's no need to kind of get into the merits of it. It was quickly rejected by Nancy Pelosi. And we continue to see Trump doing thing that he has not done as far as I can tell throughout his presidency, right which is backed down on anything. And and so I think those are good signs. I don't know what what your take on that it good. What what are the good? Oh, you think it's coming to a close soon. Just because of what I think I think the fact that Trump has come forward with a compromise proposal, and the fact that Trump is not going to attempt to. Deliver the state of the union during the shutdown. I think those are good signs. And I think those auguring favor of us being able to end the shutdown on the near horizon. Maybe I'm feeling overly optimistic to me. It's just like trying to predict I I don't know. Like, you got a mouse scurrying around of maze or something. And you're like I predict that it's gonna get to this part of the maze. I think it's going to happen. It's like, I don't there's no prediction of a could. You know, like it could just go. Oh, it's there or not, you know, or could just never find the other end of. I think that is that is the greatest description add up. I'm gonna I'm gonna go without would right mouse obeys. Who knows if it's gonna get to that? The Trump does all the time to is that like right when their signs of something happening. He'll just either here and culture said something bad about him or what? And then he just totally reverses. You know, it's it's I don't feel. I don't feel comfortable making any prediction at all other than the only thing. I was saying I'm deeply worried, and I think that worry has been valid that this shutdown because this was back in what week one or two of the shutdown. My I'm deeply worried about how long this could go on because I know he doesn't care about humans like he doesn't. There's no cost to him of this like thinks, it's all fine. And maybe the only cost maybe if someone tells them poll is going against him. You know, like, maybe we'll get lucky and he'll care about of a poll or something, but other than that just in terms of human being stuff like I'm not we can't rely on that. So he's he doesn't he's not going to behave like a predictable person in that. Respect. I don't think. Yeah. No. I agree with that. We've also mentioned that shutting down the government is a feature and not a bug to to to to this administration in in a bunch of ways. And you know, we're gonna answer some more questions on that in the c segment, but but there you go state of the union postponed question, Mark. And and that that definitely caught me by surprise. I know there's a I I thought there was a good chance. He was gonna do it in front of a bunch of Trump water bottles or something, you know. I I honestly thought and hundred percent wrong on this that he would just go to the Senate. Oh, I thought you say that Trump boardroom back from from, you know, the apprentice there who knows right, and just pack it with his supporters, and and the networks would cover that. Well, at least we don't have to deal with the potential implications of that. So we'll see next week. We could be doing a wrong and right on the the same set of question that flip-flop the other way. Yes. Yes. All right. Let's I'm in. No hurry to move onto the main segments. But but I feel like we should. Yeah. It's it's it's just what we have to do. What's going on with this transgender military ban? It sounds like a court Yudo allowed it to go through. All right. Tell us in what way are horrible president is being awful for no real reason. Yeah. And and I wanna start with I'm going to Lincoln the show notes. I've already shared it out over Twitter and in the opening arguments Facebook community, there is a really really good article. That was an interview with longtime friend of the show Alice Ashton for the advocate that breaks down the reality of the trans ban means I think this I it's it's a horrifying read. But in my view gives some not just a human face to to the to the crisis. But describes you know, I I've already had one discussion, you know, with somebody said, well, you how this is just I don't we have so many bigger issues going on. There are fourteen thousand trans servicemembers proximity. That is. Yeah. One percent of the trans population as a whole trans individuals are over represented in military service. And and trans transpeople already have unemployment at three times, the national average for reasons that are probably pretty obvious not the least of which is in most jurisdictions. You can fire somebody for being trans just because they're trans. So that's terrible. And it's about to get worse. And if there were any other population group in this country, where an executive order was about to increase their unemployment rate by one to five percent that would be outrageous. And and that's the reason that, you know, even if you don't care about this on a moral level, and you should write. But if you're talking to Michael Frank, and he doesn't care about it on a moral level. This is this is not just, you know, five people this is not a handful. This is a significant chunk of the military. And it is a significant percentage of the trans poppulation what happened, and and I and I wanna go through the the history because we were on a good pace up until the supreme court a couple of days ago issued a series of rulings. And and essentially what what the rulings do is they stay the enforcement of lower court, judgements that issued preliminary injunctions blocking the Transpac from going into effect. So in other words, I'm gonna talk about there is some administrative work to be done to implement this. But as of right now, there are no judicial orders that prevent this administration from change. Ching the policy towards trans service members. We're gonna talk about the last proposed change. But it's it's bad. I mean, the current the the last proposal by then secretary of defense Gimenez, essentially said that the that that the government can discharge and refuse to allow to enlist trans servicemembers, I'm gonna talk specifically about the particular language, but that's the effect. It is an outright ban with a few very small. Exceptions those exceptions currently apply to under one thousand servicemembers. Right. So less than a couple percent of the potential number of servicemembers to be affected, and there there have not been any implementing regulations, but those regular. Nations are being written as we record this, and and will be put into place soon, and it will go into effect. There is a as far as I can tell nothing that can be done at this stage to stop that from happening. So yeah, go ahead. I I don't know what Sam speechless. It's it's yeah. I don't know. What Shane I mean? So I guess as you're saying there was a preliminary injunction. But yes, the precor. Okay. Well, I'm so so so here's what happened right? And let me say at the outset the way that this is written. It is being characterized as not a ban on trans servicemembers for reasons that I will explain in a minute, but a ban on people with gender dysphoric now. As as your Notting along. This is a really really difficult issue right now in the psychological literature and in the trans community. I am not remotely an expert on those issues. But, but my understanding is that you can be trans and not have gender dysphoric. Right. And leaving aside the all of the issues surrounding. You know, the the treatment of of trans men and women where you know there. There have been all sorts of, you know, gate keeping issues and the like, I'm not qualified to address those issues, but but essentially the way in which the ban is presently written. According to the Mattis statement is designed to say, oh, we're not discriminating against trans people so long as you serve in an and I want to stress. These are Madison's words these are by far not my words because they don't make any clown horn sense. But as long as you serve in quote, your biological gender. In quote, you can continue to serve that. I you know that is. Pastas, as oh, it's like if we said to gay people, oh is long as you pretend to be straight than you. Yes. That is exactly what we did. I guess. Accepting that, you know, gender identity. I mean, there was look I don't wanna get into a robust defense of don't ask don't tell. Although again, I will point out that in the mid nineteen ninety s it was a progressive step from we will fire you for being in the military. If we discover that you're secretly gay to move to. Hey, you can be secretly gay. Just, you know, don't ask don't tell. And again, I realize I've oversimplifying. This is not a don't ask don't tell segment I think there is a fair argument that right sexual behavior is something you can keep private gender identity is is considerably more expensive than that. And I think that's a good argument. I also wanna point out right dysphoric, right? Like etymologically, right? Dysphoric is the opposite of you. Fauria. Right. It is that conditions. Are you know, intolerable lots of people not in the stage where you know, they that would be described as dysphoric to to nevertheless want to identify as trans to. Nevertheless, you know, have this be something that that that affects their lives. So yeah thousand good time to ask the question. But I'm curious if it's framed that way, are we evaluating who has like our our transpeople right now able to just say like just to keep their job up. Nope. No just for you here. How are they going to valuate that somehow? Yeah, I I will get to that. When we talk about the specific policy. Here's what it reverses. Right. Because what it reverses? And again, this is yet another example of where the existing policy was perfectly straight. Right forward and had no administrative red tape, and our small government Republicans decided to make it unnecessarily complicated in service of evil June of twenty fifteen the Obama administration and then secretary of defense. Ash Carter ordered a year long study of the feasability of trans men and women serving openly in the US military. They brought in the RAND Corporation. Right. The most prestigious think tank in the world, nonpartisan, certainly not a lefty outfit by any means. Right. Not you know, a social Justice. It's the RAND Corporation. Right. And they studied for a year the effects of trans service on readiness deployability and unit cohesion at the end of that study. They issued a report. That said, no, of course, not that it also covered medical costs. Right. It it sort of preempted all of the stupid arguments that Trump has made and same thing. Right. You're not talking about medical costs that exceed the typical medical costs that service members have right? And to use an example from the from actually Maddison's research, right? The the standards on admissibility into the service are different than the the standards for retention, right? So in other words, you have high blood pressure when you join up as an eighteen year old those are grounds for not allowing you to join the army. But if you join the army when you're eighteen and then you develop high blood pressure in your thirties as lots of people do you've been get treatment for hypertension right in in the military. You get you get the the an, and we could do we could do a deep dive on, you know, medical care in the military. Let's put that on the whiteboard. But in other words that that transfers members don't have appreciably higher. Medical costs than other servicemembers. Right. And so that was the result of the study as soon as it came out, then June thirtieth 2016 secretary Carter issued what what is called the open service directive no link that in the show notes. I guess we can look at it wistfully, and it says effective immediately. No, otherwise qualified servicemember may be involuntarily separated discharge or denied reenlistment or continuation of service solely on the basis of their gender identity. Doughy going back to you Frank that that's I mean, I hate having to do these weird arguments where you're like find a way to argue with someone who doesn't care about people. That's a hard thing to do. But I think that's a pretty simple, and it sort of putting it in the Republican frame a little bit, which is if they're fit to serve their country. They're fit to serve simple as that. And the very next paragraph eight they're only three paragraphs to this, right? There are other sections that are implementing, but but the the directives are basically these three paragraphs paragraph p says exactly what you just said, right, which is transgender servicemembers will be subject to the same standards as any other service member of the same gender. They may be separated discharge or denied reenlistment or continuation of service under existing processes and basis, but not solely due to their gender identity. Fair or an expressed intent to transition genders. Yeah. So and that answers the arguments about. About because their their arguments being raised by the other side. I believe disingenuously. I don't know if these are factually, correct? But the arguments are that trans men and women have higher rates of suicidal idealization. They have other issues that may make them unfit for military service. Obviously the first response is right. The reason that they have higher rates of of of suicidal idea is if they do would be how they're treated in society that doesn't seem to be a great argument. But but the point is that if somebody has suicidal idealization and is not fit for military service. They could be discharged could refuse to allow them to enlist even if that is as a result, you know, or correlated in some way to there being transgender, right? It is not a situation where this becomes an absolute defense. Right. This. This is a situation where it cannot be used as the basis for discrimination. And then the the the C provision says that a service member whose ability to serve is adversely affected by medical condition or medical treatment related to their gender identity should be treated for purposes of separation in retention in a manner consistent with servicemember whose ability to serve his similarly affected for reasons unrelated to their gender identity or gender transition. Right. So again, I think answer sort of the medical arguments. I it is difficult for me to imagine that non religious right ideologically motivated presidents could possibly in any way disagree with this year. I couldn't imagine reasonable George H W Bush getting into office and going well, you know, by God, we're going to get rid of that. But Donald Trump dip, and and so on June thirtieth twenty seventeen secretary of defense. Jim Mattis announced that was that was when this policy was scheduled to take effect. Right. So again, you see the Obama you see the Obama administration's approach which seems so quaint now of we've got a problem. Okay. Well, let's study it. Let's make sure that we're proceeding prudently. Okay. We're announcing a major new change in June of two thousand sixteen. Let's give the military a year to implement these changes right leads because we get it. Right. And we want to balance out we don't want. We don't want charges that were being reckless. And so so it was going to take a year to open. They say Obama was would have made a great president. I mean, I think he was a great president. But he he was from another time like he. Yeah. He was doing the reasonable things that you used to do when everything was reasonable. Hey listeners. You know, what's not smart job boards that send you candidates that aren't qualified for the role you posted that is infuriating that used to happen to me back when I was hiring people. It's a it's a waste of time. You know else is not smart picking a public fight with Nancy Pelosi shila, she'll get you. But you know, what is smart going to ZipRecruiter dot com slash oh. A to hire the right person. Unlike other job sites, ZipRecruiter finds qualified candidates for you. It's powerful matching technology scans thousands of resumes to identify people with the right skills education and experience an actively invites them to apply to your job. So you get qualified candidates fast. That's why ZipRecruiter is rated number one by employers in the US this rating comes from hiring sites on trust pilot with over a thousand reviews, and you know, as I met. Engined? I do have a little experience hiring people, and I cannot tell you how valuable it is to have the right candidates. It's frustrating when you get a pool of candidates, none of whom you really in love with. But you, you know, you really need the job done. So you hire somebody sub optimal. And then you're you're kinda that's a whole other can of worms you want the right candidates fast. And right now, our listeners can try ZipRecruiter for free at this exclusive web address. That's ZipRecruiter dot com slash. Oh. A if you love the show, you can show your support, and you can get a fantastic service by going to ZipRecruiter dot com slash. Oh. A that ZipRecruiter dot com slash oh. A ZipRecruiter, the smartest way to hire. And so so that was going to open enrollment enlistment to to trans servicemembers and Mattis said, I'm deferring that by six months, right? New administration. We're looking at it. I'm deferring it by six months, but I'm not making any changes to the open service policy during those six months, but a month later, Donald Trump took to Twitter, and and what Donald Trump said on Twitter was quote, the United States will not accept or allow transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the US military and of quote. And that then led to the immediate filing of lawsuits and good on these heroes who filed the lawsuit, and you know, who now, you know, maybe in in a very difficult position. So there were four different sets of lawsuits filed one here in Maryland stone versus Trump I'm going to focus on that. Because there's a veered procedural thing. And so I'm going to tell you a little bit about that. But all of the all of the lawsuits allege the same thing, right? Which which was that recinding the open service policy was among other things a violation of the equal protection clause of the fourteenth amendment talk about that a minute after Trump's tweet August twenty fifth twenty seventeen the president issued a memorandum stating that in his judgment, the department of defense had failed to identify a sufficient basis to conclude that the open service directive would not hinder military effectiveness and leaf -ality disrupt unit cohesion or tax military resources. I'm going to upload that memorandum as well. So this is an executive order to executive memo, but has the same force of law as an executive memoranda as a directive to the department of defense and that explicitly rescinded the open service policy. The the Carter opened service policy. And then he directed the that the department of defense and the various branches of the military should return to the longstanding policy and practice on military service by transgender individuals that was in place prior to June twenty sixteen I e a comprehensive ban and being able to discriminate against them. And it also banned the enlistment of trans individuals. Right. That is that that word learned this while researching it, so I'm going to share this with our listeners listeners is called accession. Don't ask me why the military has special word for enlistment when enlistment would work, but I it was a ban on exception. And I was like what what on earth is a session. That means joining the military so ban on retention ban on accession and a ban on sex reassignment surgery. And again this. Is the language used in Trump's order right directing that the various secretaries of the armed forces, quote shall halt all use of Reese of DOD or DHS resources to fund sex reassignment, surgical procedures for military personnel. Except to the extent necessary to protect the health of an individual who has already begun a course of treatment to reassign his or her sex and of quote, and again, their language not mine so lawsuits were filed and and they and the administration lost everywhere. Yeah. That's remember. Okay. So it was it was and here's how they lost. Right. So the argument is an argument on equal protection grounds. And and here is that there's there's kind of an interesting law explainer here that I'm going to embed in the middle of this horrible discussion. The fourteenth amendment says no state Sheldon Ida any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of a loss. Right. And so the very first thing, you might ask is we'll wait the military is at state, right? The military is under the supervision of the US government. We talked about the incorporation doctrine in a bunch of previous cases in which the supreme court said that the fourteenth amendment incorporated, the Bill of rights out to the state. That's why the state of New York cannot violate your first amendment rights. There's also a doctrine of reverse Inc. It's a it's a nineteen fifty four case it's called bowling versus sharp that says the fifth amendment right which says that the federal government will not deprive you of life liberty or property without due process of law reverse incorporates the provisions of the fourteenth amendment as part of the definition of liberty. This is an interesting sidebar again for originalist friends. The bowling decision was a nine nothing decision in a pretty conservative wealth in a middle of the road. At least supreme court in nineteen fifty four was not remotely controversial at the time. And it absolutely is the kind of opinion that that the supreme court could not issue, and that anyone following in originalist logic is sort of forced to to deride that opinion. And so, you know, it's kind of. Yeah. Another area in which the originalists our way out of touch with, you know, only eighty years of jurisprudence, and and the overwhelming wishes of the American people anyway, so the protection clause of the fourteenth amendment is reverse incorporated back to the federal government. And and what that means is that you can bring a challenge to argue that an action of the federal government, clearly, this is violates equal protection of the law and this good time for us to do a little mini explainer on what that means. Because all the time laws treat different people differently. Right. If we say, you know, you take the law that says felons can't vote in federal elections. Right. Well that treats one group of people felons differently from another classic people, non felons. So in other words, the fact that laws treat people differently is not dispositive. And we've talked about the you know, does this mean, Nazis, get to bake cakes? And does this mean James damore gets to sue Google because he's a Republican the way in which you win an equal protection clause is as follows your the plaintiff you demonstrate that you've been treated differently from others. Who were similarly situated? You then have to show that that treatment was the result of intentional or purposeful discrimination, and then the burden shifts back to the government to determine whether the disparity in treatment can be justified by the requisite level of scrutiny, and that requisite level of scrutiny depends upon what class you're in in terms of the class that was discriminated against right? So if you're a member of what the court calls a suspect class discriminated against on the basis of that class. Then what applies is strict scrutiny, which basically means the law is almost certain to be struck down strict scrutiny applies to three things it applies to discrimination on the basis of race on the basis of national origin and on the basis of religion. On the other hand, if you're not a member of a protected class, then what applies is rational basis. Right. So felons not a protected class Republicans not a protected class if rational basis applies than what the government has to demonstrate is that there is a rational basis for discriminating between the classes of people in the law and that rational basis test is super easy to prove. And that's why of all of the distinctions that we have the mirror test is that. Yeah. That's exactly what it is. Right. The Faulk MIR you put a mirror under the legislators knows. And if it fogs up to indicate that they're breathing it passes rational basis, I in recent years courts have actually done a little bit of a substantive inquiry in in rational basis cases, including in this case. And I'm going to talk about that in a second. But. But really where this battle is being fought is over what is considered a quasi suspect class, and to which the doctrine of intermediate scrutiny applies if intermediate scrutiny applies you have to show as the government, quote, exceedingly persuasive justification and quote for drawing the distinction in the law, the only quasi suspect class is gender right is sex. And again, those are the terms being used by the courts, right? I understand, you know, I'm not I'm not endorsing that particular language, but the crucial thing is and we talked about this. When we talked about the highly versus Ivy tech decisions and the Zarqa versus altitude express decision. That was the last time we talked about those cases was in episode one fifty two by the way, there is no supreme court decision that recognize. Is is either sexual orientation or gender identity as falling under the suspect classification right under this level of intermediate scrutiny. There are decisions at the circuit court of appeals. Right. So if you're in a state that is within the jurisdiction of the second or the seventh circuit than those courts do recognize that discrimination on the basis of gender identity is equivalent to discrimination on the basis of of sex. And to be honest. Unlike the hurdle that you have in the highly and Zarqa decisions which has to do with the legislative history of the nineteen sixty four Civil Rights Act. If you're just talking about the equal protection clause the argument that. Discrimination against trans men and women should fall under. At least intermediate scrutiny is really really strong. It comes from a case called Glenn versus Brumby, which is an eleventh circuit decision. So again, you have these decisions at the at the circuit court level. But you don't have them coming from the supreme court, right? So the supreme court is free to write on a blank slate. But but here's what what Glenn versus Brumby says, right? They start with all of the discrimination on the basis of sex decisions. Right. And the two kind of most famous ones really are a case called Mississippi university for women versus HOGAN nineteen eighty-two case, and then a subsequent decision US versus Virginia regarding the Virginia Military institute and both of those cases were about admitting members of the opposite sex too. To those educational institutions. Right. So the Mississippi university for women, obviously, did not admit men and the supreme court said, yeah, you've got to admit men VM. I the Virginia Military institute did not admit women. And the supreme court said, no, you've got to admit women, and in in both cases, they quoted from from the same language, which was then quoted again in the Glenn versus frumpy decision. State actors to include the US controlling the gates to opportunity we have instructed may not exclude qualified individuals based on fixed. Notions concerning the roles and abilities of males and females. Right. So think about that in VM, right? Like the via VMI argument was hey, this is a rough military academy. And we just keep out those, you know, precious Little Women because they couldn't pass our rigorous physical entrance exams anyway. And the supreme. Court said. Yeah, that's not good enough. Right. Yeah. You want you want to administer physical tests. Great. But let women take the test. Right. Don't you cannot use broad-based views of what women are like to exclude them from those opportunities. And that is precisely what the eleventh circuit seized upon in the Glenn versus Brumby case. Right. They said look. As those cases continued to develop that there was a subsequent supreme court decision Price Waterhouse versus Hopkins from nineteen Eighty-nine that made it explicitly clear that discrimination on the basis of gender stereotyping is sex based discrimination. Right. And so they put all of that together and said look. It. It doesn't matter. How you look at it. And the and the court you could see this is the eleventh circuit a conservative circuit, by the way. This was a unanimous three oh panel that was joined by William Pryor, one of Donald Trump's potential nominees to the supreme court. Right. And in fact, one of one of the most the the the guy that I said was a dark horse candidate. If you really wanted to trigger the libs someone who has a long and outspoken history of saying hateful things about LGBTQ, people, nevertheless did not descend from this opinion because it's super clear. Right. So as a result of that. And as a result, I think of of this clear application all of these courts at the district court level enjoined the trans ban policy, and as as you know, Thomas right, the fundamental question when you're talking about issuing. A preliminary injunction, right? You've got the other standards is likelihood of success on the merits, right? And the court said, yeah. Now, we think the plaintiffs are going to have no trouble proving likelihood of success on the merits, in fact. And now I'm going to quote from from stone again, this was the Maryland case. But, but they were all pretty similar that that the stone decision said moreover, this court finds that based on the exhibits and declarations currently on the record the directives that is Trump's tweet and executive order are unlikely to survive even a rational basis review, the lack of any justification for the abrupt policy change combined with discriminatory discriminatory impact to group of our military, service members who have served our country capably and honorably cannot possibly constitute a legitimate government interest. So that story that should settle it. It should. And so what the Trump administration did was said. Okay. Well, then we're gonna go back to the drawing board. And I am going to instruct Jim Mattis to conduct an internal study. And and and come up with a new policy that survives rational basis review. And then well Vattel will was that Mattis wasn't necessarily that bad on this issue. Like, I thought he would do I miss remembering your miss remember? Madison. And and again, I don't know what's in his heart of hearts. I don't know where he is on this issue. I know the study that they came up with is a forty two page study. I'm going to link it in the show notes. It is conducted by talking to people in the military. Right. So basically there there's no independent verification. It raises the arguments that it raises are, and I'm not making this up one mental health is going, you know, the mental health disparity of transfers members will undermine combat readiness to physical health and three. And again, I I wish I were making this up the need for separate bathrooms. And other you know, sex-based discrimination. That's currently in the military. That's okay. That's the justification bathroom understand. Because what the report says is that implementing the open service directive would interfere with current sex-based regulations that are already in place in the military, and that are already constitutionally permissible such as having separate bathrooms for men and women. And again, it's based on the fact that the report assumes that the definition of a person's gender is the role that you were assigned at birth which they call your biological gender. So the report rea- FIS something that is not supported in the medical and psychological literature, and is of course, kind of the key. To the trans people don't exist. They're not really men. They're not really women side of the argument. So the Mattis directive, which came out February twenty-second of this year is a described by the Trump administration as replacing the earlier Trump order, but his fairy clearly just implementing the Trump order and no court to date has fallen for the notion that that this this replaces right because we've talked about how in the past right? When one of the ways in which Trump was able to stall resolution of the of the Muslim ban was by recinding prior executive orders and issuing new ones. Right, right. Changing them in material ways. This does not change the prior policy and material way. He here's here's what it says. It says that a if you have undergone transition if you are a servicemember, and you have undergone transition or quote require and quote undergoing transition, which is then defined as having a diagnosis of gender dysphoric. You may not be recruited. You may not enlist. And you may be terminated subject to the exception that I'm gonna talk about in a second be if you're trans quote without gender for you. Then you can serve. And again, I want to emphasize this is their discriminatory language you can serve quote in their biological sex and of quote yet. And so we've we've talked about that there is a a database that is maintained. It is called the defense enrollment eligibility reporting system d e r s and so what trans service members to is what some trans servicemembers have done is changed that marker in that database right from female to male. What? Yeah. Because as I you know, I interviewed transportation the military on my show as well. Because the one of the more tragic aspects of this is the fact that because the policy was changed under Obama trans people who might have been kind of quote unquote in the closet before in the military came out in like notified, their superior that kind of thing. So like there are people who thought okay? Finally, the coast is clear, I can be myself here became open about the fact that they were trans. And now a couple years later that's the in. What what I think is a really horrifying betrayal that can be used as evidence that they can't be in their job. Now. Yeah. And that's one hundred percent, correct. And what the maddest policy does to try and respond to that is craft see the exception, which I told you to to put a pin in. And let's let's look at that now because this is going to become crucial for trends servicemembers. So the exception has two components to it. The first is service members who are diagnosed with gender dysphoric after entering military service may be retained without waiver provided. They are willing and able to adhere to all standards associated with their biological sex. And again, that's nonsense. But, but that's what the policy says the servicemember does not require gender transition and the servicemember is not otherwise non deployable for more than twelve months for a period of time in excess of that established by the service policy, which may be less than twelve months. I don't know how that third calculation. The non deployable calculation is is made I've talked to a couple of folks. We'll we'll follow up on it. But basically says so section one I read that as saying you can try and get back in the closet for now. But right, you have to identify by the gender that you were assigned at birth. And you have to not transition you have to continue. You know, you have to continue in in the gender. You were signed up birth exception to says transgender servicemembers who were diagnosed with gender dysphoric by a military medical provider after the effective date of the Carter policy June thirtieth 2016, right, but before the effective date of any new policy put up in that this is crucial may continue to receive all medically necessary treatment to change their gender marker in the ER s and to serve in their preferred gender, even after the new policy commences. This interest. According to the study will apply to nine hundred thirty seven of the fourteen thousand servicemembers. I wanna read the exceptions to the exception because this is important. This includes transfers members who entered into military service after January one twenty eight teen when the Carter policy took effect by quarter. The servicemember must however at here to the procedures set forth in the regulations may not be deemed to be non deployable for more than twelve months. Right. The same non deployable issue. And then here's the really really crucial part. And nobody that's reporting on this has has pointed this out there's an explicit several -bility close, here's what the policy says. While the department believes that its commitment to these service members, including the substantial investment, it has made in them outweighs the risks identified in this report should its decision to exempt these servicemembers be used by court as a basis for invalidating the entire policy the exemption instead is and should be deemed. Several from the rest of the policy. So what does that mean? That means that if a court were to look at the exception and argue under equal protection that that should apply not just to those service members who got a gender dysphoric diagnosis would between June thirtieth twenty sixteen and whenever the implementing Greg's which are gonna come out any day now. Right. Maybe within a few days of of the show dropping and then says, okay? Well, the only way that that that creates an artificial distinction between those service members and other transit members. What this says is then the department of defense, the branches of the military will kick, this exception and everybody will be forced back into the closet. So it's bad. Now, it could get worse, and they have deliberately built in a mechanism to potentially make it worse. They would rather save the policy than permit the exception and permit those fourteen thousand transference members to continue to serve with distinction. It's that's I don't need to to tell you that that that that's bad. What's coming next? I I don't after having painted a terrible picture of what's going to happen. I don't wanna undercut that. This is going to happen. This is going to affect I wanna say like, look if if you're a trance servicemember right now. I don't know what to tell you to do right because on the one hand. Right. If you try and race out and get a gender dysphoric diagnosis right now. Number one, you might not be in the position to want that right? But suppose, you know, this forces you to act and you say, okay. Well, I'm gonna go try and get within the safe harbor provision two. Things could happen to you number one. Right. Your your evaluation because it must be from a military medical provider. Right. Cannot be from your own private doctor that Diagne. Hospice could stay pending, right? The doctor could say, okay. Well, I'm writing up my report. And then all of a sudden the implementing rigs come out and now you're outside the safe Harper period. Right. And and now, right? This brings you into. She had a gory a right. Like, it just is. And then, of course, the second thing, right? The the military might kick this when when when they're arguing in court, they Mike. Okay. Yeah. Well, we're going to several out this part of the exemption. I I don't know what to do. I mean, I I am. I am. It's just one of those moments where I'm struck with kind of the. The recognition of overwhelming privilege of you know, you an I don't don't have to face those kinds of decisions and. You know, I can say my my heart goes out to to those who do and I don't know. I don't say it does not right. The fight on the merits is not over and I want I want to be super on that. It is not this is what what what was before the supreme court were two things. The first is the petition to stay the effect of these decisions, which was granted weirdly, and this picks up the procedural thing that I talked about before weirdly, they they did not that the the government did not file a petition in the stone case, they only filed in the other three cases. And so it's sort of made it it's Randall. But but it, but it doesn't matter. Right. That that the the stay the injunction in stone is now rescue Kat. It's been decided by the supreme court. So it will be lifted in stone as well. So. So that that's super bad for all the reasons that we just went through. But the government the second thing the government asked for was for a writ of, sir. She Aurora before judgment. I'm gonna talk about that on Tuesday's show because it deserves its own segment. Okay. But those were denied, so, sir. She right before judgment is all of these decisions are at the district court level. They are pending before various circuit courts of appeal, and what the government wanted to do was bypass the fourth circuit, the ninth circuit and have the supreme court take it up. And and the supreme court said we're not gonna do that wearing a let those cases litigator out in the various respective circuit courts of appeal. But we're gonna let the band go into effect. While those cases are being litigated. Remember that denying an injunction granting an injunction is a signal that the court says, yeah, we think you're right. We think you're right on the merits. So when you went on an injunction, that's a pretty strong signal of where that court is headed denying an injunction means that you do not have you have not met the threshold of showing a substantial likelihood of success on the Mary's. And so you could go before the court and say, okay, we weren't able to persuade you that we were substantially likely to win on the merits. We get that this court thinks that it's a close case. Here's why we're still right on the merits, right? And I believe the fourth and ninth circuits in particular are going to apply the eleventh, circuit precedent. It will go up to the supreme court. And and then the question will be. We we know where the hard core. And I can't believe I'm drawing this distinction. We know where Gorsuch Alito Cavanaugh and Thomas are going to come out. The question is is is John Roberts going to draw some kind of arbitrary line that that effectively overrules the eleventh circuit's opinion. So when they went since the supreme court, I guess undid the stay or stays does it then go back. So it's backed down in the circuits now or is the supreme court deciding on the merits like, no, okay. So it's it's neither of those. Right. So what? So what happened is right? The the district court's entered in a preliminary injunction, right? Those cases are in various stages of appeal. Right. Okay. Because some of those cases have been adjudicated on the merits and then appealed up to, sir. Circuit courts of appeal. Some of those cases are still in the process of getting a final determination because of the shenanigans with the the February Madison bright, and so there was a whole bunch of new procedural motions to dismiss with which those cases, you know, turned around to know that didn't move out the case, it's still the same issue. It's still the same policy. So what this does is the stays the enforcement of the judgment pending appeal. And so it says it doesn't overturn the decisions. It doesn't rule on the merits, and it is not rate ripe for the supreme court to rule on the merits because no circuit court of appeal has ruled on the merits yet. That's what the petition for social right before. Judgment was meant to do was meant to say. Hey, you don't need the fourth circuit to weigh in here. You should get rid of the stay take it up. And then presumably, you know, that was done with the idea that the supreme court would then reverse. Right. So it will still be adjudicated on the merits at the various circuit courts of appeal. And I think that the circuit courts are going to come out are going to follow Glenn versus Brumby. It feels really really straightforward to me. And then the question is what the supreme court will do. Yeah. I don't I don't have a whole lot of hope. But I do have I do have some hope, but I know we're out of time so couple of just quick sentences. The cruelty is the point the parties are not the same blank Bachmann for president twenty twenty because the Democrats won't do this. This is not they're not the same at the same. Yep. Absolutely here here here. Blank or blank box woman, by the way. Yes. Oh, there's so many blank box women going to be great. Okay. So if we're kinda bottom lining this. You know, correct me if I'm wrong here. But it sounds like there's not a lot you or I or anybody can do right now. It's still going through the the appeals process. And, you know, once if it gets all the way to Scotus, and they rule, you know, there's nothing we could do then what what's your main takeaway from this? What what how do you feel about it? Yeah. So that's that's exactly right. So I I would say there are two takeaways here. The the first is it remains a live question to be adjudicated on the merits as to whether gender identity or being a trans man. Or woman is an intermediate requires intermediate scrutiny under the equal protection clause. And I think we will see good decisions from the fourth circuit. From the ninth circuit in I in in the near term. So we're still kind of waging the battle to determine what the equal protection clause means. But I think I think the Glenn v Brumby cases super super clear, and and and and that's that's why I think that's headed obviously, then to the supreme court that sort of the second thing, and this is a little bit of a teaser for next week. I think that it is significant that the supreme court declined to issue Ritz of social rod judgment in this case, I'm going to tell you why. And we're going to talk about just how activists the supreme court is and will be on next Tuesday show. Good good teaser. I'm very curious to hear that. But all in all is the segment was every bit as depressing as I thought, it would be and more. This is horrible. And we're we're really are. Hearts, go out to anybody at any transpeople. I we know several them trans people in the military. The it is amazing. When you look at those numbers, you know, it's more. It's more people than you might think. And those a real people who are now worried about whether or not they can still have their job in their career and their paycheck for no for no good reason. Absolutely. No good reason, it's it's horrifying. So hopefully, the courts will go the right way of actually, but it it's definitely feels really powerless right now. It's it sucks. Yes. It does. Right. Well, let's try to rapid fire through some shutdown stuff. Here. We're we're a little long. But you know, it's there's a lot to talk about. And I think it's it's worthwhile. A lot of the stuff deserves a lot of time. So hey listeners here's a tip. No guy looks good in a long, bulky, dress shirt. When it's on tucked, you might think it looks casual but it ends up looking sloppy. And we don't wanna look sloppy. That's because they were never meant to be worn that way untuckit make sure specifically designed to be worn untucked there not too long and they're not too short for that. Clean. Casual look you can even wear at the office with more than fifty fit combinations untuckit shirts. Look great on tall, short, slim and athletes guys of all ages to untuckit dot com or visit one of untucked, it's fifty stores across the US and Canada, and the website is great. It shows you the variety they have the colors what they might look like they've got a great sizing chart to figure out. Maybe what what body type you need to have the shirt that will fit you best. So untuckit even offers free shipping and returns on all orders in the US use the promo code away for. Twenty percent off your first purchase. So if you want the perfect fitting shirt, regardless of your shape and size. Try the original untucked shirt and remember use promo code. Oh. A for twenty percent off your first purchase. Let let's do some quick shutdown questions. No, I think I am very restrained. And I talked about important things. Very restrained. If I use it at all, I'm gonna do those temendous came. Of communication, there should be nothing. You should be ashamed. All right. Hold on. From patriot. Eric trump. I guess this is we found the Trump's new legal strategy. I guess like Giuliani is working out. So this is the game. They can pledge the show and asked us legal questions. I am positive that's cheaper than hiring Rudy Giuliani. So so think about it. Do you mean cyber security expert, really Julia? Who has standing to bring a suit to challenge in order returning them to work. So that's that's is talking about the kind of the IRS thing. We're Trump's like, oh, I'm just gonna make people go return to work for free. Or is that exactly right? Exactly. Right. And I am trying to answer all of these before the explanation with one to three words. So the answer there is any worker, and I'm gonna Lincoln the show. I don't know why more of these haven't been filed recently. You know, we talked about the the air traffic controllers union case that's still pending by the way. I mean judge Leon denied the T R O. But as we just explained in the last segment he could still revisit that on the merits, the the recent lawsuit that was filed on behalf of anonymous high senior government officials was filed under the fairly standards act. Right. And as we know right that provides for mandatory minimum wage and paid overtime. And and what it says is that? And that's that statute also provides for double your actual damages plus your attorney's fees. So if you're an attorney I start talking to some federal employees and get these lawsuits filed I'm I'm hundred percents. Here's it's at least as good a chance that you're going to get your attorney's fees as as the the suits, you you likely bring so any worker next drives me nuts is this. When this the shutdowns happen in Republicans can be like everything's things are still we don't need the government. Things are still finding like. Yeah. Indentured servitude works out. Great for the employer. That's awesome. Yeah. If the government still kind of scrapes by because people are working for free because they're they're scared to lose their jobs and the. Yeah, that we're yeah. It does work out. Great for us for for, you know, it's that's cool cool system. Anyway, if the federal courts are shut down would the lawsuits even be heard. The answer to that is eventually we talked about last week the reporting by the federal courts that they were going to run out of money on the eighteenth the latest word from I guess, overturning couch cushions in court lounges is that the the the the federal courts will remain funded through February. I with the caveat that quote, there will be no more extensions and of quote, so they have kind of pinched every last dime at at at that point, all of your cases, all of my cases in federal court that are not imminent criminal cases. I think are going to get state. So it's going to be bad. I was just thinking like judges are probably not the kind of people are like I might lose my job. I might get. They're going to hire a new me if I don't were. I mean, those with lifetime ten. Yeah. I think they're like, oh, no, no, no paycheck. No work by pretty sure. That's that's how that goes. Okay. This one may take a little explaining considering how long a lawsuit might take. Are there? Any more expedient ways to prohibit the administration from violating the anti deficiency. Act would. Nope. Okay. Nope. But can you explain what that means? Exactly. Yes. So the the the question is is there any other way to enforce the anti deficiency act other than by bringing lawsuits, and and the answer is right? The doors of Justice, and the furloughed prosecutors could I guess. You bring chart AB some sort of militia. But but but that's never been done in the history of the ADA. So so, yeah, it's next one here is there any mechanism to prevent the administration for making very aggressive interpretations of the exceptions to the ADA to put virtually all furloughed workers back on the job without pay and the answer. Here is no with an asterisk and the asterisk is. Eventually, I believe the courts will slapdown those overly aggressive interpretations. But if you're asking can we get an injunction right that the the first step of that was judge Leon's decision. Not to grant an injunction in the air. Traffic controllers case. Now, another judge may see things differently denial of an injunction does not preclude has no long lasting effect on whether another court says yet, you know, what this has reached the stage the tipping point where the Iran. Proble harm and the balance of harms is too great. But but right now, the answer that is no. Assuming that ordering back on the job is ordering. I guess people back on the job is an actual violation of the ADA who could or would be held, criminally or civilly liable. That's a good question. And the answer here is everybody except Trump. Thirteen USC thirteen fifty provides that an officer or employee of the US government who knowingly and willfully violates the anti deficiency. Act. Shelby. Find not more than five thousand dollars in prison for not more than two years or both. So that that can apply to anybody. Again, you have to meet the standards of knowingly and willfully, right? So if you're just following orders that probably will immunize you. But but coded apply at the at the cabinet level. Right. Could apply at the heads of executive agencies level? I see no reason to think that it couldn't the only person to whom I think it does not apply is is to Trump himself under the clear statement rule, which we talked about in connection with the bar memo. So so everybody else final question that a lot of people are asking why does congress still get paid? Yeah. And the answer here is the constitution as it turns out all of the provisions for payment right of congress of the president and of judges come from provisions in the constitution. So we'll still get paid. So it's just the other people that work in the courts that are shutting down yet. Everybody else who is not an article three judge will will not get a paycheck, including the judges clerks, including the clerk, of course, including the people that the judge is really really need your trust me somebody who has judges for friends, you really need to have, you know, your clerks and the clerk of court and the staff. Okay. But hey now, how we always talk about making actual good lot awful movie or show. You know, like what if we are the plot is technically the only people who can work are these federal judges, and they haven't done this kind of grunt work in. And they have to like operate the whole courthouse themselves to try to get a critical decision. What do you think that what I love it? I love it. Work to says machine has facts. Now, what does will Farrell vehicle, right? Yeah. It's going to be one of those comedies, but with a heart. You know, like they're really trying to get an important decision of done. But they have to do all this funny stuff along the way. Okay. I think it's it's it's a all right. And it's plausible. All right. And then you know, I saw this question. And I I know we're running along by thought it was a really good one and a half to apologize because I cannot remember or find where I saw it popped up on my phone. You know, busy with something. And I could not find check Email patriotic Twitter. So listener if you want to get a shout out, you let me know. But someone asked us, you know, regarding the shutdown like, hey, I'm curious how you and Andrew would feel if you know, should should a liberal president shut down the government for something like a higher minimum wage or might have been. I'm I'm forgetting exactly what it was. But some liberal policy like, Gary. At jobs guarantee, or minimum wage or something like our universal basic income, which I thought was interesting phrase, it the other way, would you support this for a good policy, and I thought it was super easy unequivocally. No, I would not support that because that's just not how governance works. You. Don't turn the way a country works is not turning it into a competition of who can be more heartless towards some hostages. And then that's who wins policy battles. That's not sustainable is just not sustainable and to the people who still disagreed with us last week, or whatever imagine. Okay, sure, this policy is the the meaningless wall that you know, it's it's not the worst thing in the world because it won't work, and it doesn't cost like that much of our budget. The next thing is well until we shut down Abam akara, or until we shut down, you know, until we get Medicare whatever you think of the next policy of this. If the if the if the precedent is set that Trump can hold hostage. Ages to get stuff done where does it end you cannot allow that to be the way the government works? You can't. And then then I wanna ask you this Andrew the only thing I thought of was like, ooh, that would almost be tempting was what if back win back when McConnell refused to have a hearing over merit garland. You know, is that the where like one Coequal branch of government is not doing is not allowing the executive branch to to to use their thority would that then be a reasonable use of this of this kind of situation of like, well, then, you know, then I'm shutting down the government until you do your job still probably still know. But a closer question. I was just wondering if you had any quick thoughts on that. I I don't think I could say any of that better better than you have you stole the example. I was going to go with shoe, the obvious -ly, the the the garland. Hearings were during a you know, an already funded session of government. But you know, imagine right that that you know, it had gone over a calendar year. It it I I would not want to say, no if only because you know, and we have the the long rumored long promised episode on constitutional hardball. I I think I think things are going to get ratcheted to the next level under our next president. And I share one hundred percent agreement with with what you've said, I don't think it's any way to run the government. But, but I think I think a storm is brewing when when Republicans are sort of back in the minority and we've seen what they've done when they've been in the minority, and and another problem with all this is it's a little bit. Symmetrical given that, you know, shutting down the like Democrats are the party of thinking government can help people with problems in elected. It's it favors Republicans because there's that bizarre, you know, anti-government wing of Republicans if that's not all Republicans and shutting down the government is something they like to do anyway. So it's it's hard to use that as a weapon against Republicans. Exactly. Right. And look we should be better than that. Right. We should care about the fact that every week of the shutdown costs an eighth of a percentage point in GDP that eight hundred thousand federal workers are are in limbo that half million are not getting paid, right? That people are miserable right now. And I would hope that our presidential candidates do indeed care by care about right? Well, it was a great question. And I just wanted to address that because I thought of the America Arlen thing that was like, oh, that'd be when it was tempting, but. It just again, it's punishing. It's punishing bystanders though. That's that's what the, you know. It's it's not ethical. I don't think like here, you're not doing your job congress. So we're gonna punish some innocent people by not paying, you know, it's it's ugly. It's not something that I think Democrats should ever do. So all right. Okay. So well, just action packed show depressing show, of course, but also route critical information there, but it is time to move on to our co favorite segment, we got yourselves back up here. Co-favourite segment of the week. That is thanking our top patrons are hall of famers are all time greats and we begin with. We are going to build a death star and make ald around pay flirt Rudy Giuliani's green room bartender. Do what thou wilt Shelby the whole of law? Stormy mckendrick second chair clown horn in the a Lago philharmonic. Second chair clown. They couldn't even make it to I share clown. It's hard to be funny every week. Yeah. That's true. That's it is hard. John builder back. Jeff Gelbart board fuzz, Peter is an anagram. It's an anagram of BuzzFeed report. So Monica civil politics radio dot com fried is seven PM eastern on valley free radio possession is ten tenths of extra schism. Man, people really stepping up. Thank you. We needed this. Everybody we needed this cheer. So thank you registry matters podcast came for the yodel state for the intelligent legal analysis. Burbank maker space unintelligible real property question. Advocate for a foster child in your community costs for children dot org. Data heck dot com. Business automated making the menial automatic Thomas. Myth is my favorite attorney Andrews, a close second Trump. The plump grump felon, affront, stump and got dumped lump blank Bachman a miasma of incandescent plasma Kurt Robinson Kiwi. Valley exports for Australian red meat and craft beer Cosmo. Thank god. I don't work for the government anymore blues. Let me be totally clear. I like being totally clear I'm trapped in a patriot factory. Please send help Michael Cohen is a no talent ask clown. Sam buck. Milo meed song the Haflinger barred an SI you three L Chris Rowden. The getting off podcast is the shutdown over yet. Nope. Karma fleet is recruiting. Join your labor union together. We bargain alone, we beg investing in Mexican ladder companies. Mike the intact. Yvt Polly, Chuck don't blame Hillary blame the electoral college. I e slavery. Yup. Yup. Rob Shrek, James a wandering minstrel delivering the state of the union address Dalen lease Amazon, Rex I don't believe facts. I don't believe soccer. She Tae Phuc Sumi is really Japanese. Right up Shah's last chance for profit prison and anonymous thank you, folks, so much takeaway, Andrew and thank you to. But our cups legal services. Upped our pledge so up your. Eight three one cat low one. I wanna tell you Thomas, I called eight cat law one. I I'm not gonna give it away. But by think folks, should should give buttercup a call. Give it a call. Thanks to welcoming, the newest listener, baby. Wendy, congratulations. Baby. Wendy Lord damp. Nut is an anagram of Donald Trump. At women for convert Michael's? That's amazing. You win at women for Conrad. Michael's Zab -i. I see arbitration agreements everywhere is pierced the veil. What has four wheels and flies garbage truck? Are we okay? So we're jokes now. Yeah. Cool. On vacation, witty tagline service may be briefly suspended, and you Milmeh. Hey, a for her. And and I'm telling you I'm pronouncing that as written. So I I'm hoping that an is that is like one of the names of those Scottish towns, but Milmeh, hey who for word origins dot org. Your site for etymological rabbit trails. Derek, thanks for the nightmare inducing TB. You're welcome. Ready to make an entrance. So back on up in rage. Moping nuts is an anagram opening arguments. Saul big, easy, blasphemy a string of unpronounceable characters Hon, employed. Seek clamp inspection officer do not by Safeway southern style. Hashbrowns not good at all. Good. No. Airing petty grievances since twenty sixteen Brad Smith jurisprudence falsely so called an exceptional reference. There Thomas in the bible is my favorite podcasts. There are not close seconds. Well, that by the way, is is how I came across one Thomas Smith. So Rhonda's wearing her amicus brief Sammy to Malaika Chandler Jeremiah's. Fancy microwave emporium Abacus flinch camp quest quest game Quist dot org soggy at Santa now, Craig Sullivan, Aaron's inability to read names as influencing Thomas follow at OA Wicky on Twitter to see what Thomas promised in thirty two one. Adopt a homeless pet and opposed decline in your docking. Matthew Vernon Danny Baker at combat nonsense Aaron gravity hundreds of hamburger. An alley second. She tissue. Kasumi is an anagram of make US hiatus if ask. Saint Muller patron Saint of yodelers ally. Bosnich Mitchell philosopher, I hardly know her Rudy Giuliani is a modern day. Nathan therm that is an amazing quality. Oh, it was a Martin short character on Saturday. Who was this lawyer who'd be up being defensive your peak defense if you should check out Nathan therm that's gains. Used Carl salesman Mormon Jay FOX Esquire. And our all time great. Our number one the best that the apex of the pyramid. And apparently, quite the the sex symbol, according to at women for Conrad. So great. And also. Yeah, I think we didn't get a chance to throw this out on the show yet definitely at OA Wicky give that a follow. The the Wikki crew is starting Twitter couch. I think is great. They can kind of answer questions. So have you ever want to ask a a random, you know, away trivia kind of question? Ask away at Wicky. I'm sure they'll be happy to help. So they are amazing. The the work that they have done is just fantastic. And thank you so much to all our top patrons. Again. Go to patriot dot com slash law pledge at the five dollar above level for a month is how you get your shoutout. So thanks so much everyone does and holy smokes. Wordy at the end of another month. So nother lot awful movies going to become an shit and a QNA. So look for all that. Oh, no social this firm ever failed the bar exam. Kidding, okay? It's time for teaches GB. I think. I'm on holy moly. What an improbable three questions streak four with three three. You might be four by now. I didn't get anyone 'cause Andrew was totally wrong in his math the other week. And I don't remember anyone chirping at you for it. But that's okay. Guys, make fun of Andrew when he's wrong at math more say. All right. Just for that. Here's the question, you know, back up bottling company sent a purchase order to a wholesaler that stated ship one hundred thousand empty plastic bottles at the posted price two days after receipt of this purchase order, the wholesaler ship. The bottles and the bottle and company accepted delivery of them a week after the bottles were delivered the bottling company received the wholesalers acknowledgement form which included a provision disclaiming consequential damages after having used the wholesalers bottles in its bottling operations for two months. The bottling company discovered a defect in the bottles that caused liquids to leak from them the bottle and company recalled ten thousand of the bottles that had been filed incurring lost prophets of forty thousand dollars assuming that all appropriate defenses are timely raised will the bottle and company likely to succeed in recovering forty thousand dollars in consequential damages from the wholesaler. A no because buyers are generally not entitled to to recover consequential damages be no because the bottling companies acceptance of the goods also constituted an acceptance of the terms included in the wholesalers acknowledgement, see yes, because the disclaimer of consequential damages is unconscionable or D. Yes. Because the wholesalers acknowledgment did not alter the terms of an existing contract between the parties. Very interesting question. I don't think I don't think we've had one quite like this thought it was going to you know, go one direction kinda win another. It's interesting. So see I think the timelines important so ship ship a hundred thousand Senate purchase order ship. One hundred thousand the posted price to his after receipt of the purchase order k the the wholesaler ship them in a week after they were delivered the bottling company received the wholesalers acknowledgement form so that that seems bad the I it's like oh week later. Oh, by the way, those one hundred thousand empty plastic balls, essentially, they cause cancer or something, you know, it doesn't seem acceptable. But okay. So they used it for for two months, though, after having used the wholesalers bottles in his bottling operations for two months. Now at complicates it. 'cause like why didn't they stop sooner volun- company discovered a defect who's a tough one because like I feel like sending a week late, not exactly acceptable. However, they use the bottles for for two months. So we look at the answer can they recover forty thousand. So it's lost prophets of forty thousand. That's profits. So it's not just the cost of the goods such interesting. So can they recover the forty thousand prophets? No because buyers are generally not entitled to recover consequential damages that doesn't consequential damages. It doesn't seem right. I would think buyers would be entitled to recover consequential damages at least sometimes so I kind of not thinking A B. No because the bottling companies acceptance of the goods also constituted an acceptance of the terms included in the wholesalers acknowledgement that that's interesting that could be the answer because. Okay. On one hand. I would say that that doesn't seem right because they got the notice the acknowledgement form a week after the bows were delivered. However, they use the bottles for two months. So that's this is this is a tough one because it's not clear like had. They used the bottles for that week. And then got the acknowledgement than said, whoa. Whoa. Whoa. This is not right. Then the now it'd be different story, but they use it. They seem to use it for two months. So since they did I be actually have these seems like it could be a good answer here. See, yes. Because the disclaimer of consequential damages is unconscionable. I could see that being it like the the the disclaimers like to bat, you know, you can't sell it and be like, oh minor. Disclaimer here these are terrible. Don't work like that. I could see that. I could see being the answer D. Yes. Because the wholesalers acknowledgment did not alter the terms of. An existing contract between parties that's seems nonsensical to me. It doesn't really seem to address the question. I could be wrong, but deems wrong. I'm really between b and c. And. Acceptance. Here's the thing. It could be unconscionable. Okay. Consequential damages. I feel like the fact that they use the wholesalers bottles for two months. I think that kinda means they accepted the the risks. You know, I feel like they if you use it for two months, then you're like, well, we're gonna kinda it's like the Pinto or something like, oh, we're just going to deal with the fallout. If there's, you know, I'm gonna go with B, I think no because they at the acceptance of the goods, I don't love the exact wording. But I I'm gonna go with B that that's how I feel. They use it for two months. I feel like they kind of accepted, you know, they made their their bed their water bottle bed and they're sleeping in it. So that I'm going with beats between B and C, maybe. But I I'm not in love with the precise. Wording of b but I think I think it's the best answer. That's my that's my answer. All right. And if you'd like to play along with Tom. On TV. You know, how to do that just share out this episode on social media include the hashtag TB include your answer, your reasons therefore, and we will pick a winner and shower that person with never ending fame and fortune, including maybe even having Thomas read your name. We all know that was you in a freaky Friday situation. Off. If you wanna freaky Friday, you have to play in order to get one. So so there you go, you know, how to share it out? We'll pick the winner shower that person never ending fame and fortune fame and fortune guaranteed. Well that was jam packed. But a lot of vital stuff to discuss their. So thanks, Andrew great stuff. Depressing stuff and gosh our hearts, go out to everybody affected by these horribly cruel and pointless policies. So with that cheery on that cheery note will see on Tuesday. Law. This has been opening arguments with Andrew and Thomas if you love the show and want to support traps odes, please visit our patriarch page at patriot dot com slash off. If you can't support a Spanish -ly, it'd be a big help. If you could leave us a five star review on itunes, Stitcher, or whatever podcast delivery via clean us and be sure to tell all your friends about it for questions, suggestions and complaints Email us at open arguments at gmaiLcom, the show notes and links on our website at WWW dot open. Argh dot com be sure to like our page on Facebook and foes on Twitter at open arcs until next. This podcast is production of opening arguments. Media LLC all rights reserved. Opening arguments is produced the help of our editor Brian's Egan Hagen production. Assistant Natalie new at our unofficial researcher magpie a special thanks to the moderators of the opening arguments. Facebook community Natalie Elisha, cook, Eric brewer and Emily waters. And also, thanks to Thomas Smith who wrote and produced all of the amazing music you here, which is used with his permission.

supreme court Donald Trump Trump United States president Jim Mattis Ash Carter Andrew Torres secretary executive Nancy Pelosi Thomas federal government Obama Twitter YouTube Maryland Michael Frank department of defense Glenn
Late Night Political Party, Part 2

Late Night with Seth Meyers Podcast

25:16 min | 3 weeks ago

Late Night Political Party, Part 2

"Hey everyone, Seth Meyers you're a week from today is election day in before America votes on November third. We here late night wanted to reflect on how the last five years of politics have shaped our work in our lives. Now, GonNa turn things over to feel producer Amanda Cowper to lead the conversation take it away Amanda. Hi, I'm Amanda Cowper, and welcome to the second of three special episodes of the late night podcasts that we're calling late night political party on this episode is speaking to members of our production staff about what a difference four years can make. We're going to look back at our extraordinary time preparing sketches for the two thousand sixteen election, and then how late night shift towards political comedy has coincided with the real life social and political activism for myself and my co workers. Here's our conversation. So I am joined here today by two of my all time favorite people who I happen to have been working with for many years Could you please introduce yourselves? I'm Ellen Wagon and I am the production designer of late night with Seth Meyers and the Amber Ruffin. Show. For applies and Mike. My Colonel I'm the staff director number writer as well out on the show and I direct all the pre tips. All. Right. Let's go back to fall of twenty sixteen in mid October for the November. Election the show traveled down to Washington DC to do a week of shows at the Warner Theater. This is the first time that a late night had gone on the road, which was a fitting occasion given Seth's popularity with a closer look and all of his news commentary and in preparation for that, the three of us took probably a dozen train rides to DC. Lie Winston. That's where Manda and I got our points. That's where Amanda. France was on those train trips. We find so hard over Miller lights. Lights so Yeah that's how we really that really bonded our friendship forever. I think we took that many train trips because we were scouting and filming two field pieces in preparation for the week of shows. So the first one that we did was seth and Michelle Obama at Howard University, and the conceit of this was we had students come in thinking that they going to get college advice from south, but they were surprised by the first lady. So let's talk about this and the biggest stressor of the shoot was that we couldn't tell anybody that Michelle Obama was coming very stressful and even the people at Howard University remember they got Mary. They put it together I took point they're like you're lying about stuff. It was the worst feeling to have to be lying to these people who knew we were lying. We had to pretend that Michelle Obama's people were part of our production staff right and that's what happened if they recognized them and they were like, we're all in dc it it's. The the biggest craziest moment for me were unfortunately for about an hour they thought Seth Meyers was the biggest diva in the world. So it was less than an hour before we were meant to shoot and seth was coming from the White House with Michelle and the elevator broke. Now we're only shooting on the second floor but then the security sweep Michelle could miss Shell Mrs Obama. The first lady could only come in the elevator she couldn't go upstairs. So in the elevator broke, I was like I don't know how to get her to set anymore because it's not possible. Some begging them like I'm is please can someone please fix the elevator and they were like set can't walk up one flight of stairs grown healthy man? No. He's got bad legs. Okay. He's gotTa take the elevator. Like sprained his ankle last week I. Don't know what to say. But as a please, please fix the elevator and they did they did the gentleman who upset was rightfully upset. I would be so bad if a bunch of people came into my work. And lied to be I'd be like what is wrong with you? Well, besides being big that liars were there any other highlights from the shoots you know this? Working with Michelle Oh totally I mean she is amazing and wonderful and awesome and just being in her presences always. So inspiring find but it was especially I think for all of us who are in the room when it all happened just watching those kids be surprised by her it gives me chills still just thinking about it. I enjoyed seeing seth after the first lady was revealed and then people not only like focusing on her. And of being like, Hey, what's up like it was very fun to see them like him still trying to do our comedy bits when this person was just like, no, I'm meaning hero of mine and we're like, okay. So back to the comedy that we were doing it was it was fun like try to work that in. Did you feel nervous? Had you ever directed a bigger star at that point? I. Mean Is There I knew that we had such a limited time in only one shot at it. It's not like I was going to give her note serving I was really just worried that like the I remember being super really mainly concerned about the surprised not being blown. That is always a funny thing to isn't it? When you especially with people in the government who have these? Huge security details and security becomes. The most important thing were used to working in a certain way and every single thing we do become secondary to what the security detail requires. So speaking of security, we ended up going to the most secure place in our nation to the Pentagon. We went there was Sassa and he got a tour from the secretary of Defense Ash Carter. Carter the Ash Carter Ellen that this was a particularly meaningful shoot for you and it was also a particularly challenging shoot for us. What was your experience going to the Pentagon? For me, I really have not had very much interaction with anybody from the military ever in my life and so I certainly had preconceived notions of what we were going into. And they certainly had preconceived notions of what a group of people coming in to shoot a comedy bit for late night TV we're going to be like and I am happy to say that I think we both really proved each other wrong in that I. Think we were very skeptical of each other and it really was really went so well, and we had such fun together but it's crazy. Retrospect, because we saw it during a different administration and a different people were there and the people that we met none of them are there anymore and their priorities have changed a lot I think i. don't know if this happened with your crew as well cornell but I know with my crew. When we went in, they had packed you know their normal stagehand gear which includes box cutters an. Exact knives and all kinds of stuff in there. What's of cutting lots of cutting tools that we need it but but I didn't realize they were in their kids and so trying to go through security at the Pentagon. Even getting to the security line is a huge deal you have to be on all these lists and. We had to think everything through because normally I mean there hasn't been a shoot that's ever existed where there's not like in additions or last minute changes in. So to not be able to do that was interesting I decided it was surreal to be in the most secure place ever building a man cave in like a spare room in hanging up a portrait of the secretary, of defense, with like minded. At like putting like fake props like we had a big display of like what they claimed was Osama bin Laden's pogs. Fake. News. Am there's Osama bin Laden's pogs and I'm just like I'm surprised the military's letting us make all these things and bring all these things. Forgot about the pogs we couldn't get at the windows hold on. We couldn't shoot out the windows. We couldn't film out the windows. Yeah. We could like show the windows in the front. Yeah Anybody Horse. Blinders on don't any of you look out the window let me make one thing clear. No looking out the window. But they were like you can't. You can't put any video online that shows even if it's below now like in a frame because someone download it and expose it, and they'll be able to like figure out what room is what and I was like wow, this is crazy. Yeah, and the producers said, my biggest thing was they made us turn in our cell phones before we walked inside and for. Doing shoot without a cell phone is sort of like just during the whole thing left handed and you had to be entirely present. You know you're in front of the most disciplined smartest people like on heard her also did you find them to be humorous? Mike. Did you find like because you worked with ash and everyone had a really I think because we also the writers of the peace in Seth. In general kind of waned into letting them have dry sense of humor didn't ask too much of them. We just let them be dead Pan and dry and I think they did really well, don't think there's like a scene in the beginning where he's in a waiting room with all the branches of the military but all four of them like imprompt with seth like did a scene with Kim Ash Carter. On one take, they were each eating Greek Food and Seth Asks for Saas, and we set them on purpose unlike like the longest table they had in one take, he slid the sauce all the way across the table and landed perfectly, very impressed by that the fun fun moments. The sauce was a real highlight for me. You know another thing about this shit interestingly, it was so much security to get in there and you're so safe when you're there. But in a weird way, I would say the security didn't constrain us in the way that like I was saying with with Mrs. Obama how security dictates everything once we got in there we do whatever we want it. You know I was running around like a maniac. It was great. You know like the so we didn't have to make any choices I would say based on security except the windows once we were. So then we did our week shows in DC, and then we came back and on election day we did a shoot that will forever be one of my favorite shoots we've ever done which was dog one. Oh I love the dog one. We also had a video that was from the perspective of the Obamas dogs and not enough people watched it and it was a good video and it got. In the election cycle in it was good. We shot that in. New. York before the election but on Election Day yes. My my favorite shoot was victory videos, which was a series of vignettes of people who were about to do something dramatic and then Hillary Clinton wins the election and they do something different and if you remember at that Point Hillary Clinton was favored to win almost like right now. So basically, all of these vignettes, there was a TV screen and that's where they saw that Hillary one and so like A. Guy was about to move to Canada and he saw that she one and he decided not to leave a woman was on her deathbed and I think flatlined Hillary one. So yes. So we're going to put the footage in post of her winning obviously, she didn't win and so the peace never aired. Yes. My favorite scene that we shot was used to Kenzi orphans who are making Maga hats in legged Oliver twist sweatshops launer stem the work that Ellen in her department put into these sets because it truly was a lake. Shop. For like old stucco like English leg sweatshop, it was crazy because that said was a bunch of kids making Maga hats like covered in coal for like a bunch of kids making Maga hat and then once was going to hang himself which I'm wag I wonder if that would have made the castle. Yeah, it was a nod to Shashank. Yeah. Instead of Brooks's here. It was lots of us here and then our last shot of the day was we went off site and we filmed the kids all like they were free because Hillary one. And that has that has haunted me literally for four years just for the record and they run screaming and excitement down the street. 'cause they're free. Did you have any initiative what was gonNA happen that day while we were shooting and there was a big shoot I kind of just assumed she was going to win I think everybody and then I kind of my mind because I had a job to do and so. I wasn't even really checking my phone until well into the night at like nine o'clock and you were an edit at that point because we were gonNA air it next day. But like I'm editing I'm looking at, there's like democracy plazas spray painted on the damn ice, rink at thirty rock. So I'm watching them also like takedown Democracy Plaza, and unlike ten o'clock in the editor he has it on mute and I'm like way. With what's happening bull what and we look at the TV ads. Calling it just stop editing video like I'm GonNa go home, and that was the I went home didn't even finish it that night we really get a good place like for editing keep going and I was that's enough but in a bad place personally. Yeah pretty upset. Damn upset about to get. Worse. And video even though the nation didn't see it there was one live audience that did end up seeing it. Mike you were there that night, the writers do like a UC BE I think it's a monthly show where we do like rejected sketches on, read them in that time we. Have this video that. Insane kind of play the video and it's truly like maybe two weeks after the election pretty raw in. America still pretty raw stuff in. So I introduced a video same way you did Amanda was like we shot this day of we have all these blank TV screens with tracking marks on them where we were GONNA put footage of winning. It's not there but we just want to show you the video anyway, and so it's like this video that plays it is when you actually see it with a score looking in, it's a TV screen with tracking marks. It's so depressing it's the most depressing. And so. By, well, the lights went up and everyone was crying including the writers including, Brian Donaldson who was like great job? Bad like was. It was the saddest shit ever like an audience of using be people cry. It's one of my favorite memories. At least somebody got to see all of our hard work and we clearly did a good job because we made a bunch of kids cry so. How many times as Mike said that sentence to me Those kids cry important making the kids cried and what's the point? Yeah. The white working at this comedy show. Okay. So we're gonNA take a quick break, and then when we come back up, we're GONNA jump ahead to life has been like in twenty twenty for our team. So. We talked about what it was like to experience our shows shift a political comedy and all the wild stories that happened around it but we also wanted to bring in the perspective of someone who's only been working on the show during the trump years our joined by Justin mcgriff who only started working with us a couple of years ago but has quickly amassed many important responsibilities justin, could you describe what you do for late night? I'll. Thank you what do I do for late night a bunch of things I'd say right now I am technically the audience coordinators that's fun really. On audiences do. But not in. Coordinating the audience, I. Am also working on the amber ruffin show, which is really cool to. Of splitting time between both and it's it's been really fun. Yeah. Download peacock everybody download peacock watched the show. Yeah. It's free. Will you tell us a bit about amber show hike to work on it her staff and everything you know different right now. So obviously, it's it's a new show. So it's been really cool seeing how it's created and how what it's like launching a new show is really really cool. But obviously, most of it is happening remotely for a lot of my writing staff and a lot of people that work on the show also in the office right now there's not that many people here Asli. and. When we first started a lot of it was remote from home. So it's it's really interesting seeing like I writing staff who I've only seen on zoom and they're all all remote and then working with people who are never seen their face you're getting constant calls on the phone. So that's been really interesting. So. It's been really really strange I guess getting a new so off the ground and it being during a pandemic from my experience but everyone that works on the show is so great. Already hilarious Ambert Jenny are the funniest people. So some been a great part of this kind of tragic year I'd say I agree and it's gone so smoothly and so well, and I bet just has lot more to do with that than he would ever let on but I know he is like the show. Links everybody together he won't say that but I can say. I was around when we started late night and how I know how tencent is by really like being surrounded by TV screens that are showing what TV screens are showing right now and like working on a political comedy show where ambers always making comments about what's happening socially politically has that had any impact on. You on staff how are you? Hi, would you? I will say I had a brief stint working in news and that was like it's all just like horrible things in the news right in front of you screens all around you and just constant breaking news breaking news. This happened that happened So getting the chance to move from that into comedy show was great. You're still getting news, but it's hard to take on what's happening which. Helps out working on ambrish show and again leading I two are both great too because you know what's happening you're getting on the news that's happening, but it's kind of like a thoughtless inside of your head. Kind of. Just put onto a screen. That is that's great too. It makes it a little bit easier but of course, not fun things are constantly happening in this world day. You also feel like I bet we all feel this in one way or the other that one of the real great things about working on both shows on your show an onset show is that I know we're all really politically engaged personally and allows you to focus every second that you're at work on trying to make changes and get a voice out that you believe him and I think that's been really amazing for all of us. So it is it is. To be surrounded by like you said Amanda, the screens of Constantly when we're at work, you know you can't get away from all these things that are happening. But at the same time, you can't get away from it and you have to kind of face it and really come up with a strong point of view and really motivates you to make change. Yeah and you brought up a good point that all of us are kind of outside of work sort of activated citizens. You know when the pandemic happened where the field team and there's nothing more opposite from the field than having sit at home. Yeah. Then quarantine. So it was like I. Guess we could shoot these over zoo. Sure. Done we have been doing a lot Zum Schutz house do some zooms. By, what have you guys start with you? What have you been doing this pandemic sort of in your personal life outside of the show that aligned with your activated goals? So I own a cheese store. It's in Chatham New York an unbelievably, it was very much an essential business in upstate New York and as all of the stores in that area in that very rural area were really decimated. There wasn't much stuff to buy and we had distribution already set up and we had sales streams already set up and all of our distributors distribute to restaurants. So Bay suddenly didn't have anybody to sell to and had tons of food that they. Needed to move and we were in a community that needed food waste became a grocery store basically overnight, and so you could call or go online and we would pack food and we just had box after box after box after box of food going you all day every day we started making big donations every week to the local food banks and to the local public schools because they really needed that support and so we're still there were still donating every week but that's what I did. Great Justin. You moved into Manhattan like right at the beginning of the pandemic, which is a rough. Time. Good. I moved during the of. The week where they don't go outside doesn't. Move. Yeah. I I'm that person. It was a wise decision, but you know it happened and. We made it through. So Mike. Tom. How are you spending? I know that I actually know how you were spending a lot of reasons. 'cause we talk a lot and you're doing a lot of protesting in fact, there was no tense few weeks where I would text you because Mike, and I are basically work spouses I would text you every morning to do a wellness check to see if you were safe and are arrested. From the night before. There was one day riot had gone out of jail, and then like for God that I had to record video with Ambert League texture be like I don't have a voice right now I don't know. So I was pretty wild times but you know had to be out there. Where you arrested at protests this summer. Oh, just twice an alternatives drops I would like to mention for anyone listening charter away to know that. That's great. Yes. are you still protesting activism work with PM Yeah? I've also been doing some volunteer work with really cool spot in Bushwick. Also trying to do more mutual aid steps. So like community fridges and stuff like that, and you know the winter's going to be rough. Rough time. So I think a lot of people are feeling activated by myself. Realize A I was activated, but I wasn't like focused. I was kind of like scattered brain, win a cause or something like got me. Then I would go and in it's I think people are starting to realize that you kind of have to be more focused in kind of will help you at least for me like Stan track and stuff. So that's what I'm trying to do. I met I met Mike out a couple of times. I've been out but I also got covid nineteen, which me two months to get over fully. So that's how I spent my summer vacation. At late night. So it was very grateful to be able to work from home a clean as a whistle. Now, no residual anything you'd walk around mask less you're just going every. Antibodies I am like. So, many don't visit. Yeah Yeah. No I got sick about three weeks after we left the office. So right it was kind of the scariest because you say what a superstar yeah wouldn't. So it was really the whole city was quiet except for ambulances. Separate for you moving demand says that was. That was literally. Yeah. So we had quite a year but I, you know I think the audience could hear the energy in our voices about being excited about this election and what the future can hold and about this new show with amber who we are so excited we are so excited for this new voice on t number one sketch. Auntie. If you're out there, Fun on-scene, great sketch that's ever show on blogging. Fun on the. Amber make sure you know trump logging look up up doing. Because you're not. No result. My Justin and Amanda. We put the Party in political party. Yeah. Thank you guys so much. So that's a look at some of the political comedy remotes we produced on late night and a lot of the fun we've had I want to say, thanks to our Amazing Production Team Ellen Wagon Mike Cornell and just griff I'm Amanda. Caliber thank you for joining us for this edition of late night political party and remember the election is just one week away. Please make a plan to vote. Late night with Seth Meyers weeknights on. NBC At twelve thirty, five eleven thirty, five central. Don't forget to follow the handle late night set on social media and tell your friends and subscribe to the late night podcast wherever they they're podcast.

Mike Cornell Seth Meyers Amanda Cowper Michelle Obama Justin mcgriff DC Amber Ruffin Ellen Wagon Hillary Clinton America Ash Carter Ellen Osama bin Laden France Washington Pentagon Warner Theater Michelle Manda
Consumers and Technology Driving Innovation in Healthcare Delivery

Discover Lafayette

00:00 sec | 8 months ago

Consumers and Technology Driving Innovation in Healthcare Delivery

"This is John Swift and you're listening to discover Lafayette a podcast dedicated to the people and rich culture of Lafayette the gateway to South Louisiana. We tape in the offices of Raider a hands on. It service provider that integrates all of your needs for advanced technical support. Effective communication options in cybersecurity raiders motto. Is You just wanted to work? We understand please visit rate solutions. Dot Com for more information. I'd like to thank Iberia. Bank our premier sponsor. They support our community in so many ways and their dynamic team is committed to serving the banking needs of clients in this region and throughout the southeastern United States. Iberia Bank offers the resources of a national bank with the personal touch of a community bank. Please visit Iberia Bank Dot Com for more information the generosity of Lafayette General Health. Also makes this podcast possible and we thank them for. Being a premier sponsor as Acadian is largest nonprofit regional health system. Lafayette General Health is committed to restoring maintaining and improving health in the communities. It serves for more information visit. Lafayette General Dot Com. This podcast provides the audio tape of a conference put on by beacon community connections in September two thousand Nineteen Holly Howitt director of beacon gathered healthcare experts in Lafayette to talk about the current healthcare trends. This was taped prior to the Covet nineteen pandemic but is very relevant information for how healthcare providers may move forward in addressing the best way to treat all of their patients joining moderator. San Robinson of Lafayette General Health is Dr Gary Welts. Ceo of Tash Action Clinics Network of thirteen community health care centers located in southwest Louisiana. Gwen Kiat Vice President of pair strategies at L. H. See Dr Kevin Allison Professor at Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine and Dr Ziade Ashkar Louisiana Center for Health Innovation at U. L. Lafayette I hope. You've all states safe. Thank you for listening. This is John Swift. General Health System was a partner at beacon community connections even before there was an official beacon and seen Robinson was chief reason for that as the research innovation in real estate investment. Executive Director job is to find cool cutting edge ideas and implement them here. General has also held the position of Director of development operations and Executive Director of Foundation. Seeing is also an adjunct instructor at the FBI Moody the Third College of Business Administration at the University of Louisiana Lafayette and prior to working at Lafayette. General scene was director of to computer science based research centers within the University of Louisiana Lafayette's Research Department the Center for Business Information Technology and the Center for Visual Industry decision. Informatics easy for me to say and as well as a decades long entrepreneur in the information technology and management consulting field so our colleagues in many ways. I am happy to call him a friend. We make a good pair. I like to think a little bit of my bleeding heart has rubbed off on him and I hope some of his business acumen has rubbed off on me. I'm excited about the panel that seeing moderate and after telling us a little bit. More about what? Lafayette General is doing in regards to accents driving outcomes so welcome thank you so let me let me move into this to this panel. And what what we're really we're really looking at it. Our healthcare trends and patterns including disruptions. So before I get started I'd like each and every one of the panel members to take a couple of minutes to introduce themselves what they do for their organizations And maybe a little bit of insight into the panel so ladies. First Gwen few could go. Please good morning My name is Glenk Guide. I currently serve as vice president of payers strategies for L. HD group here in town. I'm actually a native Louisianan have spent most of my professional career in healthcare from a finance angle. And so I've cut my teeth in emergency medicine and then spent some time in the public policy world working for a local lobbying group and that allowed me to do is to buy those finance principles to our policy arena and really figure out what works. What's going to be a tangible option? How do we navigate some of those things that we all have to navigate to be successful in our ventures? Now I'm with L. H. C. Large Home Health and hospice provider that originated in appaloosas. We're currently in thirty five states. We have the ability to serve over sixty percent of the US population over age. Sixty five which is a really really great statistic and I think we should all be proud that it's here in our hometown And in in the role I play. I work with our traditional payers like Blue Cross Blue Shield to secure our revenue for the company so that when our nurses are caring for the patients we can. We can pay for them. Happy to be here today. Glenn Gould's can take this whole go. My name is Gerry. Road sign the CEO of action clinics. Which is a network of community health centers in southwest Louisiana covering about seven parishes? I'm a native New Orleans. Had the distinction of being on and what we refer to as big charity hospital and had the good fortune of training there. We were just discussing before the panel began the two lane connection that we all have here. So I did mine degrade a two lane. Medical School and residency to lane and in that role had exposure to a population of patients that I think in this society in this world. Consider the undeserved. So I'm an internist. While in medical school I received a scholarship with the National Service Corps that assigned me to Franklin Louisiana which is down the road from here. That was thirty seven years ago. I had a three year commitment. But you'll find one of the best recruiting to who can have is to get people to drink. The water OUGHTA marry young lady from the community. Which is what I did. So that was the recruiting and retention too and. I'm delighted to be here. Also the honor of being the president of the National Association of Community Health Centers which serves thirty million. People in the United States is the largest primary care network in the nation bigger than Kaiser bigger than the Va System. We have been in existence as Movement for over. Fifty Years Test Accident. Clinic is the oldest and the first community health center state of Louisiana. We'd be celebrating. We'll be celebrating forty five years in November and the population that was described in the previous session. That Camden mentioned was something that I was particularly interested in and I think we could bring that perspective as to challenges that are associated with that population. So I'm looking forward to the discussion. Thank you Dr Wilson Dr Calcium. Hi My name's Kevin. Kelly listen. I am a health policy and economics professor at Tulane University so again the two lane connection most of my work. Now that is not teaching involves Medicaid research so we are doing a kind of a large-scale evaluation of Medicaid expansion in Louisiana. We've we've done some work around access and health outcomes and we're continuing that work we're also now a lot of my time is being taken up by evaluating the section eleven fifteen demonstration waiver. You sit in Louisiana so since the approval of waiver. There's a kind of a five year evaluation process there that we're heading up so a lot of work around health policy that that involves the Medicaid population darker ashkar. My Name's Dash Carter. I've been practicing in academia now since one thousand nine hundred five doing that. Time also had different leadership roles most recently. I was the chief medical officer of Health for the best four months or so had honor of joining the Faculty of Nursing and then addition and director of Louisiana Center for Health Innovation to bridge a data science with health outcome research working towards improving healthcare outcomes for the population. Thank you thank you Dr to Gwen. We'll have you kick it off our. So what do you think is the single greatest disruptor in healthcare today? I gave it a thought I was trying to come up with something that wouldn't be duplicate of across the board but I do have to say that healthcare is late to the game on the consumerism movement. Right so we've seen in every other industry the voices of the ultimate consumer customer shining through. And we're starting to see that here with access available through mobile programs with the influence that people have through media. We just finally. The Voice of the patient is starting to shine through. I think that that's a welcome event. I think that that's going to hopefully bring bring a lot of things to the table. That can sometimes be forgotten and some. I'm really eager to see how that continues to develop for all of us. So why don't we? Why don't we just sort of go download? Actually I pulled an article. I think that set the table for me for the discussion it was. It was entitled to disrupted or disruptor. Which one would you be in that article that references. Some studies that were done but particularly to say is that companies that wait until the market demands a reaction that our greatest risk of being replaced with younger more agile organizations that already utilizing new technologies and so technology and I've learned some new vernacular when I was doing the research driving. They were saying that the United States economy as a whole there's only realized in eighteen percent of digital potential. So I think the challenge we have today in the digital world is to follow up. When you said it's how do we? How do we marry high tech high touch because as much as we can develop data and artificial intelligence that human factor the human element is still to me the X. Factor? That has to still be a part of the equation. I think Dr World so what we saw with beacon was the last mile problem. Which is we can put technology in place and risk or people. We can sit there and we can try to identify them and put their record in the any EHR but at the end of the day what it was was our killer. App was a phone in person. Would making that phone call to make sure that? These non clinical care coordinators navigators. Were making sure these people are getting the services that they absolutely needed absolutely Dr Alison. So I have two answers to this. Question is the short term answer in the longer term answer and I think I used to teach business school and there was a lot of talk about disruption. And you've heard this for years. I'm sure in healthcare and I think in the in the short term the answer is probably the biggest is the electorate and the elected representatives that change policy. So you think about the biggest disruptions that have happened in healthcare in the last sixty years or so. It's what creation Medicare Medicaid and the affordable care act expansion of Medicaid coverage so movement to pay for performance. I think these are the kind of disruptors. We're we're seeing the the near term as opposed to something like Amazon coming in and changing the way that everybody experiences healthcare but I do think to reiterate what's been said before I think in the long term this consumerism is really the the answer for disruption. You know. It's the customer experience in healthcare is not always great and in fact is often not great and in terms of technology adoption healthcare has been very slow to the game. I don't know how many of you are faxing. Your information industries outside of healthcare but healthcare has been a late adopter and a lot of that is because there's not a lot of competition driving these. These sorts of adoptions of these technologies so I'll save this for a question to be asked later but I think there's this competition and driving change in healthcare based on the consumer experiences something that in the long term. Maybe the biggest force this discussion. So I'm just thinking about it this way I mean I put it in perspective. I mean I think the major dry but the cost right I mean almost twenty percent of our GDP is spent on healthcare so all these disruptions are underway to bring down the cost now. We tried something the eighties nineties. Remember what was it for the HMO movement and one of the drivers for failures. For those what I mean we did not have good Internet. Then we've madly windows ninety five so the computer technology is advancing memories terabytes and the vice of data is advancing machine learning. You have deep learning. You have deficient intelligence. So all of these finally. Hey the data's there I mean it's always been there but now we can capture digital video audio imaging information so now we're trying to understand with advancing. Technology is how we can interpret and use it that so this is how you can do analytics. And this is what we're trying to do. For example for risk certification when you talk of population health the healthy ones how we can prevent them from getting sick and even does ratify what they live. What kind of conditions? We need to make sure that they don't develop any diseases. Proactive versus reactive and healthcare has been reactive the entire time. Dr Welby let me go back to the future. I'm kidding when I was a young medical student many many years ago. Forty years plus it was. Electrified futurist Dr. Hyman ironically. The same name as a center. It was to roll in New Orleans and he predicted in fifty years. Americans will be receiving their healthcare at a department store and I can tell experts show of hands of the audience. He predicted it was. GonNa be at sears. Because if you remember back then see America. What shot and yesterday's news if you saw Walmart opened in Dallas Georgia you talking about cost. Predicting they could lower the cost by forty percent of the model that they were in their model is the similar one that we use of Kuwait. Cs Have Onsite Primary Care Behavioral Health Dental lab and imaging so when you talk about disruptors access to care. That is a major factor. That's going to be out there that we're going to have to compete with. So can you continue on that fashion? I we you know are are at Lafayette General rate and now with our combating those non traditional entrance into our space. I mean we've already said Amazon with Dr O'Toole Wanda leading the efforts there. Cbs at Walmart or Walgreens or going to acquire human. You've got these nontraditional you know boxes essentially by entering the space. And they're saying we're going to take over. Chronic care and chronic conditions would be the providers. What does that do for you all in your models? When you're sitting here I can take that remember a intelligence. It's all about now. You're talking about me right. So these companies were so good in targeting consumers right. I mean go on Amazon. They know what book to read target. You and healthcare is waking up to it and you know what they're going into the spectrum of healthcare so targeting patients who are the consumers so this is why these companies are leveraging and to have to buffer the cost you need to do for vertical integration negotiators pharmacies to lower the cost because up to seventeen percent of healthcare cost. But the gory equalised. These things yes you know because smartphones fitbit's all the things that consumerism that you mentioned you know as patients and refer back to what you said earlier about the social determinants. I mean yesterday I was fighting not fighting trying to convince the woman to get a mammogram and she said you know I got my electric bill. Cutoff him I'd like to cut off. So the last thing on our mind was going to get a mammogram. I need to go back and to get my electricity turned back on but these smartphones and the fitbit consumerism and powers of that that gives them as well as providers you know in some of the articles are reading. And you think about the capability of what we have right now on smartphones. You can run so if I could do an ekg as an internist in heavy. Put your fingers. On Iran indicates he. I don't need an ekg technician or the machine back in the depth of respiratory to measure respiratory ultrasounds. Off of this. It's that automation. And I know you say politics earlier when I listen to Andrew Yang and he talked about the displacement of four million jars because of automation. That is something that. I think that's going to really have to be addressed as displaced people. Continue on this. I mean the home ecosystem. That's going to be set up soon my mind. Eventually you're going to be L. E. C. Group's going to be the one really doing the taking care of the people because you're able to set this ecosystem of devices that Dr Wilson just discussed and so I get down to the question of policy and payer at that point in time. The technologies exceeding. How do we get that to the table? Agreed and it was interesting because as you were saying well what does that mean for you. I thought great things from me right I think but remember this so the technology and the access and all of those things. The next generation doesn't value convenience the way we've value convenience because they've always had it and so they're gonNA place value on is. We're GONNA have to be prepared for that. And I would say that the price of doing business is to use our data to use our processes and to be efficient when you can retain that clinical excellence and that human touch at the end of that spectrum. That's when you've really done it and that's when you've served your patient population that's that's that's what. I think the goal needs to be. I think in particular population just serving up on my phone. I was gonNA play the Queen. Song for the millennials theme. I want it all how wanted now. That's why urgent care. That's why I think you know they want it and when you do the marketing the ten thousand people today in the country sixty five and older so home health in the services outside the office are credible. But for millennials date. Don't want a primary care provider. They WANNA go urgent care. They want to convenience. And so we're going to have to position ourselves to meet demands of what it's changing and those that don't interface. Don't do predictive or follow. Where where it's already too late for some people. If they're not engaged on that level Dr Collison. This goes back to the consumers idea. This is a great point for so long. Healthcare has not been very consumer friendly in the sense that you know if I need to go to the doctor. My doctor's offices open eight to five. Well I work eight to five. You know so. It's it's these kind of things. Dad We most of us are accustomed to. We know that dealing with the healthcare interacting with the health care industry is going to be a kind of a pain. It's GONNA take time. They're gonNA frustrations but this new generation coming up doesn't have those experiences may have different expectations and if those expectations drive where money is going and drive with a behavior that I do think that it has the potential to change things. The question though is. Are there going to be alternatives that allow for people with with different demand than older generations to really leverage those those alternative options and to push healthcare in a different direction? So darn cows. And I'm a Yankee. Okay so I'M GONNA use. Don't hold that against me. Oh I'm GONNA use a Yankee phrase. You always skate to where the PUCK's GonNa be an ought to where the puck was right. So where should we be skating to? What's the trend that you see? We should be skating well again. I think in the short term. It's it's tough to to project something like this. Because we don't policies change and those policy changes come with different regulations. And it's really tough to navigate these these things when you're dealing with a heavily regulated industry like healthcare but in terms of thinking into the future. I do think that there's going to be a point where we have to see whether healthcare is an industry decides to continue along the same path. That's been going or whether it adopts embraces some of these these consumer things that are more friendly to consumers and I. I don't think the industry will do it on its own. I think it's GonNa take some sort of outside motivation whether that's easy. No regulatory or whether it's competition from from somebody like Amazon or somebody coming in and that may that may drive those changes. So yeah I think healthcare traditionally has been kind of ski to where the Puck was not where it's going. I think it's always tough. Especially when you're straddling these two environments we've been reactionary industry and you have to be you go towards the high risk patients and you try to resolve for that. What I'd love to see us do escape towards the health and maintain that health and so if there is any way to balance the two and identify how to how do you. How do you address high risk? And how do you get better but all the while? How do you prevent the high risk from happening in the first place? What do you do with your children? What do you do with your young adults? We've got the ability to foresee things before they happen so now we got to harness that and actually prevent the high risk from from taking place mean interject a little southern religious philosophy. Janke here all the flexible for it was shown shape. And if you're not agile dynamic and you're not able to Dapitan you will be extinct and Agreed Example Rene stands very with tobacco free living than we've been working on passing ordinances and getting folks in all the different towers. We're in Saint Mary and Tara Bone of banning tobacco and smoke smoke free facilities and then what pops up this in crisis that way ahead of the curve so in a handsome multi pronged approach so primary prevention is critical so policies and pine and things that we're doing in school systems to the dare programs and things that are preventing kids doing substance use doing that that's critical but then when you have these crises you have to be. We're going to have to pile some policies that are going to ban these products you know. Smoking kills two regular tobacco. Smoking kills but not instantly like vaping does so now. You have to be adjustable in in an legislative session now. Laws are being drafted right now to do. We have to do. Educate some parents that are in their mind. They thought vaping was safe. You know so now so you never know what's coming around the corner. I had the Good Fortune of coaching. Charing governor healthcare transition team. I can tell you. By Medicaid Making Medicaid expansion and the states. That didn't have we made a tremendous impact on those four hundred fifty thousand people that are now on Medicaid if the election election brings a different change in administration and gets disbanded. Aca GETS overturned. You're going to have this total disruption in Healthcare Delivery System Z. What do you think when we? I'm sorry Dr Ash Carter Longtime so when we heading is an interesting question. I found futurist. I think the future is precision medicine which is advancing so much genomics and their DNA analysis and if combined that with big data able to target specific disease entities and. We're able to focus on college. Pioneers with specific genomic targeted therapies. But it's going to flow across all disease spectrum and it's not only be to treat disease it's going to be tourist stratified to prevent disease so I think the genomic data is going to be our future and our not be surprised in five ten years that precision medicine is going to be taking lead. Thank you so I'm going to sort of switch gears a little bit. I have the pleasure of running a couple of investment and innovation funds for Lafayette General. So we can come in and work with these companies that are startups and and get them some seed funding and then use our sandbox as respectfully L. Seeger was part of our our second fund and use us our horsepower of the ecosystem to to bring these companies market. And so then I'm going to ask you if he stepped out of Your Role L. E. C. Group and you were coming to seek funding from the Innovation Fund Company. Would you be bringing to the table? Thank you for putting me on the spot with John. Because he mentioned that he would be asking something along the lines of bringing something new to the industry. What would that be an? I struggled quite a bit with that and I'm afraid I might disappoint the audience because I don't my role is not to be bringing anything new. I'm not a I'm not a futurist. I'm not a visionary what I do best is I make things better or I create a process around something that's tangible. And so what I would actually like you to do. Is Ask me to sit on the table and evaluate those programs. Because I think what I can do. Well is legitimize. Business concerns thinking about the economics and thinking about the policy also thinking about the application to make sure that we are focusing our energy investments on. It's something that's going to stick to the recording this. I'm going to play that back and when we have a company it's through the vetting process you will be at the table. Okay Dr Ashkar what do you think what would you do? How Conduct Symphony Orchestra out of big? I'd like to do anyway. You don't know is he's a fabulous musician and he plays in the band right so think if you if you could pay him. When he gets paid to play the keyboard and conduct he'd be done so specially you will be. That's very interesting because I had to put my thinking frame as a physician and everything else but if I'd like to do things like to more on prevention because unfortunately most of the cost goes into the terminal diseases terminal stages says if we can have some alignment between strong research data science informatics genetics genomics and the line or the payers and providers and patients and everyone was prevention for example when you look at Louisiana ranked number fifty and many get outcomes hypertension diabetes kidney disease mortality that is common denominator for novelist. We city so if we can find some more specific information is it only exercise or some genetically tournaments then. Some geographic determinants is some other issues so these things that would be interested to do more and I hope we can find some sort of. I think if I had a good answer to this question probably be doing it not doing what I'm doing now but I think the boring answer would be that I. I think I understand payment systems and changes around payment policy pretty well so you know consulting in an area like that. I think the more interesting answer is is this point about prevention and you mentioned obesity and I think that's important. I also think personally education if you look at correlates between the longevity and good health education is probably. The strongest predictor of that so by my passion would be that we promote education as a way to improve. Health Outcomes Dr Wiltz. I'M GONNA go back to what I said in the beginning if you could figure out a way to marry high touch with high tech the human element has asked absolutely has to be a component of it but Howard get patients empowered to use the day to collect the data to make informed decisions and make the lifestyle changes that they need to make half of what we Swedish preventable disease you know and changing culture and I think what's being held today you with. This summit is a key to because the answer that we need in the country is not going to be crafted out of Washington. Dc or state capitals. It has to begin from local communities. Like you're doing here No one can save us from us but us but if you put in a room a strategy where everyone in I like to break it down to what I call metrics that matter going back to what was just said. You know you're talking about obesity smoking when you teach medical students you can teach them all the pharmacology all the things that we teach them but if you can get someone to have a healthy pregnancy with a healthy child with normal birth weight and never begin. Smoking doesn't become overweight exercises. Eat right and things that they need to do and has all the preventive things then you can have a healthy population. Then you mix in the social determinants component and then you can make a difference but until that time you have to have a multifaceted approach so I kind of do have an idea it would be to use the analytics and the social media much the way that Amazon knows that I want to order some new bare minerals makeup before I even logged on to figure out what makes a person tick and then get in the way of that or get in front of that conscious decision to make about decision right so on Monday. Morning flew out in. My Watch reminded me that I normally do a lot better by this time. But it's those things what kind of APP. But what kind of device can we create that harnesses the things that determine its or the Genetic conditions that are putting down around pat the wrong path and then gets in front of it to help us navigate into a better one. So I'm going to open this up to the entire panel and we have a room full of healthcare professionals not just clinicians but administrators and all kinds of folks here. If you had one piece of advice to offer them what would it be? Obviously listen to the people that you're trying to serve and get feedback from the people that people wanted to. I root of medicine courses. I mean no harm. Medicine professor used to tell me people will tell you what's wrong. You just have to listen so I think if you do the right. Someone mentioned earlier by the community needs assessment. You can figure out what the community is desiring and and try to meet that need. We call it being community responsive so that would be the advice. Try to tailor make it too. Would begin with the end in mind of people recognized as the problem. Say always ask why. Innovate and stay up-to-date speaking. Did Anyone Watch Youtube? Boris Johnson the feminists talking about Ai. I it's very interesting. I O J just to go and see is predicting we're going to have terminator read is invading. Earth and we can have electricity. I mean it's very interesting to see how people perceive is going to happen in the future. It's sort of when skynet becomes self aware is what we're waiting for for those of you. Who are old enough to understand that reference. Yeah I mean I don't have any any real good piece of advice other than the fact that I think the discussion. We've had around health behaviors and things that influence. Our health. Outside of medicine are are critically important. I think if you look at the gains we've made in longevity and improvements in health over the last half century or so most of it's been behavioral. It's and the reduction in smoking rates. It's been the other improvements that we've made outside of direct healthcare. And so you know the one thing I really interests me. We've talked about vaping. And we've talked about some of these behavioral. That's kind of what I'm interested in. Keeping an eye on so so policies that can improve health one of the areas that I'm doing some research and now is paid sick. Leave and some of these things that aren't directly related to medical care but we know are correlated with improvements and health later on so I I'd like people to pay more attention to those sorts of things. My advice would be that. There's always one true north and it is that there's an interaction between a clinician and patient and that is the most important part whether it's a doctor or a nurse or a social worker or even just somebody providing access to care. That is the moment that we're about and we need to be standing in support of that so I think we have a few minutes until offer some QNA so if there are some folks in the audience that would like to ask our our panelists. Yes ma'am Dr Overlay. I'm sorry I've got like a spotlight right in my face. Thank you great. Great thought provoking questions and answers. What can we learn from other countries? I think we can learn a lot from other countries on things that we can do better. We have young people who have all of the opportunities in the world who are in our top educational institutions. They're stressed anxious they. They don't know they. They don't know their way forward. What can we do better and take lessons from other countries? I think the proof is in the data that we don't have we don't enjoy the life. Expectancy is some of the other countries. I kind of like the French. You know a drink wine and relax and third hour work weeks and do other things. The Mediterranean Diet has been proven to be one of the most effective diets. I you know I like the World Health Organization definition of health. You know and I have the good fortune of being on the board of Trustees of osteopathic medical school and their tenant is the spiritual and mental. They D- what all the elements that you've mentioned and there's a spiritual component that I don't think we recognize. I don't WANNA sound like this Williamson candidates real but I do think that's a component. There are lessons learned that we can. We can learn from the the lifestyle. I think is what you're referring to the American lifestyle the rat race just that that component crucible you add that on top of all the things that we do to ourselves and it sets us up failure so I think we have to address that so we spend a lot more money on health care than other countries do we spend almost twenty percent of our GDP. The average developed countries spends about half that on healthcare and our outcomes at least if you measure in terms of of longevity mortality rates. They don't look good as other countries. So how much of that is attributable to medical care and how much of that is attributable lifestyle to lifestyle questions that we don't know the answer to but it's pretty clear that we're spending a lot more and not getting as much as some other countries and I think the answer to that question is why that's the case is is really important and I'd like to keep digging to understand that but I don't think we have a great answer for that question yet. Yeah I would also just echo. That actually was in France this summer and I watched a home. Health nurse come in and Performance Service on my mother-in-law actually and the total cost for her visit with four zero. It was harder to make change than it was for to pay her. And and so I don't know the answer. I don't know how you get there but I really would like to find out and I'll certainly go back to France for longer if anybody wants to. I think the question quick conversation. Thank you brother the Cruise co-chair for a healthy Kitty Anna discussion consumerism. Some of the words that jumped out from you as combatant competition pain frustration so far the organizations truly going to embrace that consumerism as we move across. And that's the topic of trends. Do you see that trend. Ever moving into early childhood centers and or schools so that we can get them that access earlier to Bradley. I'm actually going to try to help with that. One too. Just moderate so one of the platforms were absolutely consumers and consumerization of healthcare is immensely important lafi general and whatever sort of version. We are in the next few years. Okay right first. Let's talk about schools. That's why we did the school based Health Program say. Marin perished fully covered. We have money to roll out from the USDA grants received for vermillion Acadia parish SLC Lsu. We we believe to mean people where they are and I think that that's something we've gotten away from right. We created an out that right. Now you all could go and I I think Blue Cross Blue Shield has the same back end provider that we have that you could go and do telehealth visit right now in this room and visit with one of our physicians right so we understand that but we're not yet really really good at it right. And so he knew who kicking their behinds. It's the CVS of the world that have with Dr Carr was talking about. Are The predictive. Analytics are buying pattern. They know what we're buying and they know how to treat you and so we have to move down that spectrum. I spent a lot of my time in management consulting in it. Before I got here and a lot of work within finance I can tell you back in the nineties. We were figuring out how you all were banking and then we were telling you how you should bank right and we told you what the delivery network should be and so we were able to score you and say this person's really Mac and online banking and push you in that direction. We're going to be doing that at Lafayette General using the data that we have to be able to do that type of predictive. Analytic that says. Hey we think this person's going to need axe and then reach out to them through these various different near on networks or risk based contracts where we get into to be able to provide act so yeah we are moving in that direction Bradley absolutely. Yeah let me. Just follow up on that as you know. There's a two goal. Ace predict adverse events that can predict that so. They'd call a lot of what you were talking about. So knowing those things in China intervened. That's what I'm saying if you do the analytics and you do the interventions that can you know that if they follow this pattern that's gonNa lead to that outcome and do the intervention at the appropriate time you just having a conversation about aces so adverse child experience. It's a score and really what it does is I'm going to say to you. This trauma is the gateway drug. Right trauma causes a lot of the problems that we see in youth and adults. And if you're under able to understand that and so I sit on the boards of Casa Court appointed special advocates for South Louisiana. And the boys and Girls Clubs mckanie. Anna and we're beginning to as our club. Kids come in or these kids. We're taking care of your costs that they're getting acer scores and that helps us better. Treat them in the environment. They're in any of the club or with one of our advocates. It's absolutely essential questions. Kisha Angeletti with two three to help. I just had a quick question. I know we mentioned all the different things as far as Louisiana being last and we talked about you know what other countries doing. But I'm interested in knowing because some of the things mentioned that I've heard we should have this that we should have already do but it's isolated. So what do we have in other areas of the state or would we have another areas of this country? That's out Louisiana? Needs to be implementing. Whether it's the APP that you discuss or anything that you all have seen somewhere else that is tangible that we can implement here in South Louisiana where we can be on a level playing field. I think I may be the oldest one on the panel so I can the most frustrating thing. I've had my whole life experiences. I've been on every healthcare reform panel since Edwin Edwards and for the last twenty five years. United Healthcare Foundation's rank Louisiana. Forty eight forty nine fifty. They don't dislike rank you they tell you the metrics that news that are involved in ranking you. That's followed by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. It does the county health rankings that ranks every county in the United States. And I think that is the roadmap that we should be looking at. As as I said earlier you can't craft out of DC or Baton Rouge you have to break it into units that you can eat an elephant one bite at a time so you have gathered here today and what you building upon and worked at Holly. That's what you have to look at the metrics that matter because I can tell you. Saint Landry power says different than than Franklin parish says. Do you have to look at the people in those communities that are going to make it? Sustainable that's what happens. We every new administration that comes in his thought process. I remember when Fred so resource head of D. H. H and we're GONNA move the rankings from forty eight to thirty nine we put. The plan together accounted governor Blanco. Went all around the whole region. We were doing these things and then administration changes and you have a whole set of different folks. It's the people in the community. They have to take ownership and sustain. It is the people that don't born work. Educate eventually pass away in. This community is going to make the difference duck-ish car. I think partnership I think the patients individuals physicians State Policy Levels. I mean there are so many advances going on in the state of Louisiana for example. The project cure hepatitis. C. is a major ordeal. That's going to happen. And that is a plan to hopefully cure that disease within five years and the texts partnerships to do that so for example the state how we can leverage that in addition to payers are really taking very progressive move. I mean I was himself Louisiana yesterday and has significant core technologies to try to work on population health prevention. Sometimes even having some no copay for some kind of groups or sending nurses at home to prevent diseases and illnesses I think it's thinking teamwork leveraging older intellectual capacities we have among groups. And we're going to get there and I think we are and I think that especially for this group. One of the things that can be mentioned the payers. We're going beyond the medical intervention and looking at social determinants right food and then those types of things and so honestly when we get to the communities. They're going to say where you been. We've been working on this quite some time. But it's I think we're we're kind of witnessing the convergence of that where they're starting to be more interest and more money behind it and more recognition that building those supports whether it's boys and girls club or the food farm like the food distribution channels. All of those things contribute toward the overall health of that that patient population. I thought I saw a question somewhere in the middle or we got one and then I think too and then we're GonNa be done okay. Hi I'm saying I'm paid for Health Utilization Aetna I'm actually more interested in the millennial statement you mentioned before it was a joke. Wanted to doctors mentioned just I want it all in speaking from a millennial perspective. Maybe I'm an anomaly but I prefer a PCP that I have a relationship with. And I'm just curious to know. What are your ideas or perspectives on the advantages of it and technology as it relates to your practices. Because I did hear something about consumerism and furthering that ribbit but what what helps kind of build that bridge so when Dr asked what other countries do differently. Care is very personal. I think we've over. I'm going to hate to say I think we over technology healthcare a little bit and we've gotten away from one person taking care of another right now. Can we do all that? We're talking about with deep data. Big Data absolutely. Can you have a relationship with a PCP through with telemedicine visit? Maybe but at the end of the day it really is. I mean you know. I started off our magic APP at beacon when we started it was the telephone and a wonderful voice on the other end of the phone making sure that that person knew that they were care for a loved and were being provided services. I`Ma go back to what I started off with high tech marrying high touch people want to be. We have to teach medical students how to interact with people. You know we have to put your hand on someone to comfort them that that is just insane that we have to teach caregivers or healers how to do that. But that relationship that you describe is the idea in my mind you know. And but marketing keeps telling us that millennials for the most part and you are probably outside that fought but people still at the end of the day. One human touch voice to interpret. You can go to web. Md Oh you want I can tell you when they get a patient thought and they get a value. It's not pathologic. But they freak out because they don't know how to interpret it so we will always be a need. I think because they've not interpret the data so but that new candy substitute to me that relationship thank you. I actually SORTA restate what y'all are saying because I do think this issue the description of the authentic healing relationship I think is just so important I would guess that every one of us in here has decided not to take the medicine that's been prescribed or not to follow through with it or not to do what the doctors telling us or not even quit smoking because it's not always just education and knowledge. There's something else about whether we believe the person who's giving us the advice where we trust them whether they believe that they're going to really they really are in our in our in our world and so. I agree with you. The Society of marrying technology. We have to do things differently but we also cannot lose that sense that we are being cared for and I loved the quotes that we heard earlier today about the people who are experiencing the complex the complex patients. But what's most important to them? You know it's it's being cared for. We've seen that. I will just add one more little thing here in this area puncture. Most of Y'all know many of you probably know about the early maternal and early maternal and infant early childhood home visiting programs. That are in right here in this community and it's home visiting by nurses starting during pregnancy in the first two years of life those programs have huge data behind them in terms of prevention and they do many of the same things that were very much relationship focused a strengths based reaching people where they are and these mothers and these babies were making tremendous changes so anyway that is here in this community so I just I just think relationship relationship relationship always darker a behind me about give. Give us the Hook Gwen. Dr Ash Carter. Dr Wilson. Thank you so much for taking time out of your busy schedules to come talk to us today. And serve on this panel palm.

Louisiana United States Amazon Dr Ash Carter Lafayette Lafayette General Health Dr Wilson Dr Calcium Dr Kevin Allison John Swift Tulane University School of Pu Tulane University director Blue Cross Blue Shield Ceo South Louisiana Medicaid Dr Wilson professor Glenn Gould
October, 20 2019: On GPS: Former Sec. Def. Ash Carter on Pres. Trump's Syria decision & the potential resurgence of ISIS

Fareed Zakaria GPS

00:00 sec | 1 year ago

October, 20 2019: On GPS: Former Sec. Def. Ash Carter on Pres. Trump's Syria decision & the potential resurgence of ISIS

"This is gps the global public square. Welcome to all of you in the United States and around the world I've read Zaccaria coming to you live from New York on today's show will precedent from Syria decision end up giving Isis of you lease on life Alestinian supported an unending war and a humanitarian crisis in Yemen and split the Gulf Cooperation Council possibly permanently being efforts have been a failure across the board as so often in the past the cynical locals are manipulating a clueless outsider the trump administration dispensed with regional experts reverse longstanding policy and assume that it's knowledge free approach would yield. has there ever been a farm policy move that has produced more crises more quickly regardless of whether the current ceasefire holes America's elite colleges and universities have long been the envy of the world the policy toward Syria does seem particularly unhinged but it's actually part of a pattern of erotic moves elsewhere remember trump's initial approach byles to prevent them from falling into the wrong hands and airlifted troops as the forces of Turkey a NATO ally moved in trump's moves in innovative new results in fact integrates the administration understand so little about how the Middle East actually works that it's Korea apart of a Middle Eastern policy that as Martin Indyk explains in foreign affairs is in total disarray Indyk describes how in case after case Assad Vladimir Putin and the Islamic Republic of Iran from was apparently acceding to Turkey's wishes but now he is also poisoned America's relations president trump has allowed Turkey to unleash its forces on Syria resulting in the abandonment of the Syrian Kurds and the empowerment of Bashar and British parliament meets on Saturday for only the fourth time since we're working to render verdict on Brexit North Korea was to dispatch three aircraft carriers close to its borders and threatened fire and fury like the world has never seen the show for his efforts to county Ron or promote peace in the Middle East instead his policies have fueled the conflict between Iran and Israel alienated dancing their personal agendas at the naive Americans expense into continues almost three years into his term trump has nothing with that country he has hit Ankara with sanctions and threatened to totally destroy obliterate its economy the US military had to bomb its own weapons a preview of minute documentary beaming scandal inside the college admissions crisis but first here's my take within months he was someting with Kim Jong Hoon who meet praised lavishly and announced we fell in love since North Korea never really offered policy concession and the love affair seems on hold. The hallmark of trump's foreign policy is a disdain for professionals and a lack of interest in history or Tara also get over it the White House says get over it amidst mounting concern about the lyrical influence in foreign policy talk about it all with two former national security advisor for President George W US policy when asked during the campaign to name a few experts whom he consulted with on foreign policy he replied my primary consultant now they face a scandal about corruption sorry what went wrong with America's marriage talk is myself the policies we are witnessing from Ukraine to the Middle East are direct consequence of the triumph of gut over brain experts finally fed up with the mess watching the Syria tobacco one cannot help but think of F Scott Fitzgerald's description of two emotion over intelligence and of personal ambition over national interest and some of the pushback in recent weeks has been the revolt let's get started Oh rich arrogant and intellectually uncurable characters in the great gatsby they were careless people tom and daisy he wrote they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness or whatever it was that kept them together and let other people clean up the mess they had made for more go to CNN dot com slash Read and read my Washington Post column this week and earliest President Obama's secretary of Defense ash was this inevitable this this withdrawal what what was it taking intelligence logistics advising and that is the path that we set out in two thousand fifteen to take this despite the Kurds claiming that Turkey has violated many times and the Turks claiming the same about the Kurds regardless the ceasefire has set to end Tuesday well it took very little and it has taken very little from the beginning when we first recruited the Kurds this is now back in twenty the US troops do the tough infantry town by town building by building fighting that's not our comparative to maintain the structure in place where the the the Turks and the Kurds in a sense each respected their own zones and peace was maintained manage we'd rather that's the enemies advantage so we would rather have ground forces that are local who can speak the language themselves which they could have done but then some of the local people probably wouldn't have joined us but instead fought against us imagining we were somehow what happens then let me bring in former defense secretary Ash Carter to talk more about the situation he served in and out of government in many rows over the decades most recent in Iraq but we had to destroy him in Syria and we could have done it all ourselves but a better way is not to have we know the area and then we bring down on top of them the great whirlwind of our of American coalition military power airpower we'll have to do it all by ourselves how do you feel about the situation with the Kurds because in a sense you occupiers and then third if we did it all by ourselves we'd be owning that territory now and as you know our experience occupying concord terror need that Isis will come back victory will be sacrificed that they'll come back and next time sending the United States representing the Department of Defense must have made certain assurances whether they were ironclad whether they're on paper or not you story in the Middle East has been a challenge for us so for all those reasons we worked with a wide PG and we knew the Kurds wouldn't like it but we said to the Kurds we haven't kept our word on our side and we don't have them in that same containment anymore freed unseen act we did it every day everybody stayed in their lane because they both needed us in their own way. Now I'm afraid for you and I did personally we're GONNA have to disagree about agree to disagree about this will help you protect your interest will keep the Kurds that were supporting away from you gene Farid when Isis was remember trying to attack and kill our people we had to protect ourselves we had to destroy them not only but we need to protect ourselves this is an enemy of our of our people and they need to go that worked for all the years I was there that was that was the kind of battle abandon a security partner who's been fighting a fight with us that takes away one of the ways we force multiply ourselves itself isolates us leaves us on our own now we've got a great military and we can do a lot but it's better we have no casualties faster victory when we worked through others and this suggests that we are not capable of remembering and keeping track of we told them we'd help them fight Isis we wouldn't help them fight Turkey and they kept their word and we kept our word now and the US Secretary of Defense Mock Aspe- says the cease-fire that was put in place in Syria on Thursday generally seems to be holding in a sense gave them the word of the United States that we have their back the coulds as I understand it destroyed some of their defensive capacity against Turkey in order to unity who has helped us and who continues to help us and as I said that will pay the price I'm I'm sorry to say because Isis will come back lower Euphrates valley but I was confident that we would keep them suppressed so defeat was all but complete really I'm concerned also elsewhere within that region and around the world the ripple effects of this if we can so quickly Jill Americans and the job at the Department of Defense certainly my job when I was secretary defense is above all first and foremost to protect our people so you can't allow that the Middle East where there are radicals where there is a terrorist presence presumably that is what what exists now in parts of Syria to see including the most deranged loser who might have gotten excited by on the Internet and they were busy trying to stay alive they said they'd fight will return they'll also therefore have a base from which to operate and try to renew Isis in Iraq and you won't be able to fight them from right there with a partner we're GONNA have to do it ourselves and we're going to have to do it because this is a group that tries to make this operation work and now they are at the mercy of Turkey and the Assad regime two of their most bitter enemies well talk a little bit more about about your worries about Isis because the situation is one now that we've sort of familiar with these ungoverned spaces in all and taken Raka the two principal cities of the so-called Islamic State Caliphate the state was destroyed for everyone well that's right but remember where we were we had US abled forces that had taken Mozell Bash Carter fascinating conversation thank you so much thanks for having me for next on GPS the rest of the weeks developments brexit Ukraine yes they do that's part of their agenda we're going to have to defend ourselves but next time we won't have anybody with US I'm afraid to say vite more provocations I think the most likely invitee we'll be Iran but it will also encourage those to me Rocco which they remember what was the place they called the capital of the Isis Caliphate and if we hadn't done that our troops headed do it all the only problem is we're absent that the Turks are there the Russians are sense the Iranians are there the Syrian government is there but we are no longer there right and will have somewhere in some way those same barbarians trying to set up their so called Islamic state again and when they threaten our people I got even more dangerous in very short period of time basically if we look at the events in Syria of the last week and we couple it with the attack on Saudi Arabia to be a just last month the fact that the United States has not been unwilling to use military force to protect to it's very direct in interest I remember to create an ad this one visit pure winning dot com slash CNN let's get deeper into what happen Megan you handle the Middle East a great deal Let me ask you what do you think this means that the end of the day because I hear people talk about Russia and to the death and in some ways I wish they had because there are still some of them were in detention and a few others who are drifting down the the principle of the strategic consulting firm Rice Hadley Gates Meghan O'Sullivan was the Deputy National Security Adviser for President Bush she's now professor at Harvard's Kennedy School provocations and there's an increased chance of a very unwelcome an unwanted military conflict between the United States and some forces in the middle early in two thousand seventeen and now they will in the chaos that will ensue as the Turks and the Kurds go at it ladies and the Kurds really sends the message to the rest of the region in the world that the US is unlikely to use military force to protect its interests and that will be the next with Syria Iran Turkey and American policy. This Stephen Hadley was President George W Bush's national security advisor in his second term he's Tokyo but it does seem like the principal beneficiary of all this is Iran after all Iran has been the principal supporter of the Assad Regime Assad is now in greater for all of that country they continue to have influence in Iraq How do you see it sure thank you for aid I would say that the Middle East other and the Russians move in and Assad moves in and the whole thing becomes much more scrambled in that environment isis provocations thinking that the US won't use any military force when in some cases the US will be forced to use military force so I think there's an increased chance nine senior national security officials now speaking out against the president and his foreign ballsy to top national security advisers can hope for out of this situation is that some kind of deal gets worked out the United States I think by giving a certain achieving a Middle East are so much broader than oil and when we look at Syria in particular Syria was a modest producer export or oil actually their oil resources words and the Assad regime that gives them some kind of autonomy and hopefully allows the United States to continue to do what it needs to do to ensure that Isis does not lots of oil and natural gas why do we need to have any involvement with the Middle East? Well I think there are several responses to that the first would be that are interested in the state says what fifty nuclear weapons housed in that airbase in Turkey Are you worried about this relationship. This has been a difficult relate period of ceasefire maybe provide the context for a deal whereby Turkey is allowed to establish this security zone who is tied to the global market and so- global supply and demand meet in the place where global price is now we have seen that oil markets haven't really reacted to all this instability very sharply in the last few weeks and my personal sense is that the markets are really undervaluing the geopolitical least and perhaps even elsewhere in the world Steve Hadley what do you think this does to US relations with Turkey after all those are also now pretty PKK at terrorist group that has killed tens of thousands of Turks it has been a problem for years Ash Carter talked about that I think the best that we in the northern ten miles of Syria the Syrian troops come in and make sure it does not go further there is some arrangement between the Syrian Kurds are in this Kurdish area but the influence of the United States and the interest of others in Syria really has nothing to do with oil and has much more to do with security and it come back and at some point the Turks then move out of that northern security zone I think that's the best that really can be achieved ship freely for some time and this strain of us being allied with the Syrian Kurds who the Turks view as affiliated with producing more oil there's no question about that so we don't have the same needs to import Middle Eastern oil but we're all connected to a global marquette and that means risk here and that we are at risk of having a spike in price if something goes verily very badly awry in this region as the chances of it it's personal agenda where does that leave Ukraine in the battle against Russia I will ask my two distinguished guests if there's instability in that part of the world and something happens that takes the oil of the Middle East off line that is still going to affect the American consumer is it tough situation Meghan would you say to people who say look why the hell away there in the first place the United States is now producing almost add in Turkey and some of this is the Turks obviously exercising their own kind of unilateralism but they are in NATO ally the United NBA dot com or the NBA to get started today aren't and we are back with Stephen Hadley we'll be able to have control of Isis total former secretary of Defense Ash Carter will join me He created the military campaign designed to destroy me have gone up pretty substantially in the last several weeks fascinating stay with me both of you next step what do you make a foreign policy that seems geared to a president out of this situation and hopefully the United States working with Russia and Turkey is and the the Syrian Kurds is trying to seek that kind of arrangement but it's can't get enough of the NBA sign up for NBA League pass to gain access to every game being played across the association every night with all new ways to watch through the NBA APP US whether it's the Turks being concerned about the Kurds the US and others being concerned about Isis or concerns about this Saad regime and the Middle East as a whole however we are and Meghan O'Sullivan Steve I want to ask you something and I think it's very important that you convey to Americans enter the word what the reality and the history has been here Mick Mulvaney says we do it all the time we use pressure on foreign governments to get them to do what we want but the what we thanks to all of you for being part of my program this week next absolutely not I wanna make it absolutely clear to the American people that domestic politics don't intrude on foreign policy so this is something that foreign policy I remember when Karl Rove wanted to attend the NFC meetings on foreign policy matters I thought it was fine President Bush George W Bush said wouldn't been done it is not the norm it was a mistake you know the the House of Representatives and in the Senate will have to decide whether it's whom you also worked in a very senior capacity when Republican congressman came in suggested that Jim Baker The Secretary of state the two presidents I served both President George H W Bush and President George W Bush at their mantra was we're going to keep domestic politics out of popular with with his base the idea of just get out of the Middle East get out of the world really I think that's right freed and we have to put this in context impeachable offense or not but it is not the kind of things that should have been done and I think the administration and the president are rightly paying that while is raising some eyebrows in Congress among traditional Republican Foreign Policy Hans like yourself it does seem around the world get their power their influence their ability to do their jobs by projecting the power of the president and by having his the president trump was elected in twenty sixteen in large part by a group of people who felt victimized by globalization and threatened by rain or her removal over these kinds of disputes is very demoralizing to our our diplomatic core and especially when rain chief economist when we come back Tuesday on TBS prepare to be miserable immigration abandoned by their politicians and apply betrayed by foreign policy elites and president trump is reflecting that view what does it do to American diplomacy what does it do to the morale of the foreign service offices well certainly the firing of the US ambassador to you is an finally it had enough and he decided the US troops should come out of Syria so you know elections have consequences and again while I disagree with the policy typical price for Megan and when when you use the State Department machinery with the embassador 's deputy assistant secretary back on any occasion so I think this not only degrades our relationship with Ukraine but I think it calls into question how effective are ambassadors can be around the world ask ask Russia to help get some dirt on Bill Clinton was actually just factual not even not even do it Clinton had visited Russia the Soviet Union policy with respect to Syria Iraq and Afghanistan but finally when when President Air to one said I'm going into northern Syria the press during the campaign and after when he has said that we shouldn't have been in the Middle East we've gotta get out of these endless wars and bring our people home I disagree with that that she's bad news and that they're going to do she's going to have to go through some things this is unheard of in my mind this ambassador and all of in basket on a Saturday for only the fourth time since World War Two many believed that Boris Johnson had the votes to pass his new brexit deal that you're reading the transcript of the Pres- president trump's a conversation with Ukrainian president where our president actually criticizes his own Ambassador Nice to be with you next on. GPS organizers say about a million people marched in London yesterday chance of no Brexit were and and essentially Baker threw them out of the office he thought it was such an inappropriate demand Have you ever in the administrations you worked with applied foreign but he is a reflecting view in the American people and the the process if you will for three years has kept president trump from actually implementing that the pressure on I've got a brush on a foreign government to try to provide political information or advantage for your president you know and it is very much a result I think of what happened in the election in Twenty Sixteen Stephen Hadley Meghan O'Sullivan pleasure to have you both on thank you now both of you are Republicans as Steven one asked the larger question you it seems to me is that president trump is pursuing a farm policy. We're all so tired of this but we have to explain it I'm GonNa very briefly characterize what I think happened and then you tell me why it happened so I shout of the European Union without to deal on the thirty first of all Tober and the recent they worried about that was the current law right now in the UK said that if watched a misery index a new game show premieres Tuesday at ten on TBS Yesterday the British Parliament are probably extremely small so give us the odds on the first two what's the most likely outcome you know right now as you said it looked yesterday as the prime minister it seems that what Parliament passed a an amendment that says we're not going to give you carte blanche to just do brexit you've gotta bring us the details we're GONNA pass each not happen I want to bring in Zanny Minton beddoes to explain what did happen she's the editor in Chief of the economist she joins us from London Zanny just doc witness demon after you end up in Newark New Jersey Stores Impractical jokers join host humility and he duly did last night send a letter but he didn't sign that letter and he said another letter saying that he thought it was a very bad idea to have an extension but right now I think we have which will be submitted and then we'll decide whether or not we're going to do it clearly a blow to Boris Johnson but I guess the big question everyone is asking is that is brexit a soap opera as you say that everyone is heartily sickles but it basically did was that it ensured the reason people pastas amendment yesterday be attached calling for a second referendum the third possibility is that we could still crash out if the Europeans don't give us an extension though I think the odds of that of several possibilities one is and I would count this out one is the prime minister gets through his deal formerly by the thirty first of October and we leave with the does this make brexit more or less likely you're right it was another another cliffhanger another twist in the endless soap operas which were basically to agree to a border customs border across the Irish Sea when Northern Ireland is legally in the same legal status as the rest of a coalition of different types that came together but one group wants extra time to Slip Parliament to scrutinize the Boris Johnson deal to make sure that they agree with the vote to get the meaningful vote through and I think it still looks as though he may have the votes to get his deal through but what I think is that the longer people look at this deal it as the protesters made their way to parliament did the politicians inside he'd their words what actually happened on Saturday we will explain with the patient to get a deal done but nobody has really had time to scrutinize this deal and the Boris Johnson deal is significantly different to the deal. That Theresa May Try United States you have Boris Johnson presenting this kind of right wing populism brexit and while it's not super popular there is still the reality mill on TBS since the highest DOT COM kindergarten is back to school get possessed by TV's funniest game show are we sure wasn't just career tacked on the UK economy would be a bigger hit than with Theresa May's deal and secondly and I think perhaps even more importantly the diff the changes that Morris don't mate right three times to get through the houses of parliament and failed and it's different in two main ways firstly it involves a kind of hard brexit than Theresa May's deal the in whose popular attractive and has a clear pro European position helping Boris Johnson hugely if we had a different labor scrutiny is under the more people may waive particularly those rebels in the Labor Party who will vote with him yesterday and it's worth remembering that right now everyone is in perhaps even some of them want to attach right as to like asking for a second referendum another group just wanted to make absolutely sure that there was no way government could cry not leader different Labor Party the last three years would have looked completely different but I think a bigger political question is when will the next election B and it looks increasingly likely I think that it would there had been no meaningful vote by the nineteenth of October I by Saturday then the prime minister to send a letter to the European Union requesting an extension be that it is in some ways helped by the unpopularity of for very far left Labour leader how much is the fact that Labor is not represented by somebody Great Britain but practically is in the custody with the EU that to me makes down the road a unified Ireland much more likely and that's why the unionists didn't vote and so I think the momentum for Scottish independence will increase in recent polls suggest that fifty percent of Scots would be in favor of independence so this deal if it goes through is likely to evolve a hard brexit that even Theresa May's deal it's a worse for the economy and it's also putting the union risk so this is a big deal and frankly therefore and get a much bigger majority and then govern for the rest of his agenda and if there is if he is forced to have this extension then he may want to go to the polls in order to get a bigger administers deal the second is that it takes longer and we have to have an extension and perhaps even the people who want to second referendum hoping that a rider amendment this country dominating politics for quite some time then we have a minute but I just WanNa ask you about the political dynamic here because it is reminiscent of something going on be before the end of the year because if Boris Johnson gets this deal through he is doing extremely well in the polls the Labor Party as you say is doing very badly he will want an election as soon as possible caused there are still going to be months and years of negotiating what the long-term arrangement looks like so what I would love this

trump Middle East Syria United States Turkey Assad Vladimir Putin president Iran Isis America President George W Bush Martin Indyk Gulf Cooperation Council Yemen NATO Brexit North Korea Boris Johnson Korea
November 19, 2018

POLITICO Playbook Audio Briefing

01:25 min | 2 years ago

November 19, 2018

"Good Monday morning and happy thanksgiving week. I'm Jake Sherman and welcome to your political playbook audio briefing sponsored by h and R Block Congress's out and the president is headed tomorrow Lago. Tomorrow got a first playbook this morning the lineup for Harvard's congressional orientation one of the hallmarks for new members of congress. Speakers include Gary Cohn who served as President Trump's top economic advisor. Transportation secretary Elaine Chao and former Defense Secretary ash Carter on the twenty twenty front. Our colleague David ciders has a piece up about how beta Aurore has blown up the twenty twenty democratic primary donors and potential campaign. Aides are waiting to see what he decides speaking of twenty twenty Mike Bloomberg has an op Ed in the New York Times where he explains why he's giving one point eight billion dollars for college financial aid. He's giving that gift to Johns Hopkins, his alma mater, Michelle Cottle, the New York Times editorial board member has a piece up about how Democrats should get fighting over Nancy Pelosi out of their system the. Wall Street Journal also has a piece of about how John Bolton is shaping president Donald Trump's priorities. Mark Zuckerberg is taking a more aggressive personal style. Telling top aides that the company is at war that according to the Wall Street Journal. Here's what's on tap for Trump's Monday. He and Milania Trump will participate in the delivery of the White House Christmas tree at one PM. He's having lunch with ice. President Mike Pence at one thirty subscribe to playbook at politico dot com slash playbook.

Milania Trump president Wall Street Journal David ciders New York Times Mike Bloomberg Mike Pence R Block Congress Jake Sherman Gary Cohn Elaine Chao Lago secretary Harvard Mark Zuckerberg congress Johns Hopkins Michelle Cottle