I am so glad you are here tonight. I am going to say a few words about before i welcome to knights guests. For a moment of history the strand was founded 93 years ago by my grandfather, benjamin bass. [applause] he founded this story in an area that was known as book row come along fourth avenue, just along the corner from here. It was the storm of the depression come and he defied the odds by surviving while all the other fortier bookstores them book row shuddered. The store was then passed on to my late father, fred who grew the story to his scale and popularity he never thought possible. Now, i am the owner and some critics said as a woman its going to be hard to run the store and i get wiped out in this digital age. So, i want to thank you, and the book Living Community on this audience of for helping not only survive, but thrive through the ages. [applause] it is impossible to read to knights book, watergate girl without drawing parallel to todays headlines. At the crossroads of the watergate scandal and the Womens Movement stood a young lawyer, barely 30 years old and the only woman on the team that prosecuted the highest ranking white house official amidst a failing marriage, having her house wrapped in her privacy invaded, she fought against the sexes preconceptions to receive the respect according to her female counterparts. To knights author, jill is an msnbc legal analyst she began her career as an organized crime prosecutor at the u. S. Department of justice. She also served as general counsel of the u. S. Army, solicitor general and Deputy Attorney general of the state of illinois. Chief operating officer of the american bar association, the first woman to hold these positions to making conversation with jill tonight is maia, a nationally renowned expert on Racial Justice and equity. She has litigated the congress and develop programs of racial programs in the u. S. In south africa. Mine is currently a University Professor at the nearby school university. She is also a legal analyst for nbc news and msnbc. I just also want to think and grow dave from sterling for being in the. Shes wonderful agents and set want to give a big shout out to cspan for being here tonight. [applause] without further ado, please join me in welcoming pioneering woman, jill and maia and the watergate girls. [applause] thank you and good evening. Thank you for being here. I am so excited to be here in this conversation with jill, who is my sisterinlaw. [applause] yes, she is. Okay, that is not literal, but in spirit. It was such a pleasure to read this book. I hope you all had purchased it and if you havent, you will. And, i just wanted to start, jill really with why you wrote it. I dont mean the y in the sense of its a really important set of stories, but why did you write it . Jill let me know she recently started it in 2008 scum in case you think she just started in case of donald trump. I did. I started in 2008 when i theoretically retired. Obviously i have failed at retirement but, i flew from retiring on two very good friends who are landing tomorrow so they are not here tonight. And, they said, we have always said you should write a book. Whats your excuse now . Joy said you were too busy. I had run out of excuses so i started writing a book. Then, i sort of dropped it. I got an agent to had a different vision of the book than i had. I rewrote it to his specifications and that i was lucky enough agreed with me that the focus was wrong. And i refocused it. What was the focus . What was the wrong focus . The wrong focus is that he wanted it to be about the hurdles i had overcome, dancing backwards and high heels, one of the hurdles that women face. So he had me write a whole chapter just summarizing my personal journey. And i thought it would be woven in to the story but it would not be story and he thought it would be the story and publishers came back saying, if it was more about watergate we would like to publish this. She writes well but we like it but not all about this personal stuff. So it never got published and then i was lucky enough to get on msnbc and i spoke to him again saying may be it would be different now that i have a platform. And we just did not go forward with it and then come on my lawyer Steve Shepard are you here . Steve over there with a hand up, introduce me to flip and flip agreed with me and i got rewritten and then paul, where you . Paul, my editor, who is the best thing that ever happened, he is just wonderful and he really got the story although i can tell you flip originally said you may not want to do this because hes a man and he may not get the story, but paul got the story ends, he asked me the most interesting question. He said, where do you see your book on a bookshelf . And i said i dont understand the question and he said i mean, what book do you think it should be like in year . And i said, katherine grams biography. I just love that book and he said, will anything more modern . And i said, katie tours book, unbelievable because it captured the era, captured the campaign, and they very unique and interesting back story. And he said those are good answers, theres no wrong answer, but i see this as a combination of all the president s men and Hidden Figures. In the minute he said Hidden Figures im like yes. He gets this. He really gets this. And i tried to keep that in mind as i selected stories because come i can tell you there are hundreds of stories and examples of stories that are not included in the book. , but i tried to get the ones that personified that combination of the investigation, getting the truth, but also what it was like to be the only woman in the room. So, i want to start with being the only woman in the room. When you read this book, it really is this intertwines a kind of personal narrative around this really critical period of our history and important legal work that was central to protecting our constitution. One of the things that struck me, we both went to columbia law school. You can clap for columbia. [applause] but when you went you were one of 15 women in the entire law school which is in the book. Cope when i went, we are about 50 , close to 50 of the law school. I bet no one said to you, someone will die in vietnam because you took their rightful place in the class and you are keeping them from getting a deferment. And besides, you will never practice law that is why im not in prison and thank you for not murdering anyone those kind of constant challenges and you end up in the department of justice and you are there doing very serious cases, you can talk a little bit about both getting the department of justice because you originally were going to be a journalist katherine grandma and then you end up in the department of justice which is how you end up on the watergate team but in all of those being the only woman. And so, can you tell us a little bit about traveling that path at a time when women were not traveling that path. I started law school because jobs offered to girls and let me just say, that title was not one i invented and when i first started i thought im not having the name book with the name girl in it and then my editor pointed out how many bestsellers have the word girl in it and then i thought maybe thats not such a bad idea but also because it captures the area, we were all called girls. And so, it seemed not a bad title. But, i was offered jobs on what was then the womans page has a journalist and i wanted to do news. I did not want to report on social events. I read a book in college called gideons trumpeted by Anthony Lewis of the New York Times and i remembered reading on the back jacket that he had gone to harvard law school. So, i very ridiculously assumed he went in was great writer and it would help me and in any event editors would take me more seriously for journalism job. So i applied to law school, also i had taken the law aborts on a fluke in my junior year and had never taken the graduate record exam so i cannot go to graduate school in journalism. Thats how i ended up in law school. After my first year i thought there has to be a better way to get a job in journalism. I hated law school. If you dont want to be a lawyer the first year is bad enough even if you want to be a lawyer. But if you dont its torture. So, i took a leave of absence and took a job at the assembly of captive european nations, and organization of all of the former leaders of what were then captive soviet country, lithuania et cetera. And which i now know from research from a book with the cia front. I was actually a cia front person which i didnt know until researching my book. Better. [laughter] okay. Sorry, no politics of that nature, sorry. Although i am running as a biden delegate. [applause] so i took the year off and decided i so, i took the year off and decided i hated leaving anything undone. Im one of those people that i start a bad book i have to finish it and now at this age if i dont like a movie i actually do walk out. But, anyway, i went back to law school and had done very well in the first year and so i was in the National Competition the second year and i sort of like that and i took a trial practice and did pretty well at that and so i thought well, maybe i should pay back my Student Loans and i should get a job in trial practice. I was lucky enough and this is the theme of my life, networking. Networking is so important a skill and when you read the book you will see that my first husband did not fare so well but there are a few good things i could sayy if i stretch my imagination. [laughter] one of them was a sister went to brown andas came to visit us whn we moved to washington where i was forced to while i was studying for the new york bar exam became home and said i decided that i want to get a job at the fcc and we are moving to washington but i had accepted a job in new york and i was studying for the new york bar but anyway, you get the picture of what kind of marriage had. But she came to visit us wanted to see her best friend from brown whose name is Jerry Mcdowell and he invited, he and his wife, invited my first husband and myself to dinner and he happened to be in the ordinance crime section picked when he heard i was looking for job he said give me your resum resume mob bosses like she happened to end up prosecuting mob bosses but that was the reason that was why they gave why i did not want all lawyers in the organized crime section started a field whichon is a great thing because you see the mistakes the trial lawyers make and then hopefully you dont make the same mistakes. You make your own. So i finally had to figure out is thehe only woman and there ws no one i could go ask what to do and i went to see the big, big boss of the organized crime section who ended up played a role in watergate and we can talk about that later and i said so, henry, how come the guys are trying to cases and im still . Doing the field . He said well, what was your girl and he be more vulnerable in the courtroom. In appeals its just lawyers but in the courtroom you be with named members of the mafia soy said and you did not notice my sex when you hired me and he said well, i dont know anyway, how i got my first trial but it was in alaska. I think they thought that was far enough away and safe enough and let me just say also i cannot wear pants to court. It was totally verboten so im in 30 below zero in alaska and the jurors are rain mock locks and flannel lined pants and im wearing a skirt. Oh the joys of having a practice in law. Yes, exactly. And you had to advocate for yourself is your point. But then you got trials but now tell us how you got onto the watergate team . You are now only the only woman trying these mob cases which is, you know, no joke but then here is one of most sensitive politically explosive important historic investigations really up to that point in history of the nation so how does that happen . First of all, when it started we didnt know that it would turn out to be what it was but it could have been anybody remember billy gate . I dont even remember what it was but it was something about beer and jimmy carters brother. It could have been that. We did not know but i had been a justice for long enough that iea felt okay, if i read i can go into private practice and in fact if i dont leave i wont be able to go into private practice because if you stay too long then law firms think youre too experienced and they wont hire you. It did not seem like a bad career risk and my mentor charles roth was the head of the organized crime section and one of the smartest best lawyers in history of the country ended up being bill clintons white House Counsel during the impeachment and he was one i went to alaska with, by the way but he was the one who said yes, i have a trial and i want you to second chair. He was my mentor and he was billion and fabulous and he was hired Watergate Special prosecutor and gave my name to them and they called me in for a one of the strangest interviews ive ever had and went on to the office and [inaudible] went to harvard with rc cox and he said when are you ready to start and he he i said right now and he said no, start the job and i said dont you have questions and he said no, we checked out your record and we want you to start. That was my Job Interview and i need at least a month to wrap up my cases and if youre saying that to be polite we can clear and you can start tomorrow. Literally worked two jobs for the first weeks i was there trying to wrap up my cases and start at the watergate office. Thats how it happened. One of the things that is so youre not only the only woman and they had already decided to hire you because of your record and it was a fairly short record and a lot of people were young. Three years doing organized crime but one thing i wanted to get are you off it does become clear that this isnt really important big deal pretty quickly and at least have the potential to be. By the time i started mccord who is one of the burglars but was also security chief for the committee to reelect the president known as and i will call it that for now on had written a letter to the judge on the eve of sentencing same you know, your honor, your rights. All the pressure you put on us you are right, we lied, other people lied, hush money was paid to keep us quiet so that letter was published by the time archie cox was hired so is pretty clear that this is not by the what has called a thirdrate burglary but it was a political crime and we knew we were into something big. One of the things you say the book but you know it will be important, you know its a time pressure and theres a tana pressure on you in addition because you are the only woman so the pressure of being the r woman who cannot fail, right, you may feel for other women in the future and that is wfinitely something we all w carry unfortunately. If anyone in the room is an older sister then you know you had to do it right or your younger sister did not get to do it and that is just how it was britt my proudest moment is that when i was first woman to be general counsel of the army my successor was a woman and that was like okay, i didnt mess this up. So, yes, you honestly did not messed watergate up either but one of the things that happened and now we will get back to the husband. [laughter] the husband. Second husband is good. But the first husband not so much but one of the thing you described in the book is how emotionally and psychologically abusive your husband is at a time when you are carrying, not only incredibly important case for the country, but huge personal pressure that you are putting on yourself to be successful for the women. How did you navigate that because there are lots of parts of the book where you talk about having doubts and wondering about yourself and having to push and propel yourself forwarh for any of us when we are in high pressure, high stress situations but went know the person you go home to at night taking you down a peg constantly how did you manage that . Number one, im good at compartmentalizing and suppressing. That was my survival technique. I just put it aside and i will say that in part because it was such a bad marriage i did not want to be at home and so i worked really hard. If something extra needed to be done i volunteered, i was perfectly happy to do it. There was nothing drawing me to be home. If i had been married to michael banks, my current husband, i dont know that i would have done a bit and liked i like to be with him britt i dont feel belittled by him but when part of the reason that i stayed in the bad marriage and part of the reason im sharing the story is because i think im not alone in this. I think there are so many women who blame themselves and in my era it was my fault and its also within my power to fix this. I believed i was responsible for fixing it. I kept trying to do it until i finally got a good therapist who said on the first time i saw him this is not your problem. It took me three years of seen him before i was willing to even confront my husband about how he treated me and all my friends saw what was happening and thate not one of them said anything ts me because they were afraid that they would lose my friendship that i would turn against them and i understand that. Im not judging them. I probably would have done the same thing but when i thought people would be shocked that we were separating i remember thinking thank god we did not stay that long because it just is amazing and i think there is one exchange i had that is in the book about rick who is now ans adult and so now he called richard but hes my last day in washington before i moved to chicago to marry michael we spent the day together Walking Around in one of his questions was how you ever stay . We saw how he treated you entering watergate they tried to find reasons to exclude spouses so that he wouldnt be at events that we had and they just did not want him around. That was obviously stressful and terrible and im not sure i took the right approach to solving my problem but it was what i did. One of the things that comes up in the book and whats really interesting as you are the only woman on the prosecutor side but then there is this only woman on nixons side. Lets talk about her because i find it interesting that there is this you have sympathy for her. I do, or i do now. I did a little bit then but it wasnt as in my intellect as it is now. It was also important what would love for you to tell everyone is both the important of how important she became to the watergate case and how you became the prosecutor who was questioning her and essentially busts watergate wide open. First, lets start with it was a significant turning point for the case. It really turned the American Public against nixon britt nixon one 19 states and a huge landslide in the popular vote. He was she was a very popular president and did some good things pretty past title ix, he opened up china coming past the epa and he had some good points to him. Obviously, had some moral failurese but some . Significant ones. [laughter] but rosemary woods would not what we have called the secretary but she really wasll n advisor and again in the book you will see i actually listen to tapes related to the crime or none that we use where she is really advising him. Shes clearly more than just a secretary but she was aunt rose to his two daughters and she shared close with pat nixon, his wife. I will divert for second because i was on fresh air and in answering a question i said i really have wanted to portray her as her family and friends knew her but no one would talk to me. Bob woodward said to me stop calling people, its too easy for them to hang up on you. Knock on the door so i flew to washington and knocked on the door and the door was slammed in my face. I gave up. [laughter] i decided i just cannot do it and i hired someone for thought could be a journalist and would not be the polarizing figure i appeared to be and that it did not work either. So, i never got that side of it but as a result of saying that i had wanted to portray her sympathetically or accurately as her family and friends knew her i got a phone call from her greatnephew, her grandnephew and he said i will talk to you and i will just tell you one of the stories because i think al all if you are listening ite might have another part to add to the book of an addendum from the stories that im getting from him and this is his name and one is that he said my mother is the daughter of joe woods who was a sheriff of cook county and the brother of rosemary woods. My mothers younger sister was named rose after rosemary woods. I already had an aunt rose so i met her and i cannot call her aunt rose so i said cant have two aunt roses and you are uncle rose. The whole family started calling her uncle rose and she had a great sense of humor and she thought it was cute and funny and she accepted being called aunt or uncle rose. The whole timeed i was interviewing and i talk to them for a couple of hours now every time he said uncle rose and he cant call her aunt rose because he calls her uncle rose it was a very weird circumstance. Ne one of the things that happened is you have john dean but john dean, no one believes john dean, the public to your point about how important she becomes as a witness because they are saying what no john medina is saying talk about hush money is a true and so they do not believe [inaudible] but dont believe john dean and you all believe john dean but you dont have corroborating evidence and the public believes haldeman so tell us how she becomes pivotal and how you draw out the lie in the coverup spirit to answers. One is the first thing that happened is we found out from Alex Butterfield that there were tapes and we knew that they had to get them because if they cooperated what john dean had already testified to in the senate we had it made but if they didnt we were dead and if there was anyas inconsistency so for example, haldeman said when dean said that the president had said i know where i can get 1 million haldeman said yes, but he did not tell you he said but you would be wrong. When we got the tapes theres no but it would be wrong. He said i can get the money so we knew we had to get those tapes and we knew we had to cooperate them. We subpoenaed them and there was a hullabaloo we first picked nine tapes that we knew we could show were part of a criminal conspiracy and most were conversations with john dean that he had said this is what i said and they were crimes. So, then the president stonewalled in ways that looked pale in comparison to what is happening now but at the time were pretty serious abuses of his power and we did not get them and finally archibald cox, the First Special prosecutor had eight customers october 20, a saturday, unusual in washington but it just came up at that point and explain to the American Public right we had a right to the tapes and white we needed them and the president was very unimpressed and he said s his attorney general buyer cox. The attorney general set of promises on it i would not do it unless i had cause and there is no cause and im not doing it. He was fired. Then the Deputy Attorney general was told to do it and he said i made the same promise and im not doing it and he was fired. Although there is a question about whether he resigned or fired but it was irrelevant because he was out for the third in command was cork who was a solicitor general and he carried out the order and that was what was known as the saturday night massacre. Three days after that the public reaction was so the outpouring was amazing and we got no one there was no email but there was these huge canvas bags of u. S. Postal mail and telexes on a machine and three days later the president said i will appoint a new special prosecutor and connect the tapes. Then on halloween which seemed appropriate to me he had his lawyers go to court and say well, i cant give you all of mine because two are missing. One wasnt recorded because it was in the private residence and the other was a tape valve function. The judge, ever suspicious said have a hearing and will find out what happened and we did and it really look like that was probably correct, just bad luck for us. We were now waiting for the seventh tape and then came the day before things giving so less than a month later, three weeks later and his lawyers came to court and said we forgot to tell you theres a third problem and one tape has an 18 and half minute gap where there should be a conversation you subpoenaed. The judge said we will have another hearing. This brings us to rosemary woods. In the first hearing where we were trying to figure out who had handled the tapes and who might have been able to explain why they were missing the white house was presenting witnesses and one of them was rosemary woods because she had handled the tape. I felt by that time there were three of us, t jim neal, had returned to nashville to tend his private practice with the promise that he would come back if we succeeded in getting an indictment and he would come back in time for the trial. That left rick and myself, to 30 yearolds in charge of this whole thing against the white house we were known as the childrens march against the wicked king. [laughter] rick is a very, gregarious, assertive, powerful, persuasive totally unlike me, im organized and thoughtful and we were a great team but i felt he was taken to many witnesses. He only had a couple years more experience than w me and i was n equal player here so i pulled them out of the courtroom and said im taking the next witness and then we are sharing equally every other witness. The next witness called by rosemary woods in the first. As a chain of custody witness, not nothing significant was rosemary woods. So i questioned her and by amazing foresight, by accident really, i asked her questions like what precautions shed taken from a not to erase any of ithe tapes. She said i used my head and thats the only thing i had to use but she was really hostile and nasty to me. Then when the white house announced that there was this 18 and a half minute gap and that there was no innocent explanation and that only rosemary woods could explain it i assumed she would state my witness because she had bent my witness the first time in you dont change witnesses in the middle. Now [inaudible] in his book claims he was behind my questioning her the second time but if he was, i have no knowledge of it. I just prepared from the moment i heard that she was the guilty one and i skipped all of thanksgiving and spent the weekend reading every thing i could possibly read about her past testimony and being prepared and there were no computers so had to get transcript and underline them and look at them and so then when we called her as a criminal suspect the first time in my life i gave a miranda warning because she was the suspect in a criminal case. Normally it wouldve been done by an fbi agent in preparation and its not usually done by lawyers and courts but i did it for the first time. So, we will open up for questions but b while the mics o around there is one story i want you to tell us people are getting ready for the questions because a lot of what is being deemed are inside story that you might not otherwise get in as part of a fun read but the fight that you all have with leon [inaudible] about whether to indict Richard Nixon. Fastforward. Again we were 30 years old and highly moral and driven by justice and truth and we felt, number one, the evidence wasve overwhelming of the president s culpability and unfair to p prosecute all the people who did his bidding, they acted on their own and were perfectly willing accomplices but that it would be hard for a jury to convict them if the chief was not indicted with them and he had to be an unindicted coconspirator because so much of his evidence was his conversations but in order for that to be admissible in court he had to be a coconspirator. We were allowed to name in an unindicted coconspirator and was not named in the indictment. It was like trumping individual number one but hes not named but you know who he is and it was a very wellkept secret that he was one of them and he was locked up in a safe and wasnt revealed until the Supreme Court where we had to say is one of the reasons we needed the tapes was because he was an unindicted coconspirator. So leon, when i got down to finding the indictment said look, you cant do that and theres an impeachment process and that is what we should do and thats the mature and proper political thing but we said no, we dont think so and theres nothing in the constitution and there still isnt despite the olc opinion and theres nothing in the constitution that saidly you cannot indict a sitting president but we finally reached a compromise which would be we can name him an unindicted coconspirator and apply to the court to allow us to give all our evidence to the House Judiciary Committee which was conducting a legitimate investigation and there were fought by partisanship and there was a reasonable prospect that they would actually act on the evidence as opposed to now when i would say the outcome is different and clearly, its different. So, that is how we ended up having this fight and then we had in a second time because once he resigned he nearly went to leon and said okay, hes not a sitting president. Why cant we do it now and leon, for reasons i sort of a say in the book why, still refused and as we fought with him the president ford became president and ford pardoned him and that ended it because a pardon is a pardon and you cant do it so we lost the opportunity to indict him. I wanted you all to hear that for obvious reasons but the description of the fight internally is not really worth reading in the book. Question. Wait for microphone so everyone can hear. Wondering how did you get woods to testify because we see now so if you, no one in the Trump Administration will testify and so that seems like the norm that is been lost. Its a great question and really relevant to right now. The president nixon, despite his moral failings, did believe in the rule of law to an extent. Obviously, he was willing to ignore theub subpoena and say im not giving them to you but he did allow us to have witnesses. They all lied and went to jail for perjury but he let them testify and gave us documents and we had white house calendars and it sounds like not a big deal but that is how we were able to invite which conversations to subpoena. We had specific information and you will see in the book there is a certain capitated discussion of whether or not the haldeman conversation which is deleted on the 18 minutes was within our subpoena and it was clearly in our subpoena because we had the meeting records and we corrected our subpoena which originally said 10 3012 and corrected it to 10 25 10 25212 25 which included the haldeman conversation so having that detail record makes a difference and by totally stonewalling as the Trump Administration is no witnesses and let me just say, its not just in terms of criminal cases but hes not letting people testify for regular oversight so if you want to know about children in cages, his taxes, hes not letting anyone testify that is eviscerating the separation of powers in the role of congress to do oversight. Great question. Thanks. Others connect. My question is do you think that theres enough evidence to have another article of impeachment . Evidence, yes. Do i think it will happen . Know. I think at this point probably best thats the right decision. It doesnt mean there will be an indictment in a new administration but there wont be one in this because the general state yes, the states could do it now and there are cases in the course that could lead to tax returns going to them into a state indictment so yes, im hopeful that at some point there will be some account ability but right now there isnt and that is why its up to all of us to get out and vote and you are probably all new yorkers and i dont care whatoi you do here because new york will go the right way but if you could go or the left way off mac but if you could all go to michigan, wisconsin, pennsylvania, that is where that is where it could help. Im not campaigning in illinois because illinois is blue and im not worried about illinois. I am worried about my neighboring states and so i really feel that it is up to us we do what we can to get back cap of the people listening are you and the people not listening are listening to alternative facts which means lies but there is no such thing as an alternative fact. T. We are in a seriously jeopardy for democracy and i dont i dont like being a downer but i think that it is a very serious thing and that i dont care who the nominee is of the Democratic Party but im voting for him or her. [applause] im sorry, and then another overhears back hello, jill. What moment in the last two years was so heartbreaking and infuriating that you wanted to tell msnbc, you know what, im a train to washington and i got to get there. What really made you mad . The list is so long for the most recent, the most recent was listening to the vote on impeachment. It wasnt a yay or nay or impeachable or not impeachable but every senator had to utter the words not guilty, even those like Lamar Alexander and ben sassoon said the evidence is overwhelming and yes he did it but its not impeachable. Thats a ridiculous argument but at least they had an argument so sr them to say not guilty it was painful to me that i was screaming at the television and it was beyond horrible. Jill, weve focused a lot on the impeachment process but there was a special prosecutor like you were a part of the special prosecutor and what is your view on bob mueller connected he fail or did he do his job . That question is from a law School Classmate of mine. And friend of my former husband. [laughter] but no, hes my friend now. You got him in the divorce. [laughter] ive adopted steven print yes, and actually at least two or three of my law School Classmates are here, are you here guys . Naomi, lois, who is here from my Law School Class . I want to say hello. [applause] hello, lois. Hello. Its very exciting for me to see them. Mueller, first of all, its a shame that he was allowed to testify. First of all, even if he had been goodad and i think we can l admit that he wasnt but even if he had been good he could not been as good as a live witness or even the investigators and lawyers who worked on the case. The head of the investigation has a superficial knowledge and is not the one who can do it. And he had already sort of, you know, backed away from inclusions that i would have made had i been mueller. I would say the facts are laid out even though the conclusion isnt. It is clear he was intending impeachment to beat the remedy which, you know, with hindsight we see when not a remedy at all because the republicans stood firm and will not do it and certainly in terms of obstruction of the cases laid out there there are indictable report thatthat will never well, depends on if he gets the second term they will never be invited but if he doesnt the statute of limitations probably wont go on and he could get indicted and ho keeps committing crimes so there will be current crimes that will be within the statute of limitations. Hello, the department of justice seems to have beense severely compromised. What will it take to recover . A new administration. A new attorney general. I think i talked to friends who work there and work in the fbi, morale is really low and justifiably so. For the little eyes asian when maia and i were there i never felt that political decision was made. People who had connections could come in and make an argument and say this is why you shouldnt indict my client and that is legitimate. Friendly, and toppled to the rescue should because one, you are the defense argument but to because if youre making a mistake wouldnt it be better not to proceed with the case . Is not a bad thing, no one ever pressured me to listen to that and act on it. I listened but i made my own judgment. Its really when thef department of justice cant be relied on then you have the first step toward a dictatorship and tort of rule toward a monarchy andow that is very sca. In the past the department has always been held to be independent and policy canbe be set by the president and if the president says i dont believe in antitrust laws i think bigger is better and everyones consolidate. Thats okay. That is a legitimate thing to say and in the same way that president obama said i dont think we should be persecuting some of the immigration things that are going on. Lets not put our resources there. Thats a policy decision. If obama said i want you to prosecute this person that would be terrible. If hee said do not prosecute ths person or make sure this person doesnt get a jail term that is being recommended within the sentencing guidelines that would be wrong. That is what is happening now. Thank you. With respect are you with respect, are you able to understand i am sure to some extent or how much are you able to understand those of us who sometimes sympathize with trump . I have tried to engage in conversations with Trump Supporters and in the past and im happy to talk to you after words and i have not gotten the kind of factbased arguments that i deal in. I am very much a fact person and so someone could say to me this is why i support him and this is what he has done that is helped me or that has helped american society, i would be able to engage in that conversation but it is always end up being it just is because it is. I cant and im not so sympathetic because i see the hate that he is unleashed. Im sure it was always there and i dont think he created it but he has made it acceptable to say and do things that would have otherwise been totally unacceptable. Im not sympathetic but i am open to discussion and hopefully to some persuasion about why i think he is dangerous and why eethe things unseen are a danger to democracy. Lets talk after words. Question. We will come back but we are going back and forth. Go ahead. Ive been following the russian situation early on because a friend of mine had a significant other for to two years as a Money Laundering researcher. I dont want to mention names but he worked for someone who is on the network on a regular basis. So, i was aware of it. Now, based on the information that all of us know and one of his genius sons said we get all the money we need from russia do think he owes russiaon multimillions of dollars and that is why he such a pal . Based on your information. My information is the same as everybody in this room. I dont have any secret sources. I follow the news maybe more closely than most people and am obsessive about msnbc has never off and theyre always on but its amazing how selective hearing is that i can tell when its something i need to really listen to and die suddenly perked up and rewind to the start of it. It does seem that there is Deutsche Bank, lets not forget them, Deutsche Bank and russiani has an event financial interests and him based on what he and they say. Ife we get financial records evr we will be able to know for sure whether that is true. Why russia originally picked him as the person they wanted and its clear everyone in this room that it was russia who interfered in the election and it is not ukraine and not a bad person is sitting on his fed but it is russia. That is clear the mall report lays that out very clearly as well. As does the Senate Intelligence committee reports. Why is continuing, i dont know. Obviously, hes let it go and dont forget all the meetings like the one at trump tower and the fact that he still says he would take foreign intelligence which is, you know the federal elections lost say you cannot take anything from a foreign power, from a foreign entity, does not have to be the government. You cant even take it from a citizen of russia or france or england. Our allies ass well. So yeah, theres something going on for sure. Thank you. Jill, thank you. Out of curiosity i was wondering if with the technology we have today if any fragment of that 18 minutes would be covered and if we could find out what that conversation was that was deleted. Great question. Heres the answer but first of all, we know it did not happen the way rosemary said we also know it was eight, nine separate iterations so someone erased and listened and then he raised more so it sounds bad and then they must do more and erase and raced and erased and erased and there have been every time new technology arises they retest the tapes. They also, a man named bill [inaudible] came up with the idea that haldemans notes and haldeman was a prolific notetaker and we have when i was questioning rosemary was i had in front of me his yellow legal pad of notes and we know the missing part is a watergate discussion because the part we can hear ends at the discretion of [inaudible] nevada were pat nixons parents were married and then continues with the watergate discussion and there is a very set of notes, normally haldeman takes prolific notes so its strange so bellinger came up with the idea there was a missing page and theyve now tested the paper to see if there were impressions that did not matchat the words above it and d not seem to be so it just was he took short notes. Its 18 minutes covered in this much of his notes which does seem strange, i will say that. But we note that it was rgwatergate and it doesnt realy matter at this point what exactly was saidnt and it is clr that on that day three days after the break ins that Richard Nixon knew everything he needed to know about watergate started in collaboration and then the june 203 date is the smoking gun tape where hes given orders to use the cia to stop the fbi following the money and the reason is the burglars had hundred dollar bills on them when they were arrested and those dollar bills could have and eventually were traced to a Campaign Donation check that was cashed in miami by one of the burglars. It would have immediately said gee, the creep paid for the burglars so that is why they did not want the money trail followed. Hello, jill. As an attorney, love your pill, jills pen, as an attorney and someone who worked in the realm of arguments and logic what you say as we are entering a new era as a response to the previous gentlemens question where facts dont matter anymore and where we are entering an era where we dismiss facts and using arguments that, instead use, where we buy into a different reality and what you say to younger generations who want to go into law . This is a failure of education because we need to learn how to do critical thinking. I am sure everyone in this room including me has fallen for something on twitter that you go that sounds so true. I fell for something a week or two ago about Bernie Sanders which i almost immediately took down because i realized it wasnt being reported widely and if it was true it would have been on msnbc and nbc and therefore it possibly wasnt true. I think we have to start really being careful. It used to be the newspapers did their own Fact Checking and you could rely on the newspapers and newspapers still do. I mean, the newspapers i read certainly still do. And i think most you and most general television stations do but you know there are many channelsre that dont and there are social media where anyone who posts anything and claims sources that are just not due to meant so we have to really start training students in school to research the source of what they are reading and analyze whether it makes sense and if there is an outlier, ignore it. I bet everybody in this room reads books and newspapers and magazines and pays attention to facts. When i read newspapers i read a lot now online because i can click on an underlying document. I dont just read the stories being put outat to me. If they say soandso was invited i read the indictment. I know what is true and what isnt. I know what is a fact and that is what we have to do in this era. We have to really go into the underlying documents. You know who to listen to on television. Who has the expertise, whether in foreign affairs, there are certain people i listen to them when they Say Something i know theyve done their research and that i can trust that what they are saying is true. And so, that is the only thing i can say is you have to just Pay Attention to your sources. Joe, if you are the lead prosecutor in the trump impeachment trial and knowing the constraints what would you do instead of what adam shifted . I think adam schiff was brilliant. I think the house managers were fantastic and i cannot criticize one thing they did. You know, certainly not i hate calling it a trial because trials have witnesses and documents. It is a hearing. It was a hearing. If you were listening you heard a very cogent case made for what had happened and why it was illegal and how it threatened the country so i think it was laid out, as well as a code, and as a prosecutor you have to know when to stop. I could go on forever investigating and never bring in an indictment but at some point you say i have enough counts and evidence and yes, there are probably ten more h terrible things that happened but if i keep investigating he will be out of office either hopefully in january or, you know, i have enough. Ive proved theas case. Even the republicans admit that the case was approved. They are just saying we dont care and i care. I hope you all care. I thank you do. [applause] back in 1973 during watergate rdentually [inaudible] came around and realized that Richard Nixon to go. [inaudible] did everyone hear the question . The question was what happened in watergate the republicans came around and it was actually three republicans who went to Richard Nixon and said we heard the smoking gun tape, you are done. We do not have enough support and you will be convicted if you go to trial. You will not survive this. It was very cold water who had been the president ial candidate and was the minority leader of the house and of the senate and that was the next day he announced his resignation and going back to rosemary woods, if i could. He did not have the courage to tell his family that he was resigning and he asked her to do it so she is one who told his wife and daughter. After he tried to throw her under the bus, i might add. Yes, yes. That is where we are at. I think the answer is gerrymandered districts and the social media and media environment in general where people can watch fox news and believe a set of information that is based on opinion and not on the facts you have william barr who took the mullah report and totally distorted what it said and First Impressions are very hard to change. Once that was out there all the people who d supported trump believed it and did not pay any attention to what the report actually said and that is the danger and that is why its happening now. Facts should matter, facts do matter to me and they should be mattering to everybody but things that are being put out as facts, fox news, are not facts. And unfortunately this will have to be our last question of the evening. Hello. Thank you to both of you for being such admirable women. My question [applause] my question you touched upon a little of social media and i was wondering do you feel like you were lucky not to be prosecuting in the era of twitter . Because trump recently attackedy Justice Sotomayor and Justice Ginsburg and the way he treated maria yovanovitch, to be honest, im so impressed she did not kill herself because he was horrific. Do you feel like you were lucky to not have prosecuted in this era . Yes, i am. I will say when i started and in organized crime a lot of people said arent you afraid that they will come after you and i remember being on trial in San Francisco and there was an emergency motion and the lawyers for the defendants who were hitmen from boston wanted my hotel number so he could deliver his briefs to me and i gave it to him ande my second chair was like, are you kidding, they are killers, why are you giving them and it never occurred to me that i would actually be in danger but since then there have been prosecutors killed by defendants and so i might today have arranged some other way to get the documents and telling my hotel i think i might be smarter but yes, i think it would be horrendous. Im very thinskinned actually so itt would be very hurtful although i would be proud if trump would attack me. Success metric. [applause] one thing jill, this book is so important im something full you wrote it and just on that last point, i think its important for all of us to know that when trump attacks someone on twitter they get death threats. Death threats. So, its not just that he says something mean. Its that there are people unfortunately who will follow that up. April ryan has had to move her home because of his attacks on her because shes in the White House Press corps asking legitimate questions that anyone should be able to ask h and so that is something that we have to recognize as a society. We cannot allow and think about how we protect people who really calm underer attack simply becae they have angered someone in power and that is not something we should accept from any party or from any person. I had to change my cell phone number in my home number. In your home was broken into. In watergate. It wasnt that there was my only point was its not that there werent any risks for any sense of vulnerability during watergate and that was but you are right, social media has made a different kind of the phone number was because of a threat to matrox supporter. Suwasnt early afraid that they would carry it out but i did not want to get any more phone calls and so i changed my number and got an unlisted number for that reason. It is unfair. Im very proud that investor you want which is now at the university of chicago and David Axelrod institute so im excited about that and hoping i will have a chance to see her, meet her, hear her speak because she is one of the heroes of this outcome and in terms of heroes maya is one of mine. [applause] i want to thank all of you for coming out tonight. This was my first live events for the book. [applause] it is very exciting, especially to be in a Historic Place so thank you, for having us here. We are excited to be here. Thanks to my Law School Friends into my editor and publisher and to my lawyer and my agent and to my publicist who is here, raise your hand. And to the editorial assistant, italia, where are you . In the back. Thank you to all the people who made this possible. I hope you enjoy reading it and i hope you learn from it but mostly i hope you just enjoy it and know its a good read. When paul and i discussed that we wanted in a small format and in 60000 words and its easier to write a long book than a short book. I wrote formative pages to start and eliminating all that stuff was hard but i think it was right and he wanted it to be a personal because its a very personal story where i reveal a lot of intimate things that i do for a reason because i hope it will help other people and not just be interesting but useful usformation i hope you will all enjoy it. Tonight on the communicators, American Economic liberties project founder, sarah muller, on Big Tech Companies as monopolies. And the impact on corporate concentration. Now theres essentially a couple of strategies if you are a tech startup, are we you sell to facebook or sell to google. What that has done is warped the ability of innovators and Silicon Valley to innovate according to market ease and according to ideas and instead everyone is guessing how can i develop something that we spoke will buy or google will buy and that is not necessarily really how we want an economy on Innovation Sector to function. Watch the communicators tonight at eight eastern on cspan2. You are watching a special edition of book tv. Now airing during the week while members of congress, are in their district, due to the coronavirus pandemic. Robert wilson, editor of the american scholar, he recounts the life of 19th century showman, pt barnum. Then historian and what records the Founding Member of americas communist party and married to new york millionaire, james stokes. Later journalist Janice Kaplan on discoveries of women geniuses today and throughout history. Enjoy book tv now and over the weekend on cspan2. Television has changed since cspan began 41 years ago but our Mission Continues to provide an unpaid review of government, already this year we brought you primary election coverage, the president ial impeachment process and now the federal response to the coronavirus. You can watch all of cspan Public Affairs programming on television, online or listen on the free radio app. Be a part of the National Conversation to cspans daily Washington Journal Program or through our social media feet. Cspan, greeted by private industry, americas table Television Company and brought to you today by your television provider. Cspan has around the clock coverage of the federal response to the coronavirus pandemic and its all available on demand at cspan. Org coronavirus. Watch my test readings, updates from governors and state officials, track the spread throughout the u. S. And the world with interactive maps. Watch ondemand anytime unfiltered at cspan. Org coronavirus. Thank you for joining me today. Thank you, its a delight. I have to tell you i thoroughly enjoyed your book. I had the opportunity to read it and its obviously a timely subject and obviously important subject. You may know im a pharmacist currently the only commonest serving to congress so healthcare is reported to me and also important to the imagine citizens. I think everyone would agree with that and i thought it was interesting that you start by you start off the book with the premise that the Healthcare System is broken and if we look at the polls