Colleen shogan, you became the first female archivist of the United States. You recently hosted the first lady and chief Justice John Roberts in the National Archives rotunda for your ceremonial swearing in. You wore white. Tell us why i wore white. Because that was the color adopted by the suffragists when they were advocating for the 19th amendment. I was the vice chair of the womens Suffrage Centennial commission, so thats very meaningful to me. And i wanted to really invoke their spirit as i took the oath of office as the first woman to become archivist of the United States. What does it mean to you to be the first woman . It means a lot. I means, i think a lot for representation. I think its very important for kids, young girls and boys to see women in these roles. I think it also means a lot to those who work in this area in libraries and archives and museums, which is a profession and career track, which is dominated by women. But oftentimes, although its changing, oftentimes do
I knew him in a different context. In the 111th congress, he directed a project for the senate libraries. It was in that context that i got to know him. I will never forget the feeling of relief i had when anthony brought the experiment of the subcommittee and decided the budget to come on a tour. As the librarian, i got to give the tour. Correct me if used some very colorful language, and i walked through the library and explained to him how we were going to turn what had been a private library into a nonprofit library. It was a joy in disbelief for them to see. It was a joy to know they were supportive of what we were doing. I will always be grateful to him for that. I am equally grateful, and thats why he is here today, that he took time to write a book. He was working on this before he started working for the government. Some people go into government and then write a book. But he wrote this before. There are not many people in our country who think deeply about the Library System.
Indict all of them and thats not liberal in my sense of the word. But equally there have been a lot of individuals doing wrong and i think conservatives have been far too quick to defend them and to endorse a way of proceeding within the criminal justice that they wouldnt in any other circumstance. Fortunately, i think thats changing so yes, there is this group but i think the libertarians are winning that argument for short. Rich lowry under other colleagues think about your book, what are your . National review is a very intellectually diverse place. Rich is more of a conservative. In this book i hope to present the arguments. Im not rude to anyone in the book is totally respectful of all of you. And since its a National Review idea. There should be something in it fo i would have brought a copy down but its a pacific and it was too heavy for me to carry. I will interrupt at 1 00 lets weve already gone into open discussion so that well have at least 10, 15 minutes for q a. Lets give
Defends outcoursing, he doubled down. Im proud of it. David perdue, hes not for you. In her campaign plan, Michelle Nunn admits shes too liberal and her foundation gave money linked to terrorists so nunn needed to fool george ans to win. She attacks perdue with add checkers called mostly false. David perdue spent his career creating thousands of jobs. David perdue will glincrease th economy and bring jobs to washington. Recent polls list this race as a toss up. You can race georgia debates at time online at cspan. Org. Earlier this month, legal scholars and open government advocates held a discussion on Government Transparency and reviewed Current Court cases on the nsas warrantless surveillance program. Held by the bar association, this is an hour and 35 minutes. Good afternoon and welcome. We appreciate you taking the time to be with us today. Im jim oreilly from Cincinnati Ohio and with me are distinguished presenters who will be each giving their own perspective on privacy and info
So this court has routinely cited cases under those customs statutes as illuminating the meaning of the probable cause standard and is therefore illuminating so you disagree with justice storey when he looked at those cases and made the point i just made . You think he was wrong . Theres no doubt in those cases the question the court was ultimately answering is are those customs officers liable . But the way it was answering that question was by determining whether those officers had probable cause. And probable cause is the constitutional standard. Thats why they have subsequently relied on the cases. Can i ask you a question id like you to address for a minute. Assume for the sake of argument i agree with you that a reasonable mistake of law is an excuse but what is a reasonable mistake . Thats what i would like you to address and in particular would you have objection to, it has to be, one, exceedingly rare, two, objective, three it has to be that the reasonable lawyer would think t