leadership, caroline kelly, david layer, the leadership team of jews united for democracy of justice, and democracy advocates inc., the creators of this series. thank you to our many wonderful sponsors. temple isaiah, stephen weiss temple, israelh hollywood jewish center for justice, the holocaust museum l.a., the forward, and the pico union project. as it is thanksgiving eve, just a word on that topic. on october 3, 1863, at the height of a bloody war dividing our country, abraham lincoln issued a thanksgiving proclamation which officially established thanksgiving as a national holiday. he proclaimed that though the nation was at war with itself, there were still blessings for which both sides could experts gratitude. he also proclaimed despite the painful and divided times, all americans should be concerned about those suffering as a result of civil strife. he set for the last thursday of november as thanksgiving. he asked everyone to pray to heal the wounds of the nation, and restore it to the full enjoyment of peace, tranquility, and union. president-elect biden spoke today to the american people, he similarly acknowledged the country's deep divide, and he also urged unity. a statement that harkens back to lincoln's thanksgiving day proclamation, president-elect biden said, "looking back over our history, you see that it's been in the most difficult circumstances that our nation has been forged." i am inspired by the optimism and pray we can pick up our pieces in the nation and begin the process of healing. after all, our american forbearers held together in 1865, surely there is hope for us now." in that spirit, i want you to register for the december 15, tuesday night, program. we have gathered together the national leaders of the muslim, jewish, hispanic, black, and asian committees for a discussion entitled "after four years of bigotry, tension, and division, how do we heal?" we will welcome jonathan greene bid, jarrett johnson, cindy of the league of united latin american's, salaam moriarty of the republic -- affairs council, and -- this is an impressive group of national leaders, and the conversation is sure to be far-reaching and important. we hope you will register tonight via the email you will get immediately after the program. and because all of the studies that prove those who feel gratitude enjoy a longer lifespan, i would like to express gratitude to our many incredible speakers and moderators, to our audience members, and my colleagues, especially to david, with whom i work on this series of -- every single day. please welcome david, who will tell you about our upcoming program and introduce our speaker. david: thank you. it is a pleasure to be here. i appreciate and share your feelings of thanksgiving. on behalf of the committee advocates, i pleased and welcome you all to another of our american crossroads virtual town hall, this the 32nd in our series. a line of influential speakers continues from tonight until the end of december. next week, we have congressman adam schiff, and madeleine brand talking about plans for the next congress. we will have secretary leon panetta. it will be on the issues surrounding transition in government. on december 23, pulitzer prize winner, bret stephens, will return with henry weinstein of uc irvine. tonight, we will be treated to analysis of what the past tumultuous four years and the head spinning past three weeks port and. our guest is a man that many of us would like to hear from when it comes to events around us and what they mean, george will. he was with us five months ago for a memorable evening, as well. he is a columnist, television personality, and author. the wall street journal has described him as perhaps the most powerful journalist in america. he's is a twice-weekly columnist at the washington post, and contributor to nbc news and and msnbc. he has won a pulitzer prize, and widespread commendations for his books, ranging from politics, diplomacy, baseball. his topic tonight is where do we go from here? the impact of the trump era. only, thetor is worn host and executive producer of the podcast to the point, and the climate change update. he's a recipient of 40 national, regional, local awards for broadcasting. including his lifetime achievement award. i wish you all a happy thanksgiving, and welcome warren to this evening's conversation. >> thank you very much. thank you for the moving comment about thanksgiving. i also adhere to it, as david said he did. it is always great to host these programs. it is a special privilege for me to talk to george will, such a interesting and wonderful writer, a very creative thinker. a man who manages to still be a conservative, even though he is not a republican anymore and has not been for the past four years. we will hear about that. your recent column about the census was sent out to those that registered to listen today, to watch today, and i will get to that. but first, the transition has begun. think i propose we start there. give us a couple of minutes on how you think it is going so far. mr. will: i think it is going well. the institutions work well without much friction. we have heard an awful lot in the last four years about the threat to our institutions and our democracy. i think people lost sight of the fact that this country was not made by fragile people, and it is not a fragile country. so i don't think our institutions have ever been threatened. we had one great constitutional crisis in this country, the civil war. even at watergate, i was just beginning to be a columnist during that. even during watergate, the institutions, congress, the courts, journalists, and others performed well and got through it. so we will get through this, also. >> what about the fact that the president has so far refused to acknowledge the vote and has cast doubt on the integrity of the whole elective process? isn't that a threat to the institutions of the u.s.? mr. will: i don't think so. i think the vast majority of americans are not subscribing to this, even his supporters are skeptical. there comes a point in the life of information where worse is better. worse he behaves, the better it is. people will see now a sore loser. -- the part of his supporters. the most alarming thing about this election is 4 million more people voted for him after watching him for four years then did in 2016. we should try and understand what their grievances are, and their anxieties and fears. with that said, we also have to draw a line and say there's no obligation for us to indulge these kind of fantasies. but the fact that his legal team the game that --ldn't shoot straight, it worse is better at times. the worse they look, the better it is for the country overall. grief of his the supporters over the failure of his campaign, but isn't there anger going't their to be something we have to deal with, or at least be a stronger impulse, or more troubling, then grief? mr. will: i don't think the american people as a whole are angry. i think they are exhausted. they want restoration of stability, something like normality. the cable television audience on both sides is kind of angry. they are at a perpetual rolling boil, because i think they enjoy that. 330 million people in this country, and at any given time, about 322 million listen to talk radio, not watching cable television, they are watching the clock, fixing the screen doors, raising children, getting on with life. i think that's what americans voted for with mr. biden. in the primaries, only one third of the primary voters voted for bernie sanders or elizabeth warren, the angry side of the democratic party. that means two thirds didn't. the people who voted for mr. biden voted for his demeanor. just as mr. trump's demeanor was part of his selling point, so, too, was mr. biden's demeanor. with that jack nicholson smile of his, and the contrast of personas was very telling. >> the president-elect has introduced the six potential cabinet members, all involved in national security in one way or another. you thought president trump, i think, was dangerous to the country. do you feel safer already? mr. will: i don't think government is a foreign country or the adversary. i think -- they are experienced people. mr. trump selected some good people early, but he ran through them a mile a minute. i think what mr. biden is trying to do is communicate and produce stability, calm -- adult supervision has come back to washington. >> how do you feel about john kerry being introduced as the -- you are not a climate denier, but you are skeptical about the whole idea, on the change, the havoc that it might wreak. and what your take is on the importance of climate to john kerry's appointment and this cabinet. mr. will: the democratic party is deeply concerned about this, and the president is responding to that. i'm not a climate change denier. the one thing we can all agree on, this is where the tape begins, not ends, it never is not changing. it is a very complicated, dynamic system. and the idea that the carbon-using activities can make a difference. it is hardly controversial. the question then becomes, what do we know for sure? how certain are the scientific predictions? how much should we wager on these predictions in terms of our freedom, trillions of dollars spent? and does it make more sense in terms of economic efficiency to change the dynamic of climate change, or accommodate it, with measures of adaptation to say, rising sea levels? see levels have been rising since the middle of the 19th century. this is not new. this is the sort of thing i think we can all cope with. again, the important thing is for everybody to calm down take , a deep breath and cope. we really have to cope when we are thinking. >> you mentioned the possibility of spending a lot of money with regard to climate change. i know you're concerned about the deficit. you said medicare and social security are not sustainable, partly because when they become unsustainable, the people in charge will not be around anymore. is that same thing true with regard to climate change? is it important to deal with it now so that it does not ruin the lives of our children and grandchildren? mr. will: it is indeed important to do that, but again, we have to understand, we are talking about the rise of sea levels, you are talking about an increase of 1-2 degrees celsius 100 years from now. most predictions from 100 years out are going to be wrong, or certainly, inaccurate. so yes, indeed, prophylactic measures are in order at this point, but again, no more should be invested in science than the science itself has invested. and really good scientists are among the first to say, it's a tentative business, particularly climate science, which is a swirling cyclone of very complicated variables. >> you wrote in june, not only should trump be removed, but that voters must dispatch his congressional enablers, especially the senators who still gambol around his ankles with a canine hunger -- [laughter] >> i love that phrase. but it didn't happen. the enablers are still there. how concerned are you about that? mr. will: i think they feel chastened. you need a spine of steel in dealing with the president. teddy roosevelt once said in criticizing someone that that person had a backbone like chocolate eclair. some of these people in the senate are like that i'm afraid. , but understand this, there is zero, and i mean zero affection in the senate for the president. he has no friends, no admirers. when he is gone, as soon he shall be, many are going to snap back into a position of recognizable dignity. some of them deserve to lose, they did not lose, but the american people must like divided government, because they produce it often. my guess is that joe biden will probably be just as happy to have a republican senate, because then he can turn to some of his critics on the left and say -- statehood for puerto rico, abolish the electoral college. you can't do that with the senate. so let's get on with the things the american people are actually worried about. >> you said biden would benefit from republican control of the senate, and that mitch mcconnell could modulate senatorial strife and go down as a consequential conservative. which i assume is high praise. how likely is that to happen? mr. will: i think it is more likely than you might think. to me, the biggest problem in our country, institutionally, is that the presidency has become untethered from constitutional restraint. i'm talking about all presidents. the imperial presidency in the last 80 years has formally theundamentally disrupted madisonian equilibrium of the three branches of government. so, it is very important that congress re-establish itself , quit vesting presidents with enormous discretion, do its job, and again establish, as it is, article 1 of the constitution, congressional primacy in our democracy. it is very important. joe biden and mitch mcconnell are institutionalists from the senate. joe biden has 36 years of senate experience. he has 54% more congressional experience in any other prior president. and this is the 36 year of the senate for mitch mcconnell. these men respect the senate. everyone wants to have a more dignified, consequential, deliberative congress. i think we are apt to see that. i think, for example, you will see a much less promiscuous use of the filibusters they now have. i think you will see this when mitch mcconnell begins to speak through many of the nominees through joe biden. by the way, mr. schumer has done to the trump nominees sort of civil wars over assistant secretaries of this and that. >> why, though, should mitch mcconnell try to modulate senatorial strife, when he's got all these senators who are running for president in 2024? and all of them are going to want to appeal to those 72 people, or however many there million were that voted for donald trump? they're going to want to maintain or reach out to those voters. art they liable to be doing the same kind of things they have done during the presidency of donald trump? mr. will: there's no question ted cruz, josh hawley, lindsey graham, marco rubio, and all the rest -- every time a senator looks in the mirror to put on her makeup or for him to shave they see a president. transactional cost of being in the senate. remember, mitch mcconnell is not sympathetic to these people. mitch mcconnell has never entertained presidential aspirations. one of the reasons is, mitch mcconnell cannot run for senate because he has the tightlipped, owlish demeanor of george will. rather harsh, but not unfair. [laughter] >> congratulations for getting rid of that image. at least for this program. senators who want to run for president -- you said the party is a cult and has become a cult. that is what you said when you resigned from it, when the nomination for trump occurred. is it still a cult, or do you think there will be an effort to try to persuade those 72 million people that have something better to do than the kinds of things that they wanted trump to do? mr. will: it is too soon to say. the truth of the matter is, we don't know. some, tom cotton for did two stints in the u.s. military, a very intelligent man. you would call it the thinking person's trumpism. i think there will be others in the republican primaries in 2024 saying, look, we want to go back to what we had with ronald reagan, who said, i don't want to go back to the past, i want to go back to the past way of facing the future. there is going to be a serious argument about free trade. when this republican party began to dally with protectionism, what is protectionism? government telling people what they can buy, in what quantities, and at what prices. it is managed trade. if that is not the essence of large government, industrial policy, what is? so the republican party has a bit of free thinking to do. my hunch is if they say we are , simply going to be trump without the messenger, they are going to find out that trump was mostly the messenger, mostly the manner, mostly the demeanor, mostly the pug man city. city.gna 1968, you and i are old enough to remember this, the president won 46 electoral votes. one of his mantras as he campaigned was, there's too much dignity in government. the people liked that. just as mr. trump's lack of dignity was part of his appeal. so the republican has to decide is it a party of governance, or , is it a party of theatrics? is it a party of inflammatory gestures? too soon to say. we are going to find out fairly quickly. >> let me ask you this. you are an advocate of libertarianism and individualism. american individualism. what about that concept when it is used as an argument for not wearing a mask in the interest of public health? "no government can tell me what to put on my face." we see that again and again. people are putting on -- using weapons when they are marching in the streets, advocating that they're simply not going to tolerate that kind of thing. when they do that, of course, we are all subject to the spread of disease. what do you say to people who have that position? mr. will: i say the following, i am, as you say, libertarian-ish. which is to say that if the government interferes with the freedom of the individual, it better have a really good reason. i went to oxford to study. i got a phd at princeton. i briefly talked political philosophy. john stuart mill on liberty says there is a distinction between self regarding acts, acts that don't affect other people, and other regarding acts. carrying covid-19 is obviously an others regarding act. this is such an easy measure to take. this idea, i call that country music manliness, on the part of people that will not wear a mask. you know the country music lyrics, i'm a bass fishing, beer drinking truck driving good old guy and no one can interfere with my liberty. this is a minor decision that will save the lives of your friends. >> well, that is persuasive to me, but it doesn't seem to have been persuasive to a lot of americans and not a lot of members of congress, including members of the senate, who have apparently spread the disease in the chambers of the senate. so again, how can you expect members of that party to lead in such a way that millions of people will be willing to deal with the disease the way we ought to deal with it? mr. will: i understand the problem. i think the most instructive teaching that is being done is by the numbers we see every morning on television, as we passed 250,000 deaths. there are some people you just can't reach. it's a darwinian moment. we will find out who is fit to survive and who isn't. what was promised when your column was sent out to the people who registered for the event, there is a case coming up before the supreme court on monday that has to do with a challenge to the census, which under trump, did not include unauthorized immigrants. he calls them illegal aliens. you have said that violates two provisions of the constitution, with both philosophical and practical consequences. talk to us about that. mr. will: the constitution quite tells you something about the enlightening nature of the american founders. they wanted to know things. they thought that information could be the basis of rational improvement. they had to have a census, because they needed to know how to proportion seats in the house of representatives. at issue in the supreme court case is exactly that. should unauthorized immigrants be counted for the purpose of allocating congressional seats? the question is, what did the founders say? this is where republicans who say they are for original-ism they want to construe the terms , of the hesitation in terms of the original meaning. when they said the enumeration should count all persons, in the 14th amendment and elsewhere in the constitution, do they mean more than just citizens? the answer is yes. in the same constitution, they refer to citizens when they meant citizens, and persons when they meant persons. it is very clear, and this is how i think it would turn out, that in fact counting all people, all residents, all inhabitants of the country, for the purpose of representation, is going to be yet another defeat for the president in the supreme court. >> they also said all persons except untaxed indians, it was specific. might that not referred then to people who are in fact citizens of other countries who just happened to be here, for one reason or another? >> you're quite right, other than indians untaxed in the founding era, another sovereign, that is loyalty to their tribes, they were in that sense not members of the american community. many immigrants tribes in this country are members of the american community. they are going to say inhabitant has been herewho indefinitely. let me give you a number that is kind of interesting. of the 10.5 million immigrants in this country, 60% have been here 10 years or more. 20% have been here 20 years or more. 1 in 3 are homeowners. 15% have bachelor's degrees or more. the fact is, 4.1 million children in this country were born here, therefore under birthright citizenship, they are american citizens, and they're living with parents that are unauthorized immigrants. the fact is, the american people in their native decency would not tolerate the police measures necessary to reach these people from their communities, where they are woven into the fabric of our life. furthermore, anyone who says these people ought to go home should face the simple demographic fact that they are home. they should understand it is not a matter of welcoming them, they are our neighbors. they work for us, they work with us, they sit next to us at churches, and synagogues, and elsewhere. this is a nonstarter issue. one of the interesting things about this year's campaign in , 2016, immigration was a burning issue for mr. trump, from the time he came down that escalator, until the election. the issue did not exist this year. in joe biden, to his great credit, has said in the last day or so he is for finding a path to citizenship for these 10.5 million people. something a majority of republicans favor. >> it is interesting you should said that, because trump was so opposed to immigration in general, it would appear from the kinds of things that he said. what do you think about the opportunities that biden has proposed for the department of homeland security? >> [indiscernible] communism in cuba. >> i think it is a healthy sign. the country is changing so rapidly. in 1993, florida became the first state in which deaths of white people outnumbered parts of white people. that is now true in 26 states. this is a country changing rapidly. the republican party will either adapt or it will expire. american political parties are extremely sensitive seismographs. i expect the republican party will change, but it is in deep trouble. because mr. trump, in 2016, by getting largely evangelicals, in an increasingly secular people, by getting rural in an increasingly urbanized country. 87% of his vote in 2016 was white, he spent four years making no attempt to broaden his base. the strategy, therefore, this year, was to get an even larger portion of an ever smaller slice of the american electorate. that is not a recipe for sustainable political prosperity on the part of the republicans. >> in a demographic change you are talking about, it is in fact one of the things that motivates the anger of some trump voters. and is racism at the base of it? >> i don't think it's racism. it is some of that. i think it is more understandable, admirable, i'm not saying it is acceptable, but it is understandable when a country people are used to is changing rapidly. if you don't like rapid change, you picked the wrong country. this country has been changing rapidly since the founding era. proposedamin franklin the almanac should be printed in german as well as english because so many germans were in the country. when abraham lincoln began his ascent in politics in illinois, from central illinois, he said, -- he invested in several german language newspapers in illinois. let's face the fact that we are a big country, we speak different languages, get over it. >> back to the census case, it is very important in california. tell us why. >> the question is who gets counted for the purpose of representation. california has i think 22% of unauthorized immigrants in this country. los angeles county has 10% of all of them. obviously if they are not counted for the enumeration relevant to allocating house seats. the house seats are going to go elsewhere, to texas, to florida, to who knows where, but california would be a loser. i don't expect that to happen, but the stakes are very large. the census is the basis of one point $5 trillion in the allocation of federal funds every year. this is a very high-stakes matter, politically and economically. >> the census is already officially over. so if the court goes in the way that you would like it to go, what happens then? what is the remedy? would we have to start over again? >> no, because the census has counted unauthorized immigrants to the extent that it can. unauthorized immigrants are often reluctant to talk to government officials for good reason. but they will be counted, and they will then swept into the pool of people on the basis of which congressional seats are allocated. so you won't have to have a do over from the senate. mr. will: back to your devotion to the constitution, what about the imperial presidency referred to earlier? when you say that the institutions of the government are safe in the country is not shaky in that regard, does the constitution need to be amended in some way or changed in some way in order to reinforce the separation of powers, give congress more of a real authority than it has now with respect to the presidency? >> congress has all the authority it needs. it needs the political will to exercise it. the fact is, congress has said presidents have usurped our power. if only presidents had to usurp it. the fact is, congress has been far too eager to shed power, because shedding power sheds responsibility. shedding responsibility sheds political danger. therefore presidents of both parties have gleefully exercise the vast discretion to declare emergencies about this and that. and take spending allocated for one purpose, and using it to repurpose building a wall, for example. he can at least .2 legislation that says congress is i can do this. president trump imposed steel tariffs and aluminum tariffs on our ally, canada, in the name of national security. it is preposterous on the face, but he can do it, because congress has given presidents of both parties far too much discretion. we don't need to change the constitution, we need to take pride in the legislative branch and not think of ourselves as members of the president's team, blocking and tackling, but instead, exercising the dignity inherent in the legislative branch. >> i believe you're also an advocate of term limits, but i don't want to get into it, because i think it is time to get to some questions from the audience. they're very interesting, indeed. john, for example, asks, should trump be prosecuted for his conduct in office? >> not for his conduct in office. there's a way of doing that, and there is the impeachment provision, we had that charade of impeachment on party lines, where he was acquitted. congress had the ability to do that. they decided not to. it is very wise to let these things go, let the past be the past. i know gerald ford perhaps lost his attempt to be an elected president in 1976 because of the resentment on his party to richard nixon. he cauterized the wound on the country and let the country move forward. so i would be very surprised if serious,, who is a ,ature veteran in washington and in his second year in the senate was when ford pardoned nixon. vance, the district attorney in new york city has criminal and civil cases about mr. trump's taxes and all of this, that can go forward. but that is of no concern to president biden. >> what are your thoughts about a new stimulus package? >> is coming. one it is very clear. this is not the time -- you're looking at the last deficit hawk in washington. even i say this is not the time for the kind of economies. we have to help the american people who are suffering enormously, through no fault of their own. millions of small businesses, mom and pop restaurants, grocery stores. through no fault of their own, they are being wiped out. this is where we act as a community and help one another. so another stimulus is coming. sooner or later however, we have , to face the music. and the music is this -- we are now heading into the national debt by trillions at a time. trillion is a big number. a trillion seconds ago is 31,000 years ago. we invented agriculture 10,000 years ago. trillion is a big number. economists argue, at what point, when the debt becomes relative to gdp, that is, to the size of the economy, at what point does it become dangerous? 10 years ago, the national debt was 53% of gdp. it is now over 100% of gdp. we are reaching twice the size of the economy in 2050. some people say public borrowing is cheap, interest rates are low. we can do this without risk. that is fine, if you know you're going to have low interest rates indefinitely. but remember this about taxes in debt. debt is taxation deferred. there are two ways to finance a government, and only two. current taxes, and future taxes. a third way to pay for it is inflation. that will become an ever more powerful temptation as the debt becomes ever more burdensome. >> will you repeat the explanation you gave on the trillion? >> yes. a trillion seconds ago is 31,000 years ago. >> that is a very helpful image. thank you for the image. joel wants to know, will trump continue to be a force in the republican party? >> i think that is a $64,000 question. he could be, if he wants to be, because he has 74 million people that watched him for four years. and said we want four more years of him. there are a very significant number of people out there who respond to him. the republican party has behaved as it has done. as i said, with canine loyalty, because they are terrified of a large portion of their constituents. the power of him tweeting to arouse these people. so it seems to me he can, if he , wants to be. that will be the drama of the 2024 nomination competition. , the will be those who say next generation of trump he ends -- trum. pians others will be out there saying, no, that was a wrong time for the country, and it will be fascinating. >> those senators you mentioned earlier, if they are eager to run for president, will they be able to do it if trump is still around, indicating that he might want to run for president? >> i'm not sure mr. trump will want to run for president again in the first place. his personal finances are going to be a shambles. they are already a shambles. he's not nearly as rich as he's lying about being. be 78. he's going to i think he's not going to be fit to run for president in four more years. >> sharon wants to know, what is your assessment of the role of the news media over the past four years? the news media has suffered from trump derangement syndrome. they decided he was such a threat to the country that they adopted an adversarial stance. that is understandable. trump's genius was to take up space in the heads of people and not get out. american journalism went back to its origins, in the 1790's, when suddenly, political parties , which the founders neither desired nor anticipated, suddenly emerged, the american newspapers and american people were voracious readers of newspapers back then. they were aligned with parties and supported by the parties. when thomas jefferson was secretary of state, he gave lucrative contracts to several newspapers. you may look back at it as an evanescent episode in our life, where we aspired to objective journalism. we have set aside that aspiration in recent years, particularly under donald trump. i think some newspapers are going to have a moment of reflection and say, maybe we up ought to get back to that. >> this question has to do more than anything else with the big lie technique trump has used, by repeating the same thing over and over again. what about the 70% of republicans believe the election was stolen. >> that is the problem. one of the things we have learned from the last four years, this goes back to my anxiety about the presidency in general, is the tone setting power of the president. the first great technological enhancement of presidential power was radio. franklin roosevelt sat down for his first fireside chat, the presidency itself changed. it was almost a constitutional moment. then came television. kennedy's mastery of that. now we have twitter, and facebook, and youtube. all of the social media. which has made the president ubiquitous. presidents are everywhere, all the time. my candidate that i favored for the democratic nomination this year was senator bennett of colorado. tweeted, you'll go weeks at a time you won't have to think about me. we are going to have to get the re-cage the executive lien. we have to get the presidency shrunk back to a normal dimension. americans all over the country are watching the crown these days. they are looking at the curious role of the monarchy in britain, britain, like a lot of other countries, separates the head of government from the head of state, which the queen is. we in the u.s., we don't want this distinction, therefore the president acquires a kind of derivative dignity that is over time not wholesome. and so, as the questioner asked, 74 million people that take him at his word because they are not skeptical of presidents in general. a wholesome, down to earth doubt about executive power would make us all better off. >> here is carol. are you troubled with regards to trump's withdrawal from the open skies treaty? i think he is destroying the very airplanes that have been used to conduct surveillance under the open skies treaty. >> yes, i am. i think one of the first things you're going to see is joe biden, with his large portion in his 36 years of the senate, with -- on the foreign relations committee, is going to take national security much more seriously than the current president has. remember the current president abandon the kurds in the middle of a phone call with the president of turkey. appalled some of the military leadership that they resigned. this is the most important thing he can do, mr. biden, is to begin to take national security seriously. what presidents are for, we can argue about, but the first responsibility of the president is to uphold the security of the country. we had a four-year hiatus in that. >> you talked about the case coming up next monday in the supreme court. andrew wants to know, what is your best guess of where the supreme court is heading? >> i think the supreme court is going to surprise a lot of people. i think the supreme court is now full of people who call themselves originalists, who will be tempered to the original public meaning of the text. i think there is not going to be to be judicial activism. frankly, i am for more judicial activism rather than less. i think judicial restraint is dereliction of the judicial duty, to restrain an overbearing majority. i grew up in central illinois, lincoln country. local lore has it that lincoln was in the champaign county courthouse when he heard the kansas-nebraska act was passed in 1864. it was the brainstorm of illinois senator stephen douglas. he said the problems fracturing the country what to do about the expansion of slavery. the important thing in america is public sovereignty. lincoln said no. lincoln's recoil that propelled him to greatness was him saying, america is not about a process majority rule, it is about the condition of liberty, and i would like to see the supreme court more active in the defense of liberty. here's my libertarian-ish side coming out. so i am not one of those who says i want the court to be more passive, i want the court to be more vigilant and engaged in -- on behalf of liberty. >> do you think the fairness doctrine should be brought back by the fcc? >> no. it was bad enough when there was at least a tissue thin technological reason for it, the radio bands were scarce, television bands were scarce. therefore government was going to tell us what fairness was. do you think the government thinks it is good for you? i don't. the technological reason for that is gone. back when we had maybe four, maybe five channels, now we have 500 channels, the internet, there is no scarcity. we now have a cornucopia of information. we hardly need the government to police it. >> john wants to know, what is your best guess as to the reason for president trump's strange relationship with russia? [laughter] >> well, i think he just responds to and is drawn to it. with his obvious affection for erdogan, and russia, it speaks for itself. second, we don't know yet, but by the time those in the southern district of new york are done looking into the president's credentials. after his fourth bankruptcy, this with her -- wizard of a businessman there were not a lot , of lenders willing to lend to him. he might have become dependent on some russian oligarchs, and others. that is speculation. but it's not entirely uninformed speculation. i think we should wait to see. but that would help explain the affection he has for all things russian. >> i'm trying to find the question that i saw that i clicked away from, because i don't know who asked it. the question is, how are the cubs going to do this year? [laughter] >> we are all going to be chasing the dodgers. they've got the best player in the national league, mookie betts. will get thes you third baseman from the rockies. the rich get richer. the dodgers are a dynasty, and a well-run dynasty. >> how did you like the 60-game season with nobody in the stands? the world series? >> i hated it. i will tell you why. in 2019, after 50 games in 2019, there were 19 wins and 31 losses. they turned around and won the world series. they had 162 games in the season. this year, after 50 games, the nationals again were 19-31. so you didn't have the time. the beauty of baseball is, after 162 games, you are what the record says you are. a 160-game season was hard to take seriously, never mind an -- a runner on second base in extra innings. well, i'm a conservative. i don't like it. >> what about the pace of baseball? it's so slow by comparison to basketball, etc. three hours and six minutes is the average nine-inning game. almost four minutes before the ball is put in play on average now. baseball now is a 3-2 outcome, long strikeouts -- it's boring. athletes, anding the ball is not put in play. because they all want to hit the ball out of the ballpark. there is a reason for that. velocity is overwhelming the game. teams have five, 6, 7, 8, 9 pitchers who throw 95 mph. that is killing the game right now. i want to make baseball great again. [laughter] >> what about the umpires? one video shows there was really a ball or really a strike. why not require the umpires -- to simply go by that. they have other things they can do they don't have to call the , ball strikes, they have additional activity. >> i think you will see some automation of the strike zone coming fairly soon. you're still going to need a man behind the plate for various calls. there will be that difference. if they don't change the pace of play, young people nowadays want life at the speed of the telephone. and baseball has added in the last 30 years, 45 minutes to the length of the game with less and less action. that's got to change. >> the dodgers -- i had to ask you something about baseball. oh, you go ahead, you've got some more. >> the most important game of thisear was game six of world series. 27 outs for each team exactly 27 , of those outs were strikeouts. that is too many. >> so what do we do about that, what do you mean it is too many? if the game is going to be walks, strikeouts, and home runs, walking back to the dugouts, people are going to find more excitement in the nba, premier league soccer, they are going to find action. not this slow as molasses in action in baseball. january >> take a couple of minutes to reflect on what you think is upcoming, as the theme of our program is not just the impact of the trump era, but where do we go from here? just give us a general sense of your feelings about things and a final word on how things are going. >> i'm looking on the bright side. looking on the bright side, i think there is a bright side to be looked upon. i think the american people came out to vote, they organized, they registered, through a pandemic, they took advantage of absentee ballots and mail-in -- early voting. the highest percentage turnout in more than a century. the country has experienced something it really did not like, and i think mr. biden's transition will fit perfect for what americans want. i think americans are ready for adult supervision and good manners. a lot of people say your criticism of mr. trump is aesthetic. and i say that's quite right. aesthetics matter in life. it's called manners. it's called civility. it's called habits, and disposition that lubricate life in a continental society. i think the american people are ready to buckle down and turn around. on immigration, protectionism, all these things. we are not bangladesh. we are a country that can get well by choosing to get well. winston churchill, who loved our country as much as he loved his american-born mother, once said the american people will invariably do the right thing after exhausting all the alternatives. i think we are pretty far down the list of alternatives. i think we are about to make difficultble, decent, choices, so smile. >> i said at the outset that it was a privilege to talk to you, and i feel that way even more. thank you very much for this program, and let me say to the audience as well and you, have a good thanksgiving, restrained though it may be, and wear the mask. i want to remind the audience that next week's program will be with adam schiff. happy thanksgiving to everybody, and thanks very much. >> president trump announced he has pardoned his former national security advisor, michael flynn, who pleaded guilty to a felony, admitting he had misled investigators about details of his conversations with the russian ambassador during president trump's transition to the white house. the retired general later withdrew his guilty plea, and the justice department moved to drop the case against him. that request has been pending before a federal judge who has been reviewing the case. president trump tweeted this -- "it is my great honor to announce that general michael t flynn has been granted a full pardon. congratulations to general flynn and his wonderful family. i know you will now have a truly fantastic thanksgiving." >> use your mobile devices and go to c-span.org for video live and on-demand to follow the transition of power, president trump, president-elect biden, news conference, and coverage at c-span.org. >> up next, from washington journal, and update on the coronavirus pandemic with dr. anthony about you. that's followed by president-elect joe biden giving a thanksgiving address from wilmington, delaware. later, indiana governor holcomb joins reporters for a briefing on coronavirus response in his state. -- in now. formalci, biden, a transition to as administration began monday. he said his team had spoken with you. who did you talk with specifically on his team and when will you meet with him directly? base with theed chief of

Related Keywords

New York , United States , United Kingdom , Texas , Washington , Florida , Delaware , Illinois , California , Indiana , Princeton , Canada , Russia , Puerto Rico , Germany , Champaign , Bangladesh , Los Angeles County , Turkey , Britain , Americans , America , Russian , Germans , American , Winston Churchill , Marco Rubio , Salaam Moriarty , Temple Isaiah , Joe Biden , Caroline Kelly , Jack Nicholson , Adam Schiff , Michael Flynn , Thomas Jefferson , Gerald Ford , Abraham Lincoln , Henry Weinstein , Bret Stephens , Josh Hawley , Mitch Mcconnell , Jarrett Johnson ,