of federal programs and his work on community oriented policing services noteworthy for many reasons, including that sits nicely in the topic of this panel. he published an analysis showing the cops program to be a waste of taxpayer dollars. it had not put more cops on the street or reduced violent crime. he has served as a manager at the juvenile correctional facility in baltimore. [applause] >> i would like to thank you for those kind remarks and thank the federalist society for the opportunity to speak today. i would like to talk about a research technique called the veil of darkness and it gives us insight into whether the police are discriminatory in traffic stops. the question is are cops racist? does the driver's race influence the decision of a police officer to do a traffic stop? this is difficult to do. not only do you have to for neighborhood characteristics, but what's going on in the officer's mind? why does the officer believe they need to pull over at individual for a stop? compare the racial composition of those stops to the racial compensation of the neighborhood. that does not account for individual driving pattern. it is an inadequate benchmark and a lot of researchers are realizing that comparing those stopped by police to community demographics is a highly flawed approach. it's a nifty term to describe a nasty experiment. experiment. we exploit changes in daylight to assess whether police are treating different groups unfairly or fairly. it works under the assumption that the police are less likely to identify the race of a driver at nighttime by more likely to identify the race of a driver during the nighttime. the daytime. if you can take advantage of the shift between day and night, you could assume the police are not targeting minorities during the day when the race of the driver is more easily identified, it would be higher than the stop at night. one of the things that is clear tonight is taking advantage of daylight savings time -- we recently had a change and our clocks because we gained an extra hour of sleep. by looking at this, we can control for patterns of driving. it is pitch black, it is dark and you can look out and it's hard to tell the race of the people you are commuting home with an other cars. right before that, you could more easily identify the drivers race. by controlling for the time of day, we control for driver patterns, driver behavior and assuming if you look at the him and assuming if you look at the difference between daylight saving time, it is best, it should not affect police behavior or deployment. this research methodology is superior to using community, demographics as a benchmark. there are five studies in nice area and they examined four cities. the first is oakland. in cincinnati, syracuse and minneapolis, three or four of these cities, the research shows there's no racial disparity going on. the one exception is minneapolis. if you look at oakland, but they they did was look at the inner twilight -- 5:00 to 9:00. they looked at police stops from june until december and had over 1100 traffic stops that controlled for the time of day and the police area that controls from a neighborhood with higher crime. you should actually control that. they found officers were less likely to stop minorities during the day, the opposite of what many people thought about unfairly targeting minorities. they looked at minority drivers compared to the night and minorities were less likely to be stopped during the day and were more easily identified. the next study was done in cincinnati and is a more comprehensive study that exploited not only a difference in the inner twilight that before and after daylight saving time and looked at time of day, day of week and the neighborhood. police officers were no less likely to stop blacks during the day compared to at the night. in syracuse, they looked at four years of data. they analyzed stops by regular traffic patrol and a crime reduction team. they were trying to do proactive things to reduce crime. if you were going to have racial profiling or some bias, you would find it among the crime him and would find it among the crime reduction team. over four years, they found blacks were no more or less likely to be stopped except in 2008. in that year, they found blacks were 54% more likely to be stopped and that was significant. they offer caution because it is an abrupt difference from the other years and does not hold. they could not identify anything that could account for that year. then, they parsed the data by traffic patrol and found there was no effect or disparity at all. the long study done in minneapolis was one year of data. it looked at the inner twilight time and daylight savings time. it looked at a huge data set but only controls for a time of day, which is an important limitation. they found blacks were 7% less likely to be stopped at night and during the day. when they just do daylight savings time, when it is day and hispanics were more likely to be stopped. they don't go into detail, they just say we did this analysis and don't go into much detail. that is sort of unfortunate. just to conclude, as a natural experiment, when i start to read up on this topic thinking about what i want to present tonight, i did not pick studies with a particular finding. i picked studies that are the strongest methodology for a disparity. we want five studies to look at and one of them finds a consistent disparity. i want to offer a word of caution. these results do not generalize beyond other cities. is very hard to generalize and say what's going on in dallas or washington, d.c. this research, most studies tend to find no disparities in the studies in traffic stops. [applause] justice stras: thank you. our next panelist, and we have a wide variety of backgrounds on this panel, our next panelist graduated from the university of michigan law school in 1963 and has been a member of the illinois bar for more than 40 years. though he has served in a variety of different capacities, he resumed practicing law in 1997. he is a lawyer who has litigated a variety of simple -- of civil rights claims. [applause] >> thank you. thank you for including me in this panel. i think it is important for participants to have an understanding of where i'm coming from in my remarks. our firm does almost exclusively civil rights work. we see individual police officers, we sue departments, generally in claims of excessive force. we have exonerated people, we sue for malicious prosecution of departments. i can say not immodestly, without a great deal of success over the last 10 or 12 years. part of that is indicated by the fact that many of our cases, for all of our cases come from defense attorneys, people we have litigated against and police officers whose family members have had problems of their own. i say this respectfully to my fellow panel members. in my experience, police work, police officers and what they do are among the most difficult people and ethical areas to analyze. please officers are given a responsibility not given to any other. they have their arm, have the right to use force, including deadly force, with that also comes an extraordinary sense of responsibility. it has very much to do with police officers and police departments. you cannot talk about criminal justice in the united states without an understanding of how police department's work and with how police officers work. just as there is a range and how well educated we are and what are political philosophy is. how well we are adjusted to the jobs we are doing. there are certain currents that can be generalized about and i would like to address some of them today. it might appear somewhat contrarian but some of things are not actors that are not easily determined on the basis of studies. i'm going to express some of those anecdotes to you. i would suggest throughout this country, small departments, large departments, urban departments, rural departments departments that for the most part deal with less serious pride. their inherent learned to hate here not to discipline their own. discipline within police departments is i don't want to say laughable, it is disrespect. let me give you a couple of examples. in almost every department in the country that we have had experience with, the discipline of an officer, if he is accused of wrongdoing, if he is accused of wrongdoing and nothing happens as a result, chooses not to exercise discipline. that charge does not become part of his personal. if the police officers accused of sexual assault on a monday and is not sustained and he is accused by another individual on wednesday, when discipline is seeing considered, they do not look at what happened on monday. if he is charged again the following week, they don't say maybe there is a pattern that is existing here. as a result, police officers can engage in conduct detrimental to their departments. the way in which citizens complaints are processed within police departments almost universally is an adequate and is set up in such a matter -- in such a manner to have the person making the charge in a position of not being official. all of us know a traffic stop or even criminal activity, the first reaction might be he was the one who pulled me over for the wrong reason. and just to be sure, suffers a lot from charges that are unfounded or that cannot be substantiated. that does not negate the fact that in police department all over this country, the strong assumption is the citizen is wrong, the police officer is right and there is rarely in any department i have had experience includes manyhat of the major departments in this country, i have never seen an internal process that really works the way it is intended. we are litigating the case for a man who is wrongly convicted, a slow living man -- slow witted man who was convicted of a vicious rape. his conviction was overturned and we are suing on his behalf. as a result of our discovery, we find letters from other policeman and we know there are other policeman because it came through departmental mail saying they saw the subject beaten, they saw the subject billion -- being even information about the rape he was accused and after being beaten for a while, he said i would sign anything you want me to. internal affairs did not turn it over, did not turn it over to others who were investigating. that is an extreme example. anyone familiar with the internal affairs department i do not think he surprised. there is another area that is difficult but in order to understand criminal justice system, you have to understand police. sometimes we call it in the line, sometimes we collect police protecting other police, but it is what happens. hundreds of cases we have had that have involved successive force. one policeman has never testified against another. i'm getting out of time already. a young man was beaten in the street. a myriad of civilian witnesses, including some clergyman saw that it happened. he was accompanied by four other police officers. the policeman denied the bad conduct. the other four police officers were deposed underwrote. people who can testify and put you into jail. people who raise their hand. one of them said at the time of the beating, he had to tie both of his shoes so he walked several feet away and that is where he was. the second person set i heard somebody yelling and the crowd. the third person said i forgot some keys in the car. i saw him leaving the scene, so i thought i would join him. that is how police testify against one another. it is denial or i could not see it because i was doing something else. i don't say any of this as criticism. i will go back to the point with which i began. that is for an understanding of the criminal justice system, takes more than statistics. it takes an understanding of basement, their departments, and the reality of how they operate. thank you very much. [applause] justice stras: thank you. our next speaker is a former philadelphia police officer corporate executive and writer. he was an editor for the philadelphia bulletin and has written for the philadelphia daily news, insight magazine and the washington times. easy author of a novel derived of his experiences on the police force. he started a wrestling club to help philadelphia possibly nor the and inner-city youth the competitive with suburban athletes. [applause] >> i want to tell you about what i think i can contribute to this conversation, but i want to read a newspaper account of testimony given at a trial of a police officer accused of murder after a shooting in which three of five suspects were killed. the testimony as by one of the surviving suspects. he testified -- one of the officers said put up your hands. a fourth suspect opened his coat and said he had no gun. anybody want to take a guess as to what that incident was? it was the tombstone daily nugget, october, 1881. it's known as the gunfight at the ok corral. the testimony was from a convicted horse the and the officer on trial was wyatt earp. so that did not start in ferguson, missouri, but may have started in tombstone, arizona. the testimony was discredited by neutral witnesses. wyatt earp, like officer wilson was exonerated and was also exonerated by the trial. the difference is that back in 1881, people pretty much knew the biases of the newspaper where unlike today, journalists try to pretend to be knowledgeable. that's what i want to talk about. i do not have the rhetorical skills of these panelists and i do not have their training. i met a disadvantage here. i'm playing rocky balboa to apollo creed. i was married in the same church as rocky balboa. i come from and ethnically religious and diverse community. i have lived with diversity and most professors and journalists have not lived with that diversity. i believe i'm the only person on the panel that he has a masters degree and has been a white police officer and a black neighborhood. i know what it is like to look the on the barrel of a 12 gauge remington shotgun. i know what it is like to get a call of a rape in progress and arrive at the scene only to recognize the domestic dispute as a husband trying to pound his wife's head into the sidewalk and then try to arrest the guy twice my size only to have the wife hang all over me because she does not want me to hit her husband. i know what it's like to get a call with a man with a gun inside the house and nearly shoot a little kid. that's one of the reasons i'm here today. the third thing i can bring are the facts. as john adams once said, thoughts are stubborn things. it sounds pretty appropriate. has been some the first casualty in war is truth. the media passes moral judgments on actions made in nanoseconds. caps off have -- if it has an affect on minorities, they are -- i know bob woodson is going to touch on this --, but this occurs because the media only reports those incidents which follow the template of portraying police as bull connors. he was the alabama public safety director responsible for arranging to have fire hoses and attack dogs unleashed when african were simply trying to get their civil rights. i like to do an experiment. i'm going to read off some names and racial hands of you are fully with them. walter scott? michael brown? eric garner? latanya haggerty? dylan taylor? gill collar? bobby dean night? nearly everyone knew the first three. only one person knew the other five. the first three were black suspects shot and killed, unarmed, killed by white police officers. the next five but only one person knew, they were unarmed suspects shot and killed by black or hispanic police officer's but you never heard about these in the national media. latanya haggerty was an are normed black female shot and killed by a black female chicago police officer after a pursuit. but it did not make national news. dylan taylor was a white 20-year-old salt lake city man who was unarmed and shot and killed at the same time as the ferguson incident. but it never got the notoriety. gilbert collar was 80 south alabama student shot and killed by a black university of alabama officer. he was naked, so there is no chance you could say you is reaching for something. but the national media did not report it. what do you think would have been the storyline of the officer were white and the man tilled was black? would there be one reference to bull connor? probably. bobby dean night was shot and killed by a black south carolina deputy sheriff. there is a video of this. it did not make national news. anthony was shot and killed by a black officer but members of the local african-american community rallied around the officer because he was considered a tiller of the community while the victim was a career criminal. this is an interesting point. people in minority communities are tired of living in fear of criminals and this comports with my experience of a philadelphia police officer 30 years ago. worse than that are the erroneous allegations made in the media. if ferguson reportage was the quintessential example. i want to read you a list of assertions made about law enforcement actions or policies by prominent media from both sides of the ideological continuum. these were later proven to be untrue. there is an article that says unarmed blacks are shot every 28 hours. this was repeated by a cnn pundit and elsewhere, but it was not true. there was a report that said killing by police, blacks and whites was 21 21. a guy named david klinger sent in an interview that the probe public unease to be shut down. another leading criminologist proves the study substantially wrong. apparently the reported goals -- the reporters do not understand the data they are using. despite the controversy, newspapers report -- trumpeted the report. they all contain the allegation. the consumer product safety commission had a swat team. and the fish and wildlife service for swat team. that was not true. only the wall street journal has rented a retraction. the most egregious reporting has to do with amnesty international and the aclu. after the oklahoma city bombing, timothy mcveigh was able to flee while officers look for arab terrorists. this same claim was repeated in letters they sent to congress ordering them to end the racial profiling act. my time is up. i have some other articles and other statistics. but me just conclude since this is the federalist society, let me leave you with this report -- among the many arguments wise and free people find it to direct your attention, that providing safety seems to be the first. thank you. [applause] justice stras: thank you so much. we will have some time during questions and answers to have panelists as questions of each other and we can discuss these things in greater detail. our next panelists was the director of the cato institute product -- project on criminal justice. under its direction, is become a leading voice in spring the bill of rights and civil liberties. his research includes the war on terror, the drug war, the militarization of least tactics and in control. he blogs extensively at the cato institute national police misconduct reporting project and has written some interested -- interesting articles about please forces around the country. [applause] >> good afternoon, everybody. i want to thank the federalist society for hosting this discussion and inviting me to participate. this has been annexed for now year of debate and discussion of these practices and criminal justice reform proposals. according to the associated press, more than 50 measures have been introduced and enacted, pieces of legislation that deal with how the police interact with citizens. my thesis is some of these proposals are constructive and what i am going to do is briefly touch on some of the policy changes that are worth highlighting. let's start with baltimore. the baltimore sun ran a series of articles about how that city handles civil lawsuits that allege conduct that was illegal by the baltimore police. since 2011, millions of dollars have been paid out by the city in court judgments in suits concerning false arrests and excessive force. the freddie gray case was settled in september for $6.4 million. some of the incidents were caught on tape like the security footage found in grocery stores. sometimes the conduct is so blatant that they will take the footage to police commanders and say what do you make of this? even the police commanders are shocked. when you have officers kicking people in the head, it's inconsistent with that training. what came out is the baltimore sun found something that was very peculiar about how the city was handling these misconduct claims. they would sit down for negotiations and say we will settle this case for $200,000. but there was a clause and the settlement papers so that when you signed it, you could not speak publicly about what had happened to you. not just you can't talk about the settlement amount, but the people who settle the police brutality lawsuit are not allowed to talk about the underlying conduct. so if you are a victim of police misconduct and you see next year the officer that was out of line in your case, you cannot speak to a reporter about it. you cannot go to a rally and talk about it or talk to civilian oversight authorities about what happened to your case if you sign on the dotted line. this policy has shielded the scope and impact of this policy from the public, but once it was exposed, the bureaucracy could not come forward to defend it very well. so i am happy to read alert, that is in the past. it is one positive thing that has come from baltimore and the media coverage on it. another item is mayor stephanie rawlings lake went to the state capital in annapolis. to ask for legislative changes that would allow her police chief more leeway to get officers convicted of crimes off the government payroll. convicted of crimes. under current law, officers convicted in criminal court of misdemeanor crimes like perjury, assault, they remain on the payroll for many months. in jurisdictions around the country, police chiefs will tell you they have a good idea to the problem officers are on their staff. the disciplinary process for holding these officers accountable is broken. in many jurisdictions, they will say the disciplinary process is a joke. i don't have to explain to this audience the many ways in which teachers unions have put in place obstacles to getting lousy teachers fired and out of our school. we see this with the police unions. now, to his credit, ohio governor john kasich tried to curtail this but was unsuccessful. this is a very difficult thing to turn around. the death of freddie gray has brought the fact that we do not have data about the number of people who died each year in police custody. police in the united states is very decentralized. we have plenty of good departments that make this information transparent. we have many other departments around the country that will not make such information available. governor scott walker signed legislation about a year ago after an incident in that state where every year, there will be an official tally of anybody killed in the custody of least and that will be tallied up the end of the year. all of that information will be available to the public. let me turn to ferguson. police shootings is another area where we do not have solid and accurate information for top this is totally unacceptable. it's absurd we do not have a tally on the people killed by police each year. i know many of them are justifiable, but we should have an accurate tally. several media organizations have been tracking shootings this year. media out let's have been tracking things very closely, so i expect we will be seeing some length the articles on what their findings are during 2015 and we can start to compare to see whether the numbers are going up or down or holding steady. the governor of texas, greg abbott, signed landmark legislation in that state. all shooting deaths in the state of texas are to be reported to the attorney general with in 30 days. along with an explanation. there will be an annual tally and it's all going to be available to the public. this is texas. this is model legislation and this is the type of thing i think we should have in place. if we don't get more action at the state level, there will be pressure to get the federal government more involved. the state should be taking the lead. we should see more actions by governors and state attorney general's along the lines of what governor abbott has done. california enacted a law that said police departments must identify officers involved in shootings. we have seen bills that say special prosecutors will prosecute shootings and so countyead of having the investigate itself. these are a few of the best practices in place. these are constructive policy changes and we need to see more of them. the media scrutiny, we've seen some bad things. the media scrutiny on ferguson brought about some court reform. they were using citations as a way of generating revenue for the government. they were not impartially administering justice. they had come to view themselves treasury, where to help meet by levyingls penalties on the people. i was at a meeting where grover norquist was talking about this -- he calls it taxation by citation. he says ferguson had turned their police into revenue agent and stirred up community resentment. he says it is imperative we have court reform around the country for interventions -- stories from the bible where the most detested people were tax collectors and we have to get the pace out from being revenue people and back into investigating violent crimes and being seen as protectors of the community. this is not just happening in missouri. i live in fairfax county. last month, there was a washington post article that police ticket cars for needing inspection -- while they are in line waiting for inspection. [laughter] it is hard to believe. these are people trying to come into compliance with all the government rules and they are getting slammed. when these bureaucratic abuses are exposed, we see the right and left come together to stop it, but more work needs to be done. let me touch briefly on civil asset forfeiture. these are the laws that allow police to seize property from people who have not been convicted of a crime, not been indicted, not been arrested. these abuses have been reported by newspaper exposes. there was the story of a young man traveling from his home in michigan to los angeles where he will start his career. he had been saving his money for three years and had his cash and was heading to l.a.. his mother gave him a few thousand dollars because that's what mothers do to help them get started on his career. he didn't get very far. from michigan to california, half way, please officers came officers came on board and asked to search his belongings. he said fine and they found a lot of cash on his person and took his money away. they said what was the rationale? they said he was traveling to a drug hotspot, los angeles. he said if you take all my money, i don't have any way to get home. i don't know anybody in this area and they just shrugged and said that's not our problem. these stories ripple out. to relatives, friends and neighbors. that's one of the reasons why there's growing resentment in communities against what some police departments are doing. george will argues we are treating people worsen the criminals. with the criminals, we take stuff away after they have been convicted in court. back to the action at the state level -- new mexico abolished civil asset forfeiture this year. other states are trying to reform laws but are running into lots of opposition. they issued a report on the state laws run the country. an "a."e got an -- "b"'s.re a couple "c"'snd -- get and "d"'s. states around the country get seas and these, so a lot more work needs to be done in this area. there is more to be said about police body cameras and we do a lot of work. they'll reform measures, chris christie put together an interesting coalition on bail reform but i see i have run out of time. let me stop here so we have more time for questions and answers. thank you. [applause] justice stras: thank you. our final panelist, bob woodson, is the founding -- founder and president of the central neighborhood enterprise and has been a struggle and paving the way for ownership of public housing. he brought together task forces to advise the 104th congress and the legislature on welfare reform and help create violence free zones that operate in many of the nations most troubled schools and communities. he's also the only person to ever receive procedures awards on both the liberal and conservative side session a carter genius fellowship and the bradley foundation prize as well as the presidential medal. i now present mr. woodson. [applause] bob: some of my friends said i'm the only non-communist to get a macarthur award. [laughter] thank you so much. i want to use my time to talk to you from the perspective of the people in low income neighborhoods, particularly low income black neighborhoods. part of my resume is that these issues are personal with me because over the course of the last 25 years, i have lost three family members to violence and two nephews were put in intensive care coming home from work. they were not assaulted and killed by white marauding police officers, they were killed by other blacks. what i find troubling about the testimony i have heard today is there is a drumbeat to vilify the police departments around this country. i believe police unions and correctional officers union are not being held accountable. i believe, the police, because they are representative of the state have an increased responsibility and obligation to be just in the execution of their duties. but, i represent an organization with 3000 grassroots leaders in 39 states, most of them are living in those high crime neighborhoods and i'm wondering what their response would be to some of the things i heard today? we are talking about race and it always seems to be the issue that intrudes itself. the problem of always looking at the police through the prism of race is that it means we discount that black lives matter only when it has been taken by a white police officer. and it means when the perpetrators are black, we look the other way. geraldo rivera had a two hour special on the rape of women in prison throughout this country -- for two hours. in each case, the victim was a black woman and in each case, the victimizer was a black corrections officer. but because the victim and perpetrators were black, it did not generate any large scale discussion or debate. we have to know the race of the victim and victimizer before we can become animated to take action. if the perpetrator wears a black face, evil escapes responsibility. i think -- just to personalize it, the past five years, we have children like this -- a five-year-old girl sitting on her grandfather's lap in milwaukee, wisconsin, and she was shot through the head. we have had 25 black children under the age of five killed not by marauding police officers, but by other blacks. the black immunity suffers a 9/11 every six months. there are 3000 blacks killed by other blacks every six months. we have a 9/11 every six months. most of the people in those neighborhoods suffer as a consequence of the vilification of the police. 13 years ago, in cincinnati, ohio, when a white police officer shot a young black man who turned, he thought he had a gun, and so civil rights leaders came and organized a boycott of cincinnati. they vilified the police, so what the police said is since we are going to be accused of racism, we will not be as aggressive in those high crime black neighborhoods, with the result the murder rate went up 800% in the black community. it did not effect the neighborhoods where those pastors and civil rights leaders lived. they did not have to suffer the consequence of their advocacy. the same in baltimore. the 300-man march. these are young black leaders who intervened between the rioters because they have the respect of the young people and they were able to reduce the violence. they are out every weekend in those hot spots trying to develop a strategy to reduce violence by helping young people that are indigenous to take responsibility for themselves. they are in those hot spots and the leader said in all of these encounters over the years, they would never threaten violence, they were only threatened by demonstrators from black lives matters who wanted to chastise them for supporting community-based efforts. what we have done over the past 10 years is we go into the community to suffer the problem and identify grassroots leaders with the moral authority to command change from within the community. they are the ones who become empowered. 53 murders in a five square block area. southwestgo in washington. the police were afraid to intervene. to have the same cultural and geographical as it code of those experiencing the problem. they were witnesses to their peers that transformation is possible and redemption is available to them. rather than spending money on shot detectors, we spend money on these young leaders who pay to be character coaches in their communities with the consequence went from 53 murders in two years down to zero gang deaths in 12 years. rather than the system investing in other indigenous efforts that have the consequence of transforming the attitudes and behaviors, we have taken this solution to milwaukee, where we are 11 schools, -- are in 11 schools, have 50 student mentors, rather than vilifying the police, the grassroots leaders need the cooperation and support of the police. because what we are experiencing now is police nullification. if we come to forms like this and speak about the militarization of the police, talking about the vilification of police, the police will do what they are doing now, they will not be aggressive in those communities, because they fear being called a racist. it will not be people who attend conferences like this who suffer the consequence, it will be low income black mothers and fathers, such as the parents of this young lady who will suffer the consequence. we need to be a little careful and spend time talking about how we can do this by reducing the balance within the communities and not spending all of the time vilifying the police were trying to work with low income parents to bring change. thank you. [applause] >> i will have some questions here, shortly. i know mr. loevy wanted to respond to the other panelists. mr. loevy: let me make general observations. for people who care about what is going on in this country, there is no one i have heard on this panel that has vilified police. to hold police responsible come to ask that they be held responsible for our sons and grandsons does not mean they are being villified. big difference between being held responsible and vilification. i feel strongly about that. these are issues that we deal with, both me, family, all the time. to criticize is not to vilify. this part of our work can be done and accomplished. it cannot be accomplished if every time the police officer engages in either unlawful or or wrongful acts, he is automatically and without thinking told that he is right. police departments make mistakes too. our job as citizens is certainly to do much of what has been spoken of by the last speaker. and job also is to see policeman and police departments operate in such a manner as to be responsible to the communities and the citizens who they serve. mr. tremoglie: can i respond to that? a couple of things. i did not have time to read off some of my data. i want to talk about the amnesty international issue. these are hallowed organizations worldwide. there considered the gold standard. in oklahoma, after the bombing, nine years later in a human rights report, they talked about timothy mcveigh being what they whileng allowed to flee they are looking for arab terrorists. but the facts were that the fbi profiler had immediately profiled the bomber as a white male with military experience, probably a militia member. in 24 hours, the fbi had identified mcveigh. in 48 hours, he was already in custody. he was taken into custody on a minor traffic violation, without a license. a lot of civil liberties people don't like that. the officer noticed he had a suicide holster, one of those with a big flap. by the time you reach over and open it and draw, you will be killed. so, they call it a "suicide holster." [laughter] mr. tremoglie: he was already in custody. he was arraigned at an airbase in oklahoma. nine years later, the aclu and amnesty international were repeating a false assertion. the idea that the police are vilified, they can be vilified by releasing the wrong information. i can say that the reason why cities get sued in these high dollar judgments is because you find jurors who are sympathetic to plaintiffs. that's called the "bronx jury" effect. doctors complain about this all the time. i could easily say that. "the grand jury's are sympathetic to police." the fact is though that i work with people indicted. i know how police officers can be. if anybody wants to google "grover dinwiddie," you will see guys i worked with who went to jail. my cousin made the case against one of them. he called me up and asked me what i think of grover dinwiddie. he told me he was shaking people down, number writers, bookies, the fixed illegal lotteries. nobody wants a bad officer. i don't like cops that are brutal. nobody liked them in my family, nobody wants them. they are bad, they're bad for us, they are bad for the police. they are bad for society in general. nobody likes them. if there needs to be reforms made in the system to make sure that there prosecuted, i am not going to argue about that. i will be the first one there to help you out. but i believe that people are interested in criminal justice reform when trial lawyers sue rapists on behalf of rape victims, which does not happen. i will be happy when they have websites about parole boards the release information about violent criminals, martyrs. 9% of those on death for have a prior homicide conviction. 9%. think about it. two murders, that's what you get. when people's art having websites that say, "let us take a look at how many people, murderers who have been paroled kill again," that's when i'll be ready for it. forgive me, i have a philadelphia accent. if you don't understand me, ask me to repeat myself. when i get emotional, it happens. that is what i will believe that people are interested in reform. when they start doing those types of things. mr. woodson: what usually bothers me about lawsuits is they are selective. the fact that newark has been on the justice department supervision system for the last five years for police misconduct, but we talk about ferguson, in the 90's, under eric holder, when he was a u.s. attorney, we had more police officers shooting citizens in washington than any other place in the country. but, no lawsuits. no public condemnation. people have to have a white face before a firing is challenged. that is detrimental to those who we serve, that is my point about vilifying the police. it has to have a racial dimension. mr. loevy: i would like to make a quick comment. i live in chicago, and we all know about the level of crime. the actual statistics are very surprising. in the black community, the same things have been going on for many years. deaths. level of differencea the big is? in my generation was that it used to be an african-american child was murdered in chicago, killed by gunfire, and you were lucky if you got two lines on the 20th page. what has happened, and it is a better thing, is that african americans getting killed is now newsworthy. i grew up in an era when it was not newsworthy, or the extent that it was was just a little blurb. now, at least there is public attention. the solutions are complex, and i admire what you are doing in trying to get a solution, but bear in mind, the police today versus 30 or 40 years ago, there is reporting given that did not exist to generation ago in the big cities. mr. tremoglie: let me give you some statistics. numerous studies getting back 40 years have determined that the best predictor of use of force is the attitude of the suspect. as one professor once told me, in general, if the subject is at nasty, you'll be treated nastily. a study by james frank of the university of cincinnati found that white officers are more likely to arrest suspects the black officers, but black suspects are more likely to be arrested when the decision-maker was a black officer. the bureau of justice statistics found that from 1976 to 1978,-- 1976-1998, blacks were the number one killer of white officers from 2001-2003. i know there was no data according to tim, but there is a u.s. report from the bureau of statistics. it is worth noting that three fourths of justifiable homicides by civilians are interracial. a white person shooting a black or white -- a black suspect shooting a white criminal. the general social survey, if you have any social scientist used to this report, 12.8% of americans in 2012 don't think police officers should defend themselves, even when being assaulted. think about that. this figure has increased dramatically from 3.1% a few years ago. -- about 40 years ago. 2008, 64% of the justifiable homicides involved the officer being assaulted. the congressional arrest report that goes back to the 90's shows 6 in 104000 deaths, homicide.ified of 69% of whites and 61.3% of blacks were killed while being arrested during this. the fbi arrested during the same seven years, state and local enforcement officers made 98 million arrests. three out of every 100,000 arrests result in someone being killed. you have a four times greater chance of being electrocuted and being killed by police. than being killed by police. a final thing, and encouraging statistic. 93% of persons requesting police assistance felt the officers acted properly. what is even more revealing is that there is no statistical difference between the percentage of hispanics, blacks, and whites. going back, it seems the average person does not believe this misinformation campaign. but, this data is out there, it is not being reported. you're only getting what fits a certain narrative, not all the information. you can quibble about it, you can debate it. you can argue it. he can say i'm incorrect. the fact is, there is too much misinformation and dis-information about police work. mr. stras: i want to turn to specific reform measures and hopefully leave 25 minutes for questions from the audience. we saw program on the use of body cameras. i know, mr. lynch, you mentioned it. it is amazing technology. some of them, while quite expensive, include infrared technology to see things in poorly lit situations. i wonder what you think about the proliferation of body cameras, and whether that is a good or bad development? mr. lynch: well, it is not a panacea, but it is going to be a big improvement in police officer and record on us police officers who are able to show that stops are legitimate, attention is legitimate, the use of force that may be necessary is legitimate. it will be the enemy to bad officers, the ones who are abusing their power. we studied at cato some of the best practices. it is easy, hearing the past two months, spending money, giving it police officers in getting them on uniforms. the issues get more complicated about what you will do with the footage once the police department has the information. should it be disclosed in all circumstances? some circumstances? it can be very expensive if you blur out the faces of certain witnesses who may be in public, near the person arrested. these are complicated issues, but the politicians are all over them. this is the first go to reform. let us spend money on body cameras. because they just don't want to discuss these issues. they just say "body cameras" and move on. but, people have cell phones at the ready, and we are catching more and more police interactions with the public with smartphones. this is a big difference from a generation ago. in the past, when somebody was complaining about excessive force, and the officer denies it, the public did not know what to make of it. we were not there, we do not know the people involved. you don't want to think that an officer is doing this. now, we can reach our own conclusions. this is kind of like the new thing that is going on that is not going to stop. we have police wearing body cameras. mr. woodson: just a quick note. there's not a single perspective on this. a lot of homicide, a lot of crimes in neighborhoods occur because people come to the police and report to that police officer something they have seen. or, they provide evidence that allows them to make an arrest. they will not do that if they know they are going to be recorded. i think we need to balance the accountability issue against law enforcement effectiveness and addressing homicide and crime. we need to discuss it from the point of view always on both sides of it. when i talk about the vilification of police, that is my point. whenever we talk about it, how come we always talk about it as if it's bad people doing bad things? mr. tremoglie: the other question is how to do this when you have to talk about the lens of the media, which only wants to crucify a police officer? whatever their motivation is, it's another thing to look at. if is only to be used to allude to a killer cop, that's difficult. i made reference to an arrest i made on a guy that was twice my size. he was trying to beat up a woman on a sidewalk. as soon as i realized, i realized it was a domestic dispute, not a rape. i had to dislodge the guy, on top of her. he's hitting her. i tried to push him, it did not work. i got my nightstick under his neck, under his chin, and i lifted it. he was coming at me at about 90 miles per hour. i was ready to hit him with a stick. the wife grabs it. supposing, in that arrest, i would have crushed his larynx, killed him unintentionally. do you think the wife would want to sue? do you think she would say she was in danger? she did not want me to hit him after i rescued her from multiple concussions or contusions. that is the type of thing that goes on. if it is filmed, what will you see on the news? please see what led to this, what motivated the actions? what i did to try to dislodge him from her? i don't think so. mr. lynch: i'm disappointed to hear mike say the only thing we could agree on is the police camera issue. there's been a lot of distortion with the racial narrative. but i've laid out six or seven policy proposals, clauses and settlement. municipal corporate form, turning police officers and revenue agents, the tally of in custody death, the tally of how many people are killed by police officers, cutting out red tape to allow police chiefs to get rid of problem officers. i have six or seven of these. the only thing we can agree on is police cameras? [crosstalking] i'm disappointed to hear you say that. mr. loevy: i share the opinion that it can be helpful. we hope that when the cameras came in to the police guard, that that would reduce the amount of violence, because at least some of the stops would be shown. if you share nine out of 10 accusations, where the violence took place in front of a squad car, in those instances, the camera was inoperative. it just happened to be broken back at the station. it happened to be "not able to be fixed." mr. lynch: of course, you're not trying to vilify police? [laughter] mr. tremoglie: i have some oceanfront property i could sell you a cheap price. mr. muhlhausen: i would urge caution adopting these policies nationwide. here's an example of a mandatory arrest for police violence. they did research in minneapolis that found, in a randomized experiments, if we institute mandatory arrests, the individual that was arrested is less likely to engage in domestic violence in the future. well, all across the country, cities and towns, when researchers did randomized experiments, they found an opposite effect. in omaha nebraska, in charlotte north carolina, they found after an individual was arrested, the person was more likely to assault his partner. he knew he was going to go to jail once the call was made. he knew he would spend the jail night no matter what. i think that we need to take these changes in policing and view them as an experiment. in some cases, as mr. woodson has said, it could backfire. so, i think we should not rush to judgment and adopt body cameras all through the police department. we need to empirically assess this. sometimes, it takes years to assess whether or not a change in policy is actually having intended results. i'm always urging caution. sometimes, policies backfire and cause more harm than good. >> i feel like i am a referee. mr. tremoglie: nobody's going -- throwing any chairs yet. mr. stras: i want to make sure the audience has a chance to ask questions. >> bob woodson, your briefs against the vilification of police misidentify the issue. colleaguesnd his police,ifying criminal not police. you are calling for the prosecution of criminals in the communities in which you work. this is exactly what these other people are calling for. prosecution of police criminals. that is not the same thing as the vilification of police. mr. woodson: let me offer a comment. 90% of police cameras that suddenly aren't working, what is that? that is example of what i'm talking about. >> but it's true. [laughter] >> you're implying this is done purposely. mr. tremoglie: the cato institute wrote in november 2014 that it remains to be seen whether or not officer wilson will be held accountable at a later date. why was that written? you don't know, do you? >> ask him, beside you. mr. tremoglie: why, in november 2014, after he was exonerated, did youyou s -- why opinion, hw he was still guilty? mr. lynch: don't attribute that to me. i didn't write it. [laughter] mr. tremoglie: that's vilification. mr. stras: he's from philadelphia. mr. lynch: he said that this is a disciplinary process in place in the philadelphia police department, that it was a joke. that's in his memoir. john is not vilifying the police, he is identifying problems in the police department to up their standards. mr. tremoglie: did i say he vilify police? i'm talking about you. mr. lynch: criticism is not vilification. mr. tremoglie: you're not criticizing police procedures, you're saying a man was still guilty after being exonerated. mr. lynch: you are a distraction. mr. tremoglie: no, you are a distraction. you don't want to answer the question. mr. stras: let's move on. [laughter] >> i hesitate to jump in. mr. stras: me too. [laughter] >> it's a good fight. mr. tremoglie: my apologies. >> i think the most important thing from the standpoint of, look, policing the free people is a challenging job. but, it is important that people have faith in the integrity of that effort. i've been a working constitutional lawyer for 25 years. -- 15 years. there's a massive and inexplicable double standard between what other practitioners say. the only vocation where it is virtually impossible to sue is law-enforcement. prosecutors have absolute immunity. police officers have qualified immunity. it makes it very difficult to sue them. there's an article that came out last year that identified 99.8% of all damage awards found against police officers -- what if we had police do what every other vocation does, to self-insure against lawsuits so that the cost is internalized? the premiums will be higher if you self damage. there will be a tendency to self-control, because the money comes out of your pocket incident the taxpayer pocket. that officer will before stop the job, and the good ones will get what they are entitled to. mr. tremoglie: i have a better idea. if you have a bad cop, put him in jail. if you have a bad ceo? suing people touches no one. suing people touches no one. if you have someone who is bad, put him in jail. >> so you support a double standard for law enforcement is the only thing we cannot be sued? mr. tremoglie: well, ceos go free. stockholders have to pay for lawsuits. that's what happened in 2007, 2008. mr. stras: i have a feeling we know who will want to respond to that. mr. loevy: what the man from the aforesaid is a good idea. but, but what mike says identifies the problem as clearly as anyone can. if it is a bad police officer put him in jail. there is all kinds of bad, unconstitutional conduct that police officers and others, governmental officials, can engage in, do engage in, that is short of criminal, but nevertheless, for the benefit of the citizens, need to be corrected. that is what civil law does. that is what the question from the floor indicated. unfortunately, most police departments reach exactly the same conclusion. either you did something so criminal that you go to jail or you're off the hook. there is a huge middle ground that needs to be addressed to make policeman and police departments more responsible. mr. stras: i hope everyone saw the washington post story. mr. lynch: washington prosecutors indicted an officer for murder. they went to court and said, "he was part of a federal task force."'s status made him immune, legally immune from state homicide statutes. the case was dismissed. the prosecutor said they will appeal the ruling. that's one to watch. it is not as easy as saying, "he broke the law, they should send him to jail." mr. tremoglie: can the laws we be changed? can the legal barriers be removed? mr. stras: we're going to the back room for another question. >> i'm always struck by conversations like this. i like to imagine they're taking place in the late 20's, around prohibition. about are all talking the practices of the police, maybe they focus on hillbillies too much, or they have to much discretion as to how many barrels to destroy. instead, the problem is prohibition. i don't know if this is beyond the scope of this conversation, but we are in a classic situation. where what we have done is created an enormous black market for 40 years, we have cultivated a scenario where the police are naturally going to be in terrible situations. the communities will engage in bad behavior. that comes right down to the argument in front of us on the panel. we have made this fight. in talking about smaller points here and there, that is important to be sure. but, it seems to me the bigger problem, the elephant in the room, is the drug war, which hasn't been mentioned. about guys want to talk hear yourve to thoughts. thank you. mr. stras: does anyone want to respond to that? mr. lynch: i agree it's at the root of many problems, but is beyond the scope of this panel. >> thanks to the gentleman who spoke to the vilification of the police. i understand there was some recent article, in the cities that you mentioned, but throughout the country as well. crime has gone up as a result of police afraid to do their jobs. i want to see what people think about police reform. better police training. it seems like some of the death that occurred had to do with police not recognizing medical issues. we need better training of recognizing when someone is in medical distress. i have a friend on the police force who says police need better training in martial arts. they are a way of bringing down someone without having to resort to gunfire. that's a possible reform. it could be very helpful, and something that everybody could agree to. i want to ask you about the people behind anti-police demonstrations and the total lawlessness of this. i mean, you know, policeman have been killed as a result of some of these demonstrations. it is really unbelievable. i have been organizing protests, and other matters in new york city. you have to get a permit when you organize. you work with police, your restricted to a certain area. the anti-police protests, they were lawless, they ran through the streets. obviously, the baltimore situation was worse than new york. who is behind this? some of these lawless protests were well-organized, in ferguson and so on. there were other groups involved, antisemetic posters were noticed. do you know who has been behind some of these. reallyknow who was behind some of these protests. mr. stras: let's talk about the negligence of officers first. mr. woodson: a lot of police officers are promoted if they make a felony arrest, which means violent encounters. there are also police officers who prevent violence with positive interactions with the police. that should count towards promotion and elevation as well. mr. loevy: i agree. we are litigating a case in which a 97-year-old world war ii veteran in a nursing home had a knife in his hand and was shot and killed by the police when they arrived at the request of the nursing home. what seems to me needs to be done is the police need better training in disengaging someone, talking someone down. obviously, no policeman should be able to not be up to protect himself when he or she is in danger, but there is a skill, that in our judgment, they should have used to talk down a 97-year-old man in a nursing home in his kitchen, with other mental health people on the premises who could've helped. training is a factor. most police departments, in their reflective moments, realize that there is a lot that could be done. mr. tremoglie: it is very difficult to establish a training regiment that would cover just about every situation. i hear about martial arts a lot. i have studied brazilian jujitsu among other things over the years. these to coach wrestling. as you might have heard, i wrestling.ch even at that, if i would've applied some of those techniques, it would've caused injury to the person i was trying to apprehend. there is no one silver bullet to solve every situation. especially when you deal with the mentally ill. it is really difficult to do that. i don't know what the answer is there. mr. stras: she also brought up the protests over the last year. does anyone want to respond? mr. woodson: black lives matter has been destructive. it has no purpose but to protest. i am a veteran of the civil rights movement, we had goal oriented solutions. "what is the solution?" black lives matter only matters when a white person takes a black life. not when a little girl gets shot through the head sitting on her lap. when they rise up and protest that, when that occurs, i will join them. mr. stras: let's go to the back of the room. >> i know you've been talking about how it feels like police have each other's backs. it also feels like the judiciary has their back. to what extent do we end up shielding municipal entities and counties that should've made good decisions on the front and from continuing to make bad decisions because we shall them from liability through the judicial process? mr. loevy: one of the speakers pointed out that policeman have immunity from being sued. it is a qualified immunity. prosecutors, judges, they have an absolute immunity. they will never be sued. part of the problem is that municipalities insure themselves, part of it is the municipalities can pay a judgment, even for errant police officers. short of criminal conduct, even when they engage in criminal conduct, what happens is they pay compensatory damages. a policeman can be sued putatively to give a warning to other police officers. they can't engage in the same kind of conduct in the future. they can punish him for his bad actions. i'm speaking anecdotally. every time we get in canada damage, against a police officer, the department puts pressure on the municipality to say, as part of the settlement, the person you are suing is not a lawyer, you get all the money as long as you don't collected it from the policeman. it is very unusual for a policeman to ever pay anything out of his own pocket. the municipality steps up. the more subtle problem is that quite often, it is the supervisory personnel that are really responsible. everybody falls on the sword. this is anecdotal, but in most of the litigation, the sergeant takes it from the lieutenant, the tenant the captain, the captain from the chief. at the end of the day, they know they will never really be heard. i hope that answers your question. mr. stras: i will now ask a question i hope would be asked, but hasn't. there are different views about the need for reform and what it looks like. i want to ask a more fundamental federalist question. where does the reform need to come from, if necessary? local governments, state government, national governments? mr. muhlhausen: all of the above. >> it needs to be governed by the jurisdictions involved. the federal government is more likely to impose a one system fits all solution that may not work across the land we live in. i would stress that we need to have an outdated, maybe, but-- federalism means that certain responsibilities should be shared by the local governments, and i think the federal government should play the role, -- very little role, if any. mr. woodson: we should look for reform. camden new jersey is to be corrupt. they've made major reforms. police officers are actually living in the community with those who they serve. there has been positive community interaction. violence is down. this goes to some local leaders, who are able to convene and explain to citizens what happened. there are positive models of reform. it should come from the locals. we need to have somebody spend some of the time, particularly some of these research institutes, on what works, the studies of successful police community interaction. mr. tremoglie: do you feel that sometimes the federal government needs to come in? we saw that during the civil rights era. mr. muhlhausen: in some cases, but broadly, the federal government should not play a major role. for those of you interested in looking at the best available research says about these topics and policing, i am not affiliated, but the center for evidence-based policing at george mason university is does excellent research on this which i highly recommend. i recommend their work. mr. loevy: without existing federal law, and the way the law has been interpreted by the supreme court, without it, well, it would be extremely difficult for a citizen, an individual citizen, to get regress from police misconduct. the very viable remedy available to them is available under federal law. without federal law, citizens would be dependent on state court. historically, they have been inadequate. the federal government does have a role to play. section 1983, section 1988. been on the books for a long time and i think they have provided an effective watchdog, and oversight. mr. lynch: in the weeks after the death of freddie gray, when baltimore was on the news, pressure began to build to bring in the department of justice. eventually, the mayor of baltimore did invite loretta lynch and the department of justice to come in and investigate the city police department. that investigation is ongoing. i expect, in a few weeks, it could be two weeks or probably three more months, but the department of justice will issue a report saying there's a pattern and practice of problems in the baltimore police department. it is really not going to be any surprise. a lot of people are surprised when they hear i say that it's a mistake to bring in the department of justice. all that national attention means there was no better time for her to make corrections a lot of people thought were necessary in the department. the environment will never be better than it was back then, when there was so much attention and scrutiny on the department. the department of justice is going to issue a report in a couple of months. i'm sure the mayor will hold a conference, and they will pledge cooperation and follow through with the reforms. we will see what happens. my point is that sometimes local officials shift responsibility for cleaning up their own departments by inviting the department of justice in and saying let them handle it, let them make tough decisions. i think it should be done by the mayor and chief of police. mr. stras: let's go back to the front of the room. >> i am bill otis, a professor of law from georgetown. the question has been raised about whether police misconduct sparks distrust of police. it in turn, undermines, law-enforcement. the question is whether police and other major public institutions enjoy public trust. in a recent poll from gallup, there was a poll of 15 institutions. the leading two institutions were the military and small business. the third was police with 52% trust. by contrast, the president enjoys 32% trust. the supreme court, 31%. television news, 21%. the reform institutions enjoy have to trust as the police themselves. the reason is that they have largely adopted what has become the motto of the anti-police movement, hands up, don't shoot. it is no longer news that it's false. his hands weren't up, he was not trying to surrender. but the media, and anti-police organization, continues to adopt what they know is a false motto as the anthem of a movement. it is a movement that takes root in a knowing falsehood which deserves all the amount of trust that we would give, for example, to something like, "if you like your insurance, you can keep your insurance." [laughter] [applause] mr. loevy: the motto today is, "don't put your hands in your pants." that's what results in shooting. in broad surveys of police, it has nothing to do with the reality of high crime communities. in high crime communities, and again, it is more anecdotal, and a high crime community, there is an intense distrust of police. why is there distrust of police? police in high crime communities do stop and frisk. the issue is not only to reduce crime. the issue is to make a social statement, like the last speaker made. "you have to respect me, you have to respect authority, you have to be in a position where if a police officer tells you to do something, you cannot exercise even a constitutional right." "the police are someone to be listened to." it is not an accident that people law-abiding communities will not talk to the police. it is not just because they are being intimidated. it is because the police in those communities have not been trained very well, and have taken the exact same type of an attitude. the police have presented that, "we can do what we want because we represent justice, not the citizens." that is what i think is going on. mr. tremoglie: the data does not bear that, arthur. bgs in a 2011 study says the majority of people do approve of the way police do their jobs. there is no discernible difference between hispanics, blacks, and whites. gallup surveys do the same thing. it was 93%. mr. woodson: the point is, people in high crime communities want more police. they want increased police. they are losing children. it is not true, what you are saying. in surveys of people in the high crime areas, more than desire increased police presence. that's the demand. mr. loevy: from the chief of police to the officers on the street, the biggest complaint in trying to solve crime is that people are not coming forward to help them. mr. tremoglie: one that was the same issue in the entire american community 100 years ago. there is no doubt that there is the use of force within the african american community. the question we have to ask his wife. -- to answer is why. people who are interested in true criminal justice reform to answer it. if i say to you, what ethnic group do you associate with organized crime, anyone who says isthing other than italian lying. and i'm italian. the question is why. these are the questions we need to have answered. you cannot have reform until you have some kind of an idea of what you want to reform and why and what causes things. to have anecdotal information. "blacks are afraid of the police." that's not bob's information, and he happens to the african-american. mr. loevy: you spoke over me. what i did say is police complain regularly, from the chief to the guy on the street, that communities, high crime communities do not have sufficient cooperation from the citizens. when i was about to say was that we can disagree about the reasons, but one of those reasons, not the only reason, one of those reasons is the fact that police, in many high crime communities, have abused their authority and the power they have. you can deny it, but it is an element. i believe that strongly. mr. stras: we have to wrap up. it is 2:15. i apologize to those of you at the microphones. give a nice round of applause for these passionate analysts. -- passionate panelist. [applause] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] >> today on "washington tornal," kevin barron looks security threats facing the u.s. by terrorism, cyber security, iraq, russia,with syria, and north korea. we look at the top stories of 2015 with men well -- manuel quinones. starts atn journal" 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> with congress on holiday recess, c-span features prime time programming. tonight, on c-span, laura logan, sebastian younger, and other journalists who have risked their lives covering the middle east. wednesday night, events from the c-span archives featuring figures who died in 2015. thursday, a look at the year in congress. year's day, at 8:00, law enforcement officials and the prison examine system and the impact on minority communities. tonight, eight: 30, memoirs by reporters, activists, and a former white house press secretary. tuesday, books on economics and the economy. thursday, discussions on isis and terrorism. on new year's day, several of our in-depth programs from this year. on american history tv on c-span 3, the 70th anniversary of the liberation of auschwitz. the 13thight, amendment. wednesday night, which president would be a better model for gop candidates today, calvin coolidge or ronald reagan? on a playwright and star of "hamilton," excepts a special achievement award. that is some of the programs featured. this new year's weekend, book tv brings you three days of nonfiction books and authors. thom hartmann on his life and career and response to viewer calls and questions. his many books include "the crash of 2016" and williams,." walter his books include "race and economics" and up from the projects. on afterwards, carl rhodes looks 1896lliam mckinley's campaign in his new book "the triumph of william mckinley." he is interviewed by richard burr kaiser. >> the republican party has been been in the 1892 election. ov

Related Keywords

New York , United States , Canada , Alabama , North Carolina , Missouri , Texas , Philadelphia , Pennsylvania , Brazil , Illinois , California , Wisconsin , Syria , New Mexico , Oklahoma City , Oklahoma , Russia , Michigan , Washington , District Of Columbia , Cincinnati , Ohio , Arizona , Iraq , Salt Lake City , Utah , South Carolina , Nebraska , North Korea , Dallas , Chicago , Italy , Italian , Americans , Brazilian , American , Kevin Barron , Scott Walker , Google Grover Dinwiddie , Michael Brown , Dylan Taylor , Walter Scott , Grover Norquist , Ronald Reagan , John Kasich , James Frank , Los Angeles , David Klinger , Tim Lynch , Manuel Quinones , Loretta Lynch , Timothy Mcveigh , Carl Rhodes , Chris Christie , Walter Williams , Laura Logan Sebastian , Grover Dinwiddie , Thom Hartmann , Bob Woodson , John Adams , Wyatt Earp , Geraldo Rivera , William Mckinley , Greg Abbott , Richard Burr Kaiser ,