METROFOCUS: NOVEMBER 14, 2019

MetroFocus hosts Rafael Pi Roman and Jack Ford break down the testimony and the evidence of yesterday’s hearing, and take a look ahead at round two of the public impeachment hearings set for tomorrow. Famed historian Doris Kearns Goodwin examines “Leadership: In Turbulent Times” by taking a look at our history to make sense of today’s national narrative.

Aired on November 14, 2019.

TRANSCRIPT

> TONIGHT ON 'METROFOCUS,' THE CASE FOR AND AGAINST IMPEACHING DONALD TRUMP.

WE ARE BREAKING DOWN THE EVIDENCE AND WHAT'S NEXT AS CONGRESS GETS SET FOR ROUND TWO OF THE PUBLIC IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS.

> THEN IT IS A LESSON IN LEADERSHIP FROM DORIS GOODWIN, THE FAMED HISTORIAN DEMONSTRATES LEADERSHIP IN TURBULENT TIMES AND LOOKS AT OUR HISTORY TO MAKE SENSE OF TODAY'S NARRATIVE.

THOSE STORIES AND MORE AS 'METROFOCUS' STARTS RIGHT NOW.

THIS IS 'METROFOCUS' WITH RAFAEL PI ROMAN, JACK FORD, AND JENNA FLANAGAN.

'METROFOCUS' IS MADE POSSIBLE BY JAMES AND MERRYL TISCH, SUE AND EDGAR WACHENHEIM III, THE SYLVIA A. AND SIMON B. POYTA PROGRAMING ENDOWMENT TO FIGHT ANTI-SEMITISM.

BERNARD AND IRENE SCHWARTZ, ROSALIND P. WALTER, AND BY --

> IN THIS IMPEACHMENT HEARING TODAY WHERE WE IMPEACH PRESIDENTS FOR TREASON OR BRIBERY OR OTHER HIGH CRIMES WHERE IS THE IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE IN THAT CALL?

ARE EITHER OF YOU HERE TODAY TO ASSERT THERE WAS AN IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE IN THIS CALL?

SHOUT IT OUT.

ANYONE?

MR. RATCLIFFE IF I COULD RESPOND, LET ME REITERATE.

I HAVE ONLY ONE MINUTE LEFT.

I KNOW --

I HAVE GOT 30 --

YOU ASKED THE WITNESS.

I WITHDRAW THE QUESTION.

I AM NOT HERE TO TAKE ONE SIDE OR ANOTHER.

THAT'S YOUR DECISION.

LET ME ASK YOU --

THE GENERAL WILL SUSPEND.

A MEMBER OF MY STAFF COULD HEAR PRESIDENT TRUMP ON THE PHONE ASKING AMBASSADOR SOUNDLAND ABOUT THE INVESTIGATIONS.

THE AMBASSADOR TOLD PRESIDENT TRUMP THE UKRAINIANS WERE READY TO MOVE FORWARD.

FOLLOWING THE CALL WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP THE MEMBER OF MY STAFF ASKED AMBASSADOR WHAT HE THOUGHT ABOUT UKRAINE.

THE AMBASSADOR SAID THE CH PRESIDENT TRUMP CARES MORE ABOUT THE INVESTIGATIONS OF BIDEN.

GOOD EVENING, AND WELCOME TO 'METROFOCUS,' I'M RAFAEL PI ROW MAN.

LAWMAKERS WILL BE BACK AT IT TOMORROW AS THE FORMER U.S.

AMBASSADOR TO THE UKRAINE TESTIFIES IN WASHINGTON.

THE FIRST DAY OF OPEN HEARINGS FEATURED PLENTY OF THEE AT RICKS AS MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE HEARD FROM TAYLOR THE AMERICAN DIPLOMAT IN THE UKRAINE AND GEORGE KEPT ANOTHER AMERICAN DIPLOMAT FROM THE STATE DEPARTMENT.

WHAT DID WE LEARN?

HOW IS THIS ALL LIKELY TO PLAY OUT?

JOINING US NOW WITH INSIGHT AND ANALYSIS THE IMPEACHMENT PROCESS IS JACK FORD.

JACK WHO IS A FORMER PROSECUTOR COVERED EVERY DAY OF THE:IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS.

JACK, WELCOME TO 'METROFOCUS.'

YOU AND I HAVE THESE CONVERSATIONS ALL THE TIME OFF CAMERA.

IT IS NICE TO HAVE THEM ON CAMERA ONCE IN A WHILE.

.

SO OF THE CONVERSATIONS MAYBE NOT.

LET'S START WITH THE BASICS AS IF THIS WAS THE FIRST DAY OF ONE OF YOUR CLASSES.

WHERE DOES THE CONCEPT OF IMPEACHMENT COME FROM?

HOW DID THE FRAMERS INTEND FOR IT TO BE USED?

YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT SO MUCH OF THE CREATION OF OUR DEMOCRACY OF OUR REPUBLIC IS BASED UPON WHAT WE DIDN'T LIKE ABOUT GREAT BRITAIN.

ONE OF THE THINGS WAS THAT THE FOUNDERS FOCUS ON, THE FRAMERS OF CONSTITUTION, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A CHIEF EXECUTIVE HERE.

HOW MUCH POWER IS THAT PERSON GOING TO HAVE OR NOT HAVE.

PEOPLE WANTED A MONARCHY AND OTHERS WHO WANTED JUST A FIGUREHEAD.

THEY COMPROMISED AS SO MUCH OF THE CONSTITUTION DID.

BUT THE FRAMERS DID INCLUDE A NOTION OF IMPEACHMENT.

THEY WERE CONCERNED, WHAT HAPPENS IF WE HAVE A CHIEF EXECUTIVE, A PRESIDENT WHO ESSENTIALLY GOES ROGUE?

AS A CONSEQUENCE THEY SAID WE ARE GOING TO BUILD IN A MECHME MECHANISM HERE, THE IMPEACHMENT PROCESS AND THEY ALSO SAID IT SHOULD BE RIRLY IF EVER USED.

IT IS AN EXTRAORDINARY PROCESS.

THEY MADE IT CLEAR IT SHOULD NOT BE A REPLACEMENT FOR AN ELECTION BUT IT SHOULD BE THE MANNER OF THE PUBLIC DEAL WITH SOMEONE NOT RULING IN THE WAY THAT IT IS ANTICIPATED.

THEY SAID LET'S HAVE IT HERE, HOPEFULLY WE NEVER HAVE TO USE IT BUT IT NEEDS TO BE THERE JUST IN CASE.

IT IS VERY DIFFERENT AS WE DISCUSSED EARLY THAN A CRIMINAL OR CIVIL LEGAL PROCEEDING, RYE?

THAT'S THE CRITICAL THING PEOPLE NEED REALIZE.

IT IS NOT A CRIMINAL PROCEEDING.

YOU HEAR DUE PROCESS, WHAT TYPE OF EVIDENCE, HEARSAY, DIRECT, CIRCUMSTANTIAL.

THE REALITY IS THIS IS NOT A LEGAL PROCESS.

IT MIGHT HAVE THE TRAPPINGS OF A LEGAL PROCESS IF IT GETS TO THE STAGE OF A TRIAL IN THE SENATE.

BUT THE RULES ARE CREATED BY THE CONGRESS ITSELF.

SO HER NOT GOVERNED BY THE FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE.

FOR THOSE OF US WHO REMEMBER BOTH THE CLINTON IMPEACHMENT AND THE NIXON IMPEACHMENT PROCESS.

YOU AND I ARE OLD ENOUGH TO REMEMBER BOTH OF THOSE.

UNFORTUNATELY, TRUE.

THIS ONE LOOKS QUITE DIFFERENT.

YES.

WHAT ARE THE DIFFERENCES?

DO THEY MATTER.

I THINK THE PROCESS HAS BEEN DIFFERENT SO FAR.

AGAIN, JUST BECAUSE IT IS DIFFERENT DOESN'T MEAN -- I AM NOT TAKING A SIDE BUT YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND BECAUSE IT MIGHT BE DIFFERENT DOESN'T MEAN THAT IT IS NOT INEFFECTIVE OR NOT APPROPRIATE.

IF YOU REMEMBER, WITH PRESIDENT NIXON, THIS ALL CAME FROM A CRIMINAL EVENT, A BURGLARY, A BREAK-IN.

THEN IT UNFOLDED AND EVENTUALLY THE CHARGES THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN FILED AGAINST PRESIDENT NIXON IF HE DIDN'T RESIGN WOULD HAVE HAD TO DO WITH OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE AND CRIMINAL EVEN.

IF YOU REMEMBER WITH PRESIDENT CLINTON'S IMPEACHMENT.

IT ALL CAME FROM THE STARR REPORT, THE STARR INVESTIGATION THAT STARTED WITH WHITEWATER AND MOVEDAN TO SO MANY DIFFERENT THINGS.

THAT'S RIGHT YOU.

DIDN'T HAVE THESE PRELIMINARY HEARINGS USUALLY DONE BY THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE THAT YOU SAW WITH PRESIDENT NIXON.

ESSENTIALLY CONGRESS TOOK THAT REPORT AND SAID WE WILL USE THAT NOW TO DECIDE HOW FAR WE ARE GOING TO GO.

AND THEY ENDED UP GETTING TWO CHARGES COMING OUT OF CONGRESS AND THAT WERE TRIED BY THE SENATE.

HERE YOU HAVE SORT OF A MIX OF THOSE THINGS.

YOU HAVE INVESTIGATIONS THAT HAD BEGUN.

NOT THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE.

THEY WILL ESSENTIALLY GET WHATEVER INFORMATION IS GENERATED FROM THIS OTHER COMMITTEE THAT'S DOING THE HEARING.

AND THEN THEY WILL MAKE A DETERMINATION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THE FIRST QUESTION IS SHOULD THE PRESIDENT, PRESIDENT TRUMP, BE IMPEACHED.

PEOPLE SOMETIMES CONFUSE THE NOTION OF IMPEACHED WITH CONVICTION.

IMPEACHMENT IS LIKE AN INDICTMENT.

CONGRESS IS -- AGAIN MAKING PARALLELS, ALMOST LIKE A GRAND JURY, THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

IF THEY DECIDE YES THERE IS SOME BASIS TO CHARGE PRESIDENT TRUMP WITH SOMETHING, IT THEN GETS HANDED OFF TO THE SENATE AND THE SENATE COULD CONDUCT THE TRIAL.

WHAT ARE THE CRIMES, OR THE OFFENSES THAT HOUSE DEMOCRATS ARE CHARGING THE PRESIDENT WITH?

WHAT DO THEY BELIEVE HE DID THAT MERITS IMPEACHMENT?

THAT'S SUCH A GREAT QUESTION BECAUSE IT IS FAIRLY COMPLEX.

THE INSTITUTION TALKS ABOUT THE GROUNDS FOR IMPEACHMENT BEING TREASON, STRAIGHTFORWARD, YOU KNOW WHAT THAT IS, BRIBERY, AND THEN THEY THROW IN OTHER HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS.

THERE IS A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A HIGH CRIME AND A MISDEMEANOR.

IT IS CONFUSING.

BAD STUFF AND NOT SO BAD STUFF.

THE FAMOUS QUOTE CAME FROM THEN CONGRESSMAN GERALD FORD.

THIS HAD TO DO WITH THE IMPEACHMENT OF PRESIDENT NIXON.

AND HE WAS ASKED, WELL, WHAT SORT OF OFFENSES CAN CONGRESS LOOK AT?

AND HIS ANSWER WAS, WHATEVER CONGRESS AT THAT MOMENT THINKS IS A PROBLEM, THINKS COULD FALL WITHIN THAT CATEGORY IS WHAT IT WILL BE.

AGAIN IT GOES BACK TO WHAT WE SAID BEFORE.

IT IS A POLITICAL PROCESS, IT IS NOT A LEGAL PROCESS.

THEY ARE LOOKING A THE POSSIBILITIES.

THESE ARE POSSIBILITIES AT THIS POINT OF AN ABUSE OF POWER, IN A THE ARGUMENT IS USING PRESIDENTIAL POWER FOR HIS OWN PERSONAL POLITICAL BENEFIT.

YEAH.

THEY ARE LOOKING A THE POSSIBILITY OF EVEN SOMETHING SUCH AS EXTORTION.

REMEMBER, EXTORTION IS I AM LEANING ON YOU TO GET SOMETHING BACK AND LEGALLY, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO GIVE IT TO ME FOR IT TO BE EXTORTION.

YOU CAN HEAR THE LANGUAGE CHANGE FROM QUID PRO QUO TO EXTORTION AND BRIBERY.

THAT'S NOT A COINCIDENCE.

YOU HAVE AN ARRAY OF POSSIBILITIES, IT WOULD DEPEND IF THEY EVER GET THERE AS TO WHAT THE HOUSE THINKS, IF THEY THINK THIS IS INAPPROPRIATE AND THEY WILL MOVE FORWARD WITH IT IF THEY GET THERE.

WHAT DO YOU THINK THE DEMOCRATS WERE ABLE TO BUTTRESS THEIR ARGUMENTS THEIR CHARGES YESTERDAY?

WHAT DEGREE WERE THE REPUBLICANS ABLE TO UNDERMINE THEM?

IT IS INTERESTING WOULD YOU SAY IT GOES BACK TO THIS IS A POLITICAL PROCESS.

IN THIS INDICATE AND AGE WE ARE HYPER POLITICIZED HYPER PARTISANSHIP.

YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND A LOT OF THIS IS POLITICAL THEATER.

I DON'T WANT TO DIMINISH WHAT HAPPENED BUT TRIALS IN SOME WAYS ARE THEATER.

I USED TO TEACH LAW STUNTS HOW TO TRY CASES AND I WOULD SAY THINK OF IT AS A PRODUCTION.

YOU ARE THE STAR, YOU ARE BRING YOUR CAST IN TO THE WITNESS STAND.

THAT'S WHAT WE ARE SEEING HERE.

IT IS POLITIC THEATER.

DOES NOT MEAN IT IS NOT SIGNIFICANT.

IT IS EXTRAORDINARILY SIGNIFICANT FOR BOTH SIDES.

I THINK WHAT YOU GOT IS THE FIRST DAY OF THEATER.

YEAH.

THERE ARE MANY MORE DAYS TO COME.

AS YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES IN A THEATRICAL PRODUCTION YOU LIKE THE FIRST ACT AND DON'T LIKE THE SECOND ACT AND VICE VERSA.

YOU ARE GETTING SOME PEOPLE -- DEMOCRATS ARE SAYING IT WAS GOOD.

REPUBLICANS, IT WAS TERRIBLE.

THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSIONS SINCE YESTERDAY ABOUT THE DEMOCRATS' DECISION TO START THE HEARINGS WITH THESE TWO DIPLOMATS WHO ADMITTED THAT THEY HAVE NEVER MET THE PRESIDENT, AND WHO ACKNOWLEDGED THAT WHAT THEY KNOW IS LARGELY FROM WHAT THEY HEARD.

WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT HAVING STARTED WITH THOSE TWO?

I THINK IF I AM PUTTING THIS LINEUP TOGETHER FOR THE DEMOCRATS I AM SAYING, THESE TWO MEN HAVE INTEGRITY.

IT IS HARD TO CHALLENGE THEIR INTEGRITY.

I THINK THE FACT THAT, REMEMBER, THEY SAID WE ARE NOT OFFERING OUR OPINIONS AS TO WHETHER PRESIDENT TRUMP SHOULD BE IMPEACHED THAT'S NOT OUR JOB.

WE ARE HERE BECAUSE WE HAVE BEEN SUBPOENAED AND WE ARE TELLING YOU WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT THIS.

FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE I THINK THEY WERE GOOD WITNESSES TO START WITH.

I AM SURE SOME WOULD SAY LET'S GO WITH THE HEAVY HITTERS THE ONE THAT WE HEARD ABOUT WHO APPARENTLY SAYS HE OVERHEARD A CONVERSATION BUT THE THOUGHT MAY BE LETS USE THAT AS OUR CLEANUP.

USING BASEBALL AM GEES.

LET'S TALK ABOUT THE WHFLER.

HE GOT A LOT OF PRESS.

IT WAS HIS COMPLAINT THAT STARTED THIS WHOLE THING.

CHAIRMAN SCHIFF SAYS HE WILL NOT CALL HIM AS A WITNESS AND HE WILL NOT ALLOW THE REPUBLICANS TO CALL HIM AS A WITNESS.

WHY?

I THINK THAT'S AN INTERESTING AND VERY COMPLEX DECISION.

YOU HAVE GOT START OFF WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE WHISTLE-BLOWER, BY FEDERAL STATUTES -- IT WAS A DIPLOMAT STATUTE, REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS JOINED TOGETHER SAYING IT IS IMPORTANT THAT WE CREATE A MECHANISM HERE BUT WE ALSO PROTECT THE PEOPLE SO THIS IS A REAL MECHANISM AND PEOPLE WILL BE WILLING TO COME FORWARD IF THEY HAVE SEEN SOMETHING WRONG.

ON THE ONE SIDE THE DEMOCRATS ARE SAYING IT WOULD DESTROY THAT NOTION OF PROTECTING HIM.

THE DEMOCRATS ARE ALSO ARGUING, LOOK, THE WHISTLE-BLOWER IS NOT THAT IMPORTANT ANYMORE.

BECAUSE THE WHISTLE-BLOWER STARTED THE PROCESS BUT IT GOT OUT US TO WITNESSES WHO NOW KNOW THING INTO RIGHT.

BUT I THINK FROM THE REPUBLICAN SIDE OF THINGS THERE IS A SYMBOLISM HERE.

THEY ARE SAYING LOOK THIS STARTED THE WHOLE PROCESS, WE SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO ASK QUESTIONS OF THE PERSON WHO STARTED THE WHOLE PROCESS.

IT IS EVEN MORE THAN THAT FOR THE REPUBLICANS BECAUSE AS MOST PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING THIS ALREADY HAVE A SENSE OF WHO -- ACCORDING TO PEOPLE WHO KNOW, IT'S KNOWN WHO HE IS, EVEN HIS NAME IS KNOWN.

AND APPARENTLY HE'S -- WELL, HIS BACKGROUND WOULD INDICATE THAT MAYBE HE IS PREJUDICED.

COMMENTS THAT HIS LAWYER MADE WERE CLEARLY SAYING I AM FOR ONE SIDE HERE.

RIGHT.

GIVE THAT, THEY WANT TO, YOU KNOW, PUT HIM IN PUBLIC TO SHOW HIS POLITICAL LEANINGS.

FAIR?

YOU UNDERSTAND WHY THEY WANT TO DO THAT.

AGAIN, IT IS THEATER.

POLITICAL THEATER.

IF I AM ON THE REPUBLICAN SIDE THE ARGUMENT IS LET'S SHOW THAT THE PERSON WHO GOT THIS STARTED IS ALSO HYPER PARTISAN.

THAT'S THEIR ARGUMENT.

TO SHOW THAT THIS THING FROM THE BEGINNING HAS BEEN BIASED.

NOW ARE PEOPLE GOING TO ACCEPT THAT?

SOME WILL, SOME WON'T.

BUT THEY ARE SAYING AT LEAST WE SHOULD HAVE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY OF HAVING HIM IN HERE AND ASKING SOME QUESTIONS.

30 SECONDS.

THE SENATE ULTIMATELY MAKES THE DECISION WHETHER THEY ARE GOING THE OUST THE PRESIDENT OR NOT.

FOR THAT TO HAPPEN, 20 REPUBLICANS HAVE TO VOTE TO CONVICT THE PRESIDENT.

IS THAT LIKELY TO HAPPEN?

DO YOU BELIEVE WITH MOST PEOPLE THAT THE HOUSE WILL INFACT IMPEACH THE PRESIDENT?

MY RESPONSE WILL BE IN RESPONSE TO THE LAST PART THAT YOU HAVE HEARD ENOUGH OF DEMOCRATIC CONCERN ABOUT THIS THAT IT WOULD NOT SURPRISE ME THAT IT COMES OUT OF THE HOUSE SAYING YES WE HAVE COME UP WITH CHARGES HERE.

HE IS IMPEACHED.

WHEN YOU GET TO THE SENATE TRIAL, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE MATH AND THE RESPONSES YOU HAVE HEARD EVEN IF YOU GET PEOPLE ON THE REPUBLICAN SIDE TO SAY -- WE HAVEN'T HAD MANY OF THEM YET TO SAY THIS WAS INAPPROPRIATE.

IT IS NOT A CONVERSATION THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES SHOULD BE HAVING, MY SENSE IS THEY WILL SAY BUT WE DON'T THINK IT IS ENOUGH TO REMOVE HIM FROM PROCESS.

THE MATH WOULD SUGGEST HERE THAT YOU ARE PROBABLY NOT GOING THE SEE REMOVAL COMING OUT OF THIS.

BUT THERE ARE STILL DAYS OF HEARINGS YET TO COME.

WHO KNOWS?

JACK, THANK SO MUCH.

WE WILL PROBABLY BE TALKING ABOUT THIS AGAIN.

I SUSPECT WE WILL.

OUGHT IN THE HOLLOWAY WE WILL PROBABLY BE TALKING ABOUT IT.

ALWAYS GOOD TALKING YOU.

> WHAT MAKES A LEADER?

AND ARE LEADERS BORN OR ARE THEY MADE?

PUL LITSER PRIZE WINNING AUTHOR AND PRESIDENTIAL HISTORIAN DORIS GOODWIN HAS SPENT THE PAST DECADES WRITING IN-DEPTH BUYIOGRAPHIES OF AMERICA'S LEADERS.

HER LATEST BOOK TITLED 'LEADERSHIP: IN TURBULENT TIMES,' SHE BRAS UPON ABRAHAM LINCOLN, TEDDY ROOSEVELT, FDR AND LBJ AND DEFINES WHAT MADE EACH THE RIGHT LEADER FOR HIS TEAM AS WELL AS TELLING WHAT ASPIRING LEADERS CAN LEARN FROM THEM.

WELCOME TO 'METROFOCUS.'

IT IS NICE TO SEE YOU.

THANK YOU.

GLAD TO BE WITH YOU.

THEY ARE SO VERY DIFFERENT, THESE FOUR CHARACTERS.

BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THEM AGAIN THROUGH THE LENS OF LEADERSHIP, DID YOU FIND SIMILARITIES AMONGST THEM THAT MAYBE HADN'T BEEN REVEALED TO YOU BEFORE?

YEAH, I THINK YOU KNOW IT IS TRUE, THEY CAME FROM ENTIRELY DIFFERENT BACKGROUNDS.

TWO OF THEM PRIVILEGED, THE ROOSEVELTS, LINCOLN AND LBJ, POVERTY, CONCERNED ABOUT ECONOMICS.

THREAT DIFFERENT TEMPERMENTS, THEY ARE AT DIFFERENT TIMES.

I THINK IT IS TRUE THAT SOMETIMES THE TEMPERAMENT FITS THE TIME.

BUT THERE WAS A FAMILY RESEMBLANCE THAT I COULD SHE WHEN I LOOKED AT THEM ALL TOGETHER OF HUMILITY.

YOU WOULDN'T THINK OF LBJ HUMILITY AT FIRST.

NOT HUMBLENESS.

IT IS THE ABILITY TO ACKNOWLEDGE ERRORS AND LEARN FROM YOUR MISTAKES.

WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE WHEN YOU SAY HUMILITY OPPOSED TO HUMBLENESS.

LINCOLN, YOU MAY THINK IT BUT NOT FOR THE OTHER THREE THAT DOESN'T POP INTO YOUR MIND.

IT DOESN'T MEAN YOU ARE MEEK OR HUMBLE.

IT IS JUST THAT YOU ACCEPT THAT HUMANS HAVE LIMITATIONS AND THAT YOU CAN LEARN FROM YOURSELF WHEN YOU MAKE MISTAKES.

TEDDY ROOSEVELT WHEN HE FIRST GOT INTO THE STATE LEGISLATURE CHUTE WILL HE RIGHT.

THEY NEVER THINK OF HIM AS HUMBLE.

THEY ALWAYS SAID HE LOVED BEING THE CENTER OF THE ATTENTION THAT HE WANTED TO BE THE BABY IN THE BAPTISM, THE BRIDE IN THE WEDDING AND THE CORPSE IN THE FUNERAL.

HE GETS IN THE LEGISLATURE, HE REALIZED HE HAD A SWELLED HEAD.

BLISTERING HEADLINES ABOUT COMPETITIONS HE MADE HEADLINES, BECAME FAMOUS.

ALL OF A SUDDEN HE COULDN'T GET ANYTHING DONE.

HE SAID HE REALIZES I HAD TO CHANGE MY WAY I WAS NOT ALLOWING MYSELF TO MAKE ANY COMPROMISE OR COLLABORATION.

THAT'S WHAT I MEAN BY HUMILITY.

WE ALWAYS HEAR FOLKS TALKING ABOUT OUR TIMES AS BEING SUCH TURBULENT TIMES.

YOU ALWAYS FORGET WHEN YOU LOOK AT THESE FOUR FIGURES -- TALK ABOUT THE TURBULENCE THAT SURROUNDED THEM, AND THEIR ASCENSION TO THE OFFICES AND WHAT THEY HAD TO DEAL WITH, ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY FIRST WALKED IN.

THINK ABOUT LINCOLN COMING INTO OFFICE.

I MEAN HE LATER SAID THAT IF HE HAD KNOWN THE TURMOIL HE WOULD FACE, THE SOUTH WAS ALREADY SECEDING BEFORE HE EVEN GOT THERE.

WAR WAS BEGINNING TO RAMP UP.

600,000 PEOPLE WOULD SOON DIE.

HE SAID HE COULDN'T HAVE THOUGHT HE COULD HAVE LIVED THROUGH IT.

OR TEDDY ROOSEVELT, TOO, COMING IN AFTER THE ASSASSINATION OF McKINLEY, THERE IS A MOOD OF REBELLION IN THE COUNTRY BECAUSE OF THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION AND THERE IS A GAP BETWEEN THE RICH AND THE POOR AND THE WORKING CLASS IS FEELING LIKE THEY ARE NOT GETTING A FAIR SHAKE.

AND THEY ARE NOT.

HE COMES IN AND HAS TO DEAL WITH ALL THAT TENSION.

THERE IS BOMBS IN THE STREET.

NATIONWIDE STRIKES GOING ON.

FDR COMING IN AT THE HEIGHT OF THE DEPRESSION WHEN HE SAID HE WAS AFRAID THE HOUSE OF CARDS MIGHT COLLAPE BEFORE HE TOOK THE OATH OF OFFICE.

LBJ HAS THE ASSASSINATION OF J FFJFK AND SO EACH OF THOSE HAD TURBULENT TIMES.

IT IS IMPORTANT FOR US TO REMEMBER THAT IN THE TIME WE ARE IN RIGHT NOW.

THEY WERE THE RIGHT PERSON FOR THE TIME AND THE CITIZENS WERE ACTIVE WHICH MAKES A BIG DIFFERENCE.

SO MANY GREAT STORIES HERE, AND SO MANY THAT MAKE YOU FEEL AS YOU SAID YOU ARE CONNECTING WITH THEM IN SOME WAYS.

I WAS FASCINATED BY WHEN YOU TALKED ABOUT WHO EACH OF THEIR HEROES WERE.

TELL ME ABOUT THAT.

IT CAME AT THE END OF THE I SUDDENLY REALIZED THERE IS LIKE THIS FAMILY TREE THAT COVERS THE WHOLE HISTORY OF OUR COUNTRY BECAUSE LBJ'S HERO WAS FDR.

HE CALLED HIM HIS POLITICAL DADDY.

HE MET HIM WHEN HE WAS RUNG FOR CONGRESS.

HE WAS IN THE NYA, THE NATIONAL YOUTH ADMINISTRATION.

AND ELEANOR ROOSEVELT HAD COME AND SAID IT WAS THE BEST PROGRAM IN THE COUNTRY.

THAT WAS HIS HERO AND HE MODELLED HIS WHOLE EARLY LIFE AS A YOUNG NEW DEALER ON FDR.

FDR'S HERO WAS TEDDY ROOFL.

HE WAS HOPING TO HAVE THE SAME TRAJECTORY AS TEDDY WHEN HE WAS A LAW CLERK AT 28.

WHEN THEY WERE ALL TALKING ABOUT WHAT IS GAG TO HAPPEN TO US.

HE SAID I WOULD LIKE TO STATE LEGISLATURE, THEN I WOULD LIKE TO BE THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE NAVY.

THEN I WOULD LOVE TO BECOME GOVERNOR AND THEN WHO KNOWS, MAYBE THE PRESIDENCY.

POLIO CUT THAT IN A DIFFERENT WAY.

TEDDY ROOSEVELT'S HERO IS ABRAHAM LINCOLN.

HE READ ALL NINE VOLUMES OF NICO LAY AND HAY AND HE WOULD TALK TO PEOPLE AND SAY HE GOT THROUGH THIS AND I CAN DO THE SAME THING.

A RIGHT AND A LEFT AND A MIDDLE.

AND HE LEARNED FROM HIM OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

AND ABRAHAM LINCOLN'S HERO WAS GEORGE WASHINGTON.

AMAZING TO THINK YOU GO FROM LBJ TO FDR, FROM FDR TO TEDDY, FROM TEDDY TO ABRAHAM LINK ON, FROM LINCOLN TO THE FIRST PRESIDENT OF OUR COUNTRY.

THE FABRIC RUINS THROUGH ALL OF THEIR LIVES.

THEY ARE DIFFERENT MEN, EACH THE ROOSEVELTS, SAME EXTENDED FAMILY, LIVES OF PRIVILEGE BUT STILL TERRIBLY DIFFERENT.

DID YOU FIND A SINGLE SORT OF CONSISTENT STRAPPED, OR A TRAIT, A LEADERSHIP TRAIT THAT IDENTIFIED EACH OF THEM.

I THINK I WOULD HAVE TO CHOOSE THAT THE MOST IMPORTANT ONE WAS EMPATHY.

AND IT IS EITHER BORN IN YOU, WHICH IT WAS I THINK FOR LINCOLN, AND MAYBE FOR LBJ, WHICH MEANS THAT YOU UNDERSTAND EITHER PEOPLE'S POINTS OF VIEW, THAT YOU CAN HAVE A FEELING ABOUT OTHER PEOPLE'S WAYS OF LIFE.

I MEAN LINCOLN FELT THAT AS A YOUNG KID.

HE WOULD WATCH HIS FRIENDS PUTTING HOT COALS ON TURTLES AND KNOWING IT WAS PRODUCING PAIN AND HE WOULD GO AFTER THEM FOR DOING THAT.

LBJ, TOO, WHEN HE WAS A YOUNG PERSON AND HE TAUGHT AT A SCHOOL AND HE SAW THE PAIN OF PREJUDICE ON THESE KIDS' FACES.

HE FELT IT EMOTIONALLY, HE DID EVERYTHING HE COULD TO MAKE THE LIVES BETTER THAT YEAR HE WAS TEACHING.

BOTH ROOFLS HAD TO DEVELOP EMPATHY, THEY LED SUCH A LIFE OF PRIVILEGE.

THEY HAD TO DEVELOP IT THROUGH POLITICS.

TEDDY SAID WHEN I WENT INTO POLITICS THE FIRST TIME IT WASN'T TO MAKE PEOPLE'S LIVES BETTER, HE JUST LIKED THE FUN OF IT BUT THEN HE SAW CHILDREN WORKING AND FACTORIES, AND SAID HE WANTED TO CHANGE THEIR LIVES.

AND FDR, WHEN POLIO HET HIM, HE SUDDENLY IDENTIFIED WITH OTHERS TO WHOM FATE DEALT AN UNFAIR HAND.

HOW TO YOU GET TO OTHER PARTS OF THE COUNTRY WHO FEEL DIFFERENT FROM YOU, HOW DO YOU HELP PEOPLE THAT ARE DIFFERENT FROM OUR REGION OR YOUR CLASS OR OUR RACE?

THEN THE ABILITY TO COMMUNICATE THAT EMPATHY IN THE TECHNOLOGY OF YOUR TIME AND BE ABLE TO PERSUADE PEOPLE TO MOBILIZE THEM TO ACTION WOULD BE THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT EMPATHY, I THINK.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE TURMOIL THAT WE ARE EXPERIENCING TODAY -- I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT JUST POLITICALLY.

I AM TALKING ABOUT BOTH SIDES OF THE ISLES, SOCIETALLY, CULTURALLY, WHICH OF THE FOUR THAT YOU CHRONICLE HERE -- WHICH OF THE FOUR DO YOU THINK WOULD BE BEST SUITED TO BE A LEADER TODAY?

I THINK IT WOULD BE TEDDY ROOSEVELT.

I MEAN THE REASON BEING THAT HIS TIME WAS SIMILAR TO OURS.

HE ALWAYS WARNED THAT THE ROCK OF DEMOCRACY WOULD FOUNDER IF PEOPLE IN DIFFERENT REGIONS OR RACES OR RELIGIONS BEGAN TO THINK OF THEMSELVES AS THE OTHER.

ET CETERA THAT DWEGS THIS OUR COUNTRY TODAY THAT I THINK -- IT IS IN A DIVISION IN OUR COUNTRY TODAY THAT UNDERPLAYS THE LARGER DIVISION THAT'S THERE.

HE KNEW HOW THE SPEAK TO PEOPLE IN DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE COUNTRY.

HE ALSO WOULD BE GREAT TWEETING.

HE HAD SHORT PHRASES, SPEAK SOFTLY AND CARRY A BIG STICK.

COULD YOU IMAGINE TEDDY ROOSEVELT TWEETING?

ABSOLUTELY.

BUT HE WOULD THINK BEFORE HE TWEETED.

HE EVEN GAVE MAXWELL HOUSE THE SLOGAN GOOD TO THE LAST DROP.

THAT'S RIGHT.

TEDDY ROOSEVELT.

I THINK MOST IMPORTANTLY WHAT HE ARGUED FOR WAS A SQUARE DEAL.

HE WAS ARGUING -- SO THERE IS PEOPLE ON THE LEFT, PEOPLE ON THE RIGHT.

HE IS SAYING I WANT THE DEAL FOR THE CAPITALISTS AND THE WAGE WORKER.

I WANT TO DEAL FOR THE RICH AND THE POOR.

IF YOU ARE RICH THAT'S FINE AS LONG AS YOU DEAL FAIRLY, IF YOU ARE A UNION GUY I WILL BE FOR YOU UNLESS YOU DEAL UNFAIRLY.

HE WOULD STAND IN THE CENTER BUT PROGRESSIVELY MOVING THE COUNTRY FORWARD.

HE IS A SENSE OF HUMOR, A DEFINITE DEPRECATING SENSE OF HUMOR.

MY FAVORITE STORY IS WHEN A JOURNALIST WROTE A REVIEW OF HIS MEMOIR.

HE SAID HE HAD SO PLACED HIMSELF IN THE CENTER OF EVERY ACTION OF THE WAR HE SHOULD HAVE CALLED IT ALONE IN CUBA.

WHAT DOES HE DO?

HE WRITES A LETTER TO THE JRMIST SAYING I REGRET TO INFORM YOU THAT MY WIFE AND INT M.A. MAT FRIENDS LOVE YOUR REVIEW OF MY BOOK.

TO YOU YOU OWE ME SOMETHING, I WANT THE SEE YOU, I WANT TO MEET YOU HE WANTED TO BE FRIENDS.

HE WAS ABLE TO BE FRIENDS WITH JOURNALISTS KNOWING THEY COULD CRITICIZE THEM AND HE COULD CRITICIZE THEM.

I THINK HE HAD THE ENERGY, HE UNDERSTOOD I MEAN IN TODAY'S WORLD, YOU HAVE TO BE SOMEWHAT THE CENTER OF ATTENTION AT LEAST AT THE MOMENT, G.I. GIVEN THE MEDIA WORLD.

HE COULD DEFINITELY BE THAT.

HE WAS THE MOST COLORFUL PRESIDENT WE HAD HAD UP TO THAT TIME.

ALSO QUESTION FOR YOU.

IN TRYING TO LEARN THE LESSONS OF HISTORY, AND WE'RE SO OFTEN TOLD THINGS SUCH AS THIS IF WE DON'T LEARN HISTORY'S LESSONS WE ARE BOUND TO REPEAT THEM.

THE NOTION OF THE PAST WHEN FAULKNER SAID THE PAST ISN'T EACH PASSED.

DO YOU GET A SENSE THAT OUR LEADERS OF TODAY -- I AM TALKING ABOUT ACROSS THE BOARD HERE -- THAT OUR LEADERS OF TODAY DON'T GRASP THAT, DON'T GRASP THE NEED TO LEARN FROM THESE MEN AND THEIR TURMOIL AND LEADERSHIP SKILLS, DON'T GRASP THE NEED TO LEARN SO THEY CAN LEAD BETTER?

YEAH, I WORRY THAT THAT'S NOT HAPPENING.

EVEN FORGETTING ONLY OUR LEADERS.

I MEAN HISTORY COURSES ARE BEING NARROWED IN A LOT OF OUR COLLEGES NOW BECAUSE OF STEM STUFF.

WHAT YOU GET FROM HISTORY AS A HUMAN BEING NOT SIMPLY AS A LEADER IS YOU SEE HOW OTHER PEOPLE DEALT WITH TROUBLE AND HOW THEY CAME THROUGH ADVERSITIES AND WHAT WERE THEIR STRENGTHS AND WHAT WERE THEIR WEAKNESSES AND I WOULD LIKE TO THINK THAT STUDYING LEADERSHIP HELPS YOU IN YOUR EVERYDAY LIVES.

AND YOU JUST NEED TO TAKE THE TIME TO GO BACK A FEW DECADES.

AND IT IS LIKE YOU LEARN FROM YOUR PARENTS AND GRANDPARENTS.

LEARN FROM LINCOLN, LEARN FROM WASHINGTON.

THESE PEOPLE KNEW SOMETHING ABOUT THE STRENGTHS OF LEADERSHIP AND SOME OF THE TECHNIQUES YOU CAN ACTUALLY FOLLOW.

WHEN I THINK ABOUT LIRCHON'S WRITING A HOT LETTER WHEN HE WAS MAD AT SOMEBODY THEN PUTTING IT ASIDE UNTIL HE COOLED DONE, NEVER SENDING IT.

HOW HELPFUL THAT WOULD BE TO KIDS WRITING EMAILS TOO QUICKLY TODAY, RIGHT.

SURE.

BROADER THAN THAT, YOU UNDERSTAND THEIR EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE WHEN THEY ARE DEALING WITH A TEAM.

HOW THEY ARE ABLE TO SHARE CREDIT AND SHOULDER BLAME.

THESE ARE HUMAN QUALITIES THAT MANY OF THEM MAGNIFY BY BECOMING LEADERS AND HOW YOU GROW THROUGH YOUR MISTAKES.

I HAVE GOT TO BELIEVE THAT EVERYBODY SHOULD LOVE HISTORY BECAUSE IT REALLY CAN TEACH YOU, TEACHES YOU ABOUT HUMAN TEACH.

ONE OF THE THINGS TEDDY ROOSEVELT SAID IF YOU WANT TO BE A HE HAD LOOER YOU HAVE TO READ BOOK.

BOOKS ARE ABOUT HUMAN NATURE, YOU READ IT IN POETRY IN PROSE IN HUMAN DRAMA.

NO MATTER WHAT YOU READ YOU HAVE TO READ THIS BOOK HERE.

AS ALWAYS, YOU TAKE US ON A FABULOUS AND VERY PERSONAL JOURNEY INTO THEIR BACKGROUNDS AND THE STORIES.

AND YOU COME AWAY -- YOU COME AWAY WHEN YOU CLOSE THE BOOK AS IF YOU ARE SAYING GOOD-BYE TO SOME FRIEND.

YOU AND I COULD TALK FOR HOURS, ALWAYS FUN CONNECT WITH YOU AND SPEND TIME TALKING TO YOU.

ANOTHER FABULOUS WORK BY DORIS.

GOOD TO SEE YOU.

THANK YOU,

'METROFOCUS' IS MADE POSSIBLE BY JAMES AND MERRYL TISCH, SUE AND EDGAR WACHENHEIM III, THE SYLVIA A. AND SIMON B. POYTA PROGRAMING ENDOWMENT TO FIGHT ANTI-SEMITISM.

BERNARD AND IRENE SCHWARTZ, BARBARA HOPE ZUCKERBERG, AND BY --

Funders

MetroFocus is made possible by James and Merryl Tisch, Sue and Edgar Wachenheim III, the Sylvia A. and Simon B. Poyta Programming Endowment to Fight Anti-Semitism, Bernard and Irene Schwartz, Rosalind P. Walter, Barbara Hope Zuckerberg, Jody and John Arnhold, the Cheryl and Philip Milstein Family, Janet Prindle Seidler, Judy and Josh Weston and the Dr. Robert C. and Tina Sohn Foundation.

WNET

© WNET All Rights Reserved.

825 Eighth Avenue

New York, NY 10019