>> TURNING TO THE WHITE HOUSE WHERE A 73-YEAR-OLD LEGAL STATUTE IS BEING USED TO DEFEND THE TRUMPET MINISTRATION'S IMMIGRATION CRACKDOWN.

IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT OF 1952 WAS PASSED AMID ANTI- COMMUNIST FEARS DURING THE EARLY COLD WAR.

IN THAT PERIOD OF HISTORY, IT IS THE FOCUS OF A NEW BOOK, RED SCARE.

BLACKLIST, McCARTHYISM, AND THE MAKING OF MODERN AMERICA.

THE AUTHOR AND REPORTER, CLAY RICE AND JOINS TO DISCUSS WHAT PAST POLITICAL HYSTERIA TELLS US ABOUT THE PRESENT.

>> Reporter: THANK YOU.

I THINK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.

FIRST, I GUESS FOR OUR AUDIENCE THAT MAY NOT HAVE PAID ATTENTION IN HISTORY CLASS, THE RED SCARE.

WHY DID IT HAPPEN?

WHAT WAS IT?

JUST SET THE TABLE FOR US.

>> YES.

THE RED SCARE WAS A PERIOD ROUGHLY FROM THE END OF WORLD WAR II, 1946, HE WENT FOR ABOUT A DECADE.

1957.

ALTHOUGH IT IS HARD TO PUT DATES ON THESE THINGS.

BUT IT WAS A PERIOD OF RAMPANT AND UNCHECKED ANTI-COMMUNIST HYSTERIA.

THERE WAS A REAL REASON FOR IT, LOOK, THERE WERE SOME SOVIET ESPIONAGE IN THE UNITED STATES, THERE WAS THE COLD WAR, OBVIOUSLY.

BUT IT GOT OUT OF HAND IN A PRETTY DANGEROUS WAY AND A SCARY WAY.

WHERE EVEN TEACHERS, POSTAL WORKERS WERE BEING CALLED INTO QUESTION FOR THEIR LOYALTY TO AMERICA.

>> SO, WHAT WAS THE KIND OF UNDERLYING TENSIONS THAT MADE AMERICANS WANT TO BELIEVE THAT THERE IS GOING TO BE SOVIET INFILTRATION.

WE WERE LITERALLY ALLIES WITH THE SOVIET.

>> YEAH, ONE IS A LONG AND SIMMERING CONTEXT BETWEEN THE PROGRESSIVE AMERICA THAT CAME THAT WAS ORIENTED MORE TOWARDS THE PLURALIST VISION, VERY MUCH EMBRACING WOMEN'S RIGHTS AND CIVIL RIGHTS, BUT ALSO A VERY ACTIVE GOVERNMENT.

ON THE OTHER SIDE, A CONSERVATISM THAT WENT VERY STRONGLY AGAINST THAT FOR A VARIETY OF REASONS.

SOME OF WHICH WERE PRETTY CONSPIRATORIAL.

AND THAT SIMMERED FOR A LONG TIME.

THE GREAT DEPRESSION WAS ON, ROOSEVELT WAS POPULAR.

AND AS HE SAID, THE WAR STARTED.

AND WE WERE ALLIES WITH THE SOVIET UNION.

BUT PRETTY IMMEDIATELY AFTER THAT, THINGS CHANGED DRAMATICALLY, SO THAT THE SOVIETS BECAME OUR COLD WAR ENEMIES, BUT PART OF THAT MESSAGE COMING FROM PRESIDENT TRUMAN AND FROM CONGRESS WAS THAT THIS WAR HAS TO BE FOUGHT DOMESTICALLY AS WELL.

THAT WE HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO BE 100% SECURITY MINDED.

AND SO ANYONE WHO EVEN HAS THE IOTA OF POSSIBLE QUESTIONS ABOUT THEIR LOYALTY, THEY HAVE TO BE EXCLUDED FROM, EVENTUALLY FROM SOCIETY, NOT JUST FROM, YOU KNOW, FROM SENSITIVE JOBS, BUT WE SAW PEOPLE KICKED OUT OF TEACHING JOBS, OUT OF, YOU KNOW, NOT GIVEN FISHING LICENSES BECAUSE THEY WERE SUSPECT IN SOME WAY.

I MEAN, IT GOT OUT OF HAND IN WAYS THAT WERE FUNNY OR WOULD BE FUNNY IF THEY WERE NOT SO SCARY.

>> YEAH, WHAT WAS THE KIND OF DOMINO EFFECT?

SOMETIMES WHEN YOU LOOK BACK IN HISTORY IN HINDSIGHT, YOU SAY, HOW DID THESE PEOPLE AT ALL OF THESE THINGS HAPPEN?

BUT WAS THERE KIND OF AN INCREMENTAL INCREASE OR DECREASE IN THE CIVIL LIBERTIES?

WHAT HAPPENED?

>> YES, THERE ABSOLUTELY WAS.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HAPPENED VERY EARLY ON IS PRESIDENT TRUMAN, WHO DID NOT REALLY BELIEVE IN THE THREAT OF SOVIET ESPIONAGE IS A BIG THREAT, HE KNEW THAT THERE WERE SPIES, BUT HE DID NOT THINK THAT IT WAS A PROBLEM, AND HE DID NOT THINK THE COMMUNISTS WERE ABOUT TO TAKE OVER THE COUNTRY.

BUT BECAUSE OF THAT, HE THOUGHT HE COULD ESSENTIALLY BUY OFF THE FBI DIRECTOR, J EDGAR HOOVER, BUY OFF HIS CRITICS IN CONGRESS WITH WHAT WAS TERMED A LOYALTY PARTNERING.

THEY ESSENTIALLY INVESTIGATED ANYONE WHO WANTED A JOB IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, AND ANYONE WHO WORKED IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

BUT THE PROCESS WAS VERY POORLY CONSTRUCTED.

AND VERY QUICKLY, PEOPLE WERE BEING HOUNDED FOR TINY LITTLE BLIPS AND ANONYMOUS TIPS THAT WOULD COME INTO THE FBI, ULTIMATELY TENS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE WERE THOROUGHLY INVESTIGATED.

AND THIS HAD A KNOCKDOWN EFFECT WITH THE REST OF SOCIETY.

BECAUSE AS SOON AS THE PRESIDENT SAID, THIS IS OF SUCH CONCERN THAT WE ARE GOING TO CHECK EVERYBODY, THEN OTHER INDUSTRIES FOLLOWED SUIT.

AND VERY IMPORTANTLY, A LOT OF POLITICAL OPPORTUNISTS SAW THE MOMENT AND USED THIS FEAR THAT WAS BOILING UP AS A WAY TO GO AFTER THEIR ENEMIES, RAISE THEIR OWN PROFILE, ULTIMATELY, THE SENATOR FROM WISCONSIN IS THE BEST EXAMPLE OF THIS.

HE LENT HIS NAME TO THE ERA.

BUT THERE WERE MANY OTHER PEOPLE LIKE HIM, BOTH BEFORE AND DURING HIS REIGN OF TERROR.

>> YOU KNOW, I WONDER, AND THIS WAS IN THE LIVING LIFETIMES OF SO MANY PEOPLE WHO HAD JUST WITNESSED WHAT HAPPENED IN GERMANY, WITH PEOPLE TURNING ON EACH OTHER.

BEING ASKED AND INCENTIVIZED TO TURN IN THEIR NEIGHBORS.

SO IT IS, LIKE, WE THINK ABOUT THAT LIKE SOME SORT OF BYGONE ERA.

WE READ ABOUT IT IN THE HISTORY BOOKS.

WE ARE TALK ABOUT A DECADE AND A HALF OR LESS.

>> YES.

I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IS IMPORTANT TO KEEP IN MIND WHEN WE THINK BACK TO THAT MOMENT OR MAYBE THE RECENT PAST IS HOW FRAGILE CIVIL LIBERTIES ARE, AND HOW EAGER, HOW WILLING PEOPLE ARE TO TRADE SOME CIVIL LIBERTIES FOR THE PROMISE OF SECURITY.

AND, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY GERMANY IS AN EXTREME EXAMPLE OF THAT.

BUT I THINK IN AMERICA, A LOT OF PEOPLE SAW IT AS A TRADE OFF.

IT WAS NOT THAT THEY WERE WILLING TO GIVE UP ALL CIVIL LIBERTIES, BUT MAYBE THE CIVIL LIBERTIES OF SOME PEOPLE.

MAYBE SOME OF THEIR OWN CIVIL LIBERTIES, BECAUSE THEY WERE BEING TOLD THAT THIS WAS THIS OVERWHELMING THREAT, THAT THERE WERE COMMUNISTS ALL OVER THE UNITED STATES WHO WERE POISED TO TAKE OVER.

>> THE SECOND HALF OF THE BOOK TITLE IS THE MAKING OF MODERN AMERICA.

SO, WHAT WERE THE CONSEQUENCES, WHAT ARE THE KINDS OF LONG-TERM IMPACT THAT THE RED SCARE HAD IN SHAPING THE AMERICA THAT WE LIVE IN TODAY?

>> YES, THERE ARE A COUPLE.

ONE IS THAT IT REALLY PUT IN PLACE THE RED, THE LEFT AND RIGHT DIVIDE THAT WE KNOW TODAY.

IT DID NOT CREATE IT, IT HAD ALREADY BEEN THERE.

BUT IT GAVE THIS SHARP UNDERLINE TO THIS IDEA THAT THE LEFT IS ALWAYS GOING TO BE SUSPECT FOR CERTAIN THINGS THAT HAVE DONE.

AFFILIATION WITH RADICALISM.

AND IT ALSO CREATED ON THE RIGHT A CERTAIN, OFTEN FRINGE ELEMENT THAT --NOT JUST OPPOSED TO BIG GOVERNMENT, BUT TRULY BELIEVED THE GOVERNMENT WAS EVIL.

AND SO WHILE THERE IS ALWAYS, YOU KNOW, THERE IS BIPARTISANSHIP AND HEALTHY COMPETITION IN THE MIDDLE FOR DECADES AFTER, THERE WAS ALWAYS THIS UNDERCURRENT OF TENSION THAT'S POPPED UP OCCASIONALLY.

YOU KNOW, THE GOLDWATER MOVEMENT, OR BUCHANAN IN THE 90s, I THINK THAT IS AN IMPORTANT CONTEXT.

BUT THE FLIP SIDE IS THAT WE ALSO, AT LEAST FOR A PERIOD, WE REASSERTED OUR COMMITMENT TO CIVIL LIBERTIES.

AND I THINK A LOT OF THE ACHIEVEMENTS OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT IN THE 50s AND 60s, AND THE WOMEN'S MOVEMENT, AND VARIOUS OTHER PUSHES FOR EQUALITY, AND FOR CIVIL LIBERTIES CAME OUT OF THE EXPERIENCE OF THE RED SCARE, AND THE COMMITMENT, AT LEAST ON PARTS OF THE LEFT, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DID NOT GO BACK TO THAT.

>> JUST IN READING YOUR BOOK, SEVERAL TIMES, I WAS APPRISED BY HOW THESE AUTHORITARIAN, AND IN SOME WAYS, FASCIST TENDENCIES WRAP THEMSELVES IN THE AMERICAN FLAG.

I MEAN, THE IDEA OF A HOUSE UN- AMERICAN COMMITTEE IS SO UN- AMERICAN ON ITS FACE.

RIGHT?

BUT JUST, LIKE, HOW DID WE BELIEVE THAT THIS WAS THE KEY TO BECOMING MORE AMERICAN IS TO ACT LESS LIKE AMERICANS?

>> WELL, I THINK THERE HAS ALWAYS BEEN A STRAIN OF THINKING, PARTICULARLY ON THE RIGHT, OF WHAT AMERICANISM IS.

RIGHT?

AND IT IS ALWAYS DEBATABLE, IT IS ALWAYS DEBATED.

BUT THERE IS THIS LINE ABOUT A SORT OF PURITY OF THOUGHT, PURITY AND ASSOCIATION, AND THAT THE VALUES THAT ARE INHERENT IN THE CONSTITUTION, AND OFTEN CELEBRATED BY MANY ON THE RIGHT, NOT ALL, BUT LARGELY ON THE LEFT, OVERT DISSENT AND OVER DEBATE, THESE THINGS ARE INHERENTLY DIFFICULT FOR SOME PEOPLE TO WRAP THEIR HEADS AROUND WHEN THEY HAVE THAT KIND OF NARROW COMMITMENT TO AMERICANISM.

AND SO YOU FIND SITUATIONS THROUGHOUT MODERN AMERICAN HISTORY WHEN THAT PERSPECTIVE, THAT IDEA THAT THERE IS ONE LINE TO WALK, IN TERMS OF WHAT AMERICANISM IS, WHEN THAT IS EMPOWERED, IT BECOMES VERY EASY TO DECIDE WHO STANDS OUTSIDE FROM THAT.

>> A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE LOOKING AT THESE BOOKS NOT TIME THEIR FINDING IT RELEVANT IN DIFFERENT WAYS FOR WHAT IS HAPPENING TODAY.

AND I WONDER IF THAT IS TOO MUCH OF A STRETCH.

CAN WE SEE THESE PARALLELS, ARE WE PROJECTING WHAT WE WANT, IF YOU WANT TO USE THE WORD McCARTHYISM.

WHAT ARE SOME OF THE THINGS YOU HAVE SEEN IN THE LAST MONTH AND A HALF OR SO THAT YOU MIGHT FEEL LIKE, HEY, THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE ANALOGY, THIS IS A REASONABLE PARALLEL THAT WE SHOULD BE CONCERNED ABOUT?

>> EVERY DAY, I WAKE UP AND THERE IS A NEW STORY THAT REMINDS ME OF SOMETHING FROM THAT ERA FROM MY BOOK.

THE BOOK WAS NOT INTENDED TO BE THAT WAY.

NONE OF THIS WAS, YOU KNOW, I DO NOT HAVE A CRYSTAL BALL, I WOULD NOT BE WRITING BOOKS IF I DID.

SOME PARALLELS ARE SUPERFICIAL.

PEOPLE EMPLOYING McCARTHYISM TACTICS HERE AND THERE, WHICH PEOPLE HAVE DONE FOR A LONG TIME.

>> WELL, FOR EXAMPLE, JUST LAST YEAR, SENATOR VANCE, WHEN HE WAS A SENATOR, DURING THE DEBATE, OR THE WITCH-HUNT AROUND HAITIAN IMMIGRANTS AND REFUGEES IN OHIO WHO WERE SUPPOSEDLY EATING DOGS.

AND HE WAS CHALLENGED WITH EVIDENCE SHOWING THAT WAS NOT TRUE.

AND HE SAID, WELL, IT DOES NOT REALLY, I AM PARAPHRASING.

HE SAID IT DOESN'T MATTER WHETHER THIS OR THAT ACCUSATION IS TRUE, THE LARGER POINT IS TRUE.

WHICH IS THAT IMMIGRATION IS A PROBLEM FOR THE UNITED STATES.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, ALL OF THESE FALSEHOODS ARE IN SERVICE OF A HIGHER TRUTH.

AND THAT WAS AN ARGUMENT THAT McCARTHY USED ALL THE TIME AND HIS DEFENDERS USED.

HE WOULD SAY, MAYBE I GOT THIS ACCUSATION WRONG AGAINST THIS PERSON, BUT IT IS STILL TRUE THAT THERE ARE COMMUNISTS IN THE GOVERNMENT.

AND SO I AM MAKING MISTAKES, BUT I'M TRYING TO GET TO THE TRUTH.

AND THAT IS VERY DANGEROUS.

RIGHT?

OF COURSE, HE NEVER DID FIND COMMUNISTS.

BUT PEOPLE LET HIM DO THIS BECAUSE HE CLAIMED TO BE FIGHTING FOR SOME HIGHER TRUTH.

NOW, BUT THAT, A LOT OF PEOPLE USE THAT TACTIC.

NOW, WE HAVE THIS ISSUE, AT LEAST IN THE LEGAL COMMUNITY, YOU HAVE A LOT OF LARGE FIRMS THAT ARE VERY WORRIED ABOUT ASSERTING OR DEFENDING CLIENTS WHO ARE ACCUSED OF THIS OR THAT BY THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION.

THEY ARE AFRAID OF SPEAKING OUT.

THAT HAPPENED ALL OVER THE PLACE DURING THE RED SCARE.

LAWYERS WERE VERY HARD TO FIND.

IF YOU WERE ACCUSED OF BEING DISLOYAL TO THE UNITED STATES OR ACCUSED OF BEING A SECURITY RISK, YOU CANNOT JUST TURN IT TO YOUR LAWYER.

YOU COULD NOT GO TO ANY LARGE FIRM.

THERE WERE VERY FEW PEOPLE WHO WERE WILLING TO STAND UP AND SAY, I WILL DEFEND YOU, I WILL TAKE THIS ON.

YOU KNOW, FOR THE SAME REASONS.

THEY WERE AFRAID OF LOSING CLIENTS, THEY WERE AFRAID OF, YOU KNOW, HURTING THE ATTENTION OF GUYS LIKE JOE McCARTHY.

>> SO, I WONDER IF THERE WERE TURNING POINTS THAT YOU COULD IDENTIFY NOW AT THE BENEFIT OF HISTORY THAT SAID, OKAY, THIS MOMENT STARTED TO TURN THE TIDE.

AND THESE TWO OTHER MOMENTS REALLY HELPED.

>> YEAH.

I THINK, LOOK.

GEOPOLITICS HAD A BIG PART TO PLAY.

JOSEPH STALIN DIED IN 1953.

THE SAME YEAR THAT THE KOREAN WAR ENDED.

THE COLD WAR KIND OF, YOU KNOW, IF IT WAS SIMMERING, IT WENT BACK TO JUST BEING, YOU KNOW, A LITTLE CALMER.

AND SO PEOPLE WERE WILLING, AMERICANS COULD KIND OF RELAX A LITTLE BIT.

BUT IT ALSO MATTERED THAT THROUGHOUT THE RED SCARE, PEOPLE STOOD UP.

NOT EVERYBODY.

AND OFTEN TIMES, WITH GREAT CONSEQUENCE.

BUT THE HOLLYWOOD 10 STOOD UP TO THE HOUSE UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES COMMITTEE AND WENT TO JAIL FOR IT.

DOZENS OF OTHER AMERICANS DID THE SAME THING AND WENT TO JAIL.

BUT IT MATTERED OVER TIME THAT PEOPLE STOOD UP.

EDWARD R MURROW STOOD UP TO JOE McCARTHY.

AND VERY FAMOUSLY PRODUCED A DOCUMENT, A 30 MINUTE SHOW THAT HELPED TANK McCARTHY'S POPULARITY, SHOWING THAT HE WAS A BULLY AND THAT THERE WAS EXCEPT THAT.

EARL WARREN, THE SUPREME COURT JUSTICE DROVE THE COURT TO SYSTEMATICALLY DISMANTLE ELEMENTS OF THE RED SCARE, THE TOOLS AND ARCHITECT SURE OF THE RED SCARE.

AND WHILE ALL OF THESE DID NOT HAPPEN AT THE SAME TIME, IT TOOK TIME.

AND IT EVENTUALLY HELPED REMOVE THE THREAT.

SORT OF LOWER THE FEAR.

LOOK, THE HOUSE UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES COMMITTEE WAS AROUND FOR A LONG TIME AFTER THAT.

REDBAITING WAS A TACTIC THROUGHOUT THE 1960s.

AND I WOULD SAY IT CONTINUES TO BE TODAY.

BUT THE FEAR WAS REMOVED.

AND I THINK IT TOOK ALL OF THOSE DIFFERENT ACTORS WILLING TO STAND UP FOR IT TO FINALLY COME TO AN END.

>> SO, I WONDER IF, YOU KNOW, I AM A NERD, PROBABLY LIKE YOURSELF AS WELL.

IS THERE A POSSIBILITY OF AN EDWARD R MURROW TODAY, GIVEN LANDSCAPE IS SO FRAGMENTED?

IS THERE A MOMENT LIKE THAT, THAT IS POSSIBLE?

INDIVIDUALS LIKE THAT, THAT CAN HAVE THE IMPACT GIVEN THAT WE ARE LIVING THROUGH THESE SORT OF FILTERS AND OUR OWN ECOSYSTEMS OF CONSUMPTION?

>> I THINK THERE IS.

BUT WITH THIS EXPLANATION, WHAT MURROW UNDERSTOOD WAS THAT McCARTHY WAS A NEWSPAPER GUY.

McCARTHY SUCCEEDED BECAUSE HE UNDERSTOOD HOW THE NEWSPAPER ECOSYSTEM WORKED.

HE UNDERSTOOD THAT IF HE GOT A SCOOP TO A JOURNALIST RIGHT BEFORE DEADLINE, HE COULD BASICALLY SAY ANYTHING HE WANTED BECAUSE THAT JOURNALIST WAS GOING TO ESSENTIALLY REPRINT IT WITHOUT CHECKING IT.

BUT PEOPLE NEVER SAW HIM LIVE.

OR THEY NEVER SAW HIM IN ACTION.

THEY ALWAYS SAW HIM, MAYBE A PHOTOGRAPH, USUALLY A TEXT.

AND MURROW UNDERSTOOD THAT TV WOULD BE DIFFERENT, THAT TV WAS SOMETHING WHERE HE COULD JUST, AND IF YOU WATCH THAT DOCUMENTARY, IT IS PHENOMENAL.

IS BASICALLY LONG CLIPS OF McCARTHY WITHOUT MUCH COMMENTARY FROM MURROW.

ESSENTIALLY, MURROW IS SAYING, YOU SEE, THIS IS THE GUY, THIS IS THE PERSON WHO HAS US ALL IN THRALL AND FEAR.

DOESN'T HE LOOK LIKE A BULLY?

AND IT WORKED.

SO, THE ANALOGY TODAY IS NOT ONE TO ONE.

BUT I THINK WHAT I WOULD SAY IS THAT IF SOMEONE IS GOING TO COME ALONG AND BE THAT EDWARD R MURROW, IT WILL BE SOMEONE WHO FRONTALLY BUT MENTALLY UNDERSTANDS THE ECOSYSTEM OF TODAY.

MAYBE IT IS NOT A JOURNALIST.

MAYBE IT IS AN INFLUENCER OR A POLITICIAN.

MAYBE IT IS JUST SOMEONE WHO HAS SOMETHING TO SAY AND IT GOES VIRAL.

IT IS HARD TO KNOW.

BUT I THINK THAT IS WHAT IT IS GOING TO BE.

IT WILL BE SOMEONE WHO GETS THE MOMENT IN A WAY THAT NOBODY ELSE DOES.

>> SEEING WHAT YOU ARE SEEING NOW, AND RESEARCHING WHAT YOU HAVE RESEARCHED, ARE YOU OPTIMISTIC, PESSIMISTIC, KIND OF, WHERE ARE YOU ON SEEING PARTS OF HISTORY REPEAT ITSELF?

>> I MEAN, I CAN LOOK BACK OPTIMISTICALLY AND SAY, I SEE ALL THESE SIMILARITIES BETWEEN THEN AND NOW.

AND I CAN ALSO SAY, WELL, IT ENDED.

AND IT ENDED IN PART BECAUSE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE DECIDED IN A VERY, I MEAN, THAT IS REDUCTIVE, BUT EVENTUALLY, WE CAME TO OUR SENSES AND WE SAID THAT CIVIL LIBERTY ABUSES ARE RIDICULOUS, THERE IS NO COMMUNIST THREAT.

AND YOU CAN SEE POINT IN AMERICAN HISTORY WHERE THIS HAS HAPPENED.

AND SO ONE COULD SAY, WELL, THE PRESENT MOMENT WILL CHILL OUT.

DAMAGE WILL BE DONE, BUT WE WILL GET OVER IT.

THIS WAS HARRY TRUMAN AND DWIGHT EISENHOWER'S FUNDAMENTAL BELIEF, THAT AMERICANS ARE PRAGMATIC, THEY ARE NOT GIVEN TO DEMAGOGUES FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME.

SO I CAN SAY THAT OSTOMY SICKLY.

--OPTIMISTICALLY.

PESSIMISTICALLY, I CAN LOOK AT ALL THE DIFFERENCES IN BETWEEN.

PEOPLE LOOK FOR PARALLELS, BUT THEY ALSO NEED TO LOOK FOR TODAY IS DIFFERENT THAN THINGS WE HAVE EXPERIENCED IN THE PAST.

I HOPE PEOPLE WHO READ THE BOOK WILL GO THROUGH IT AND SAY, OH, BUT NOW, IT IS LIKE THIS.

NOW THE CHALLENGE TO THE LEGAL COMMUNITY IS COMING FROM THE PRESIDENT HIMSELF.

AND THAT CHANGES THE GAME.

AND THAT LEAVES ME LESS OPTIMISTIC.

SIMPLY BECAUSE I DO NOT KNOW HOW THIS ENDS.

AND I DO NOT KNOW IF THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE WILL EVEN MATTER WHEN PUSH COMES TO SHOVE.

>> THE BOOK IS CALLED RED SCARE, BLACKLIST, McCARTHYISM AND THE MAKING OF MODERN AMERICA.

AUTHOR CLAY RISEN.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.