[Applause] >> Good afternoon, everyone. And thank you for joining us for our inaugural Spotlight Interview. I'm Keren Yarhi-Milo, the Dean of the school of international public affairs here at Columbia. It is really great to see so many familiar faces with us today, distinguished guests, students, faculty, and community members. And I am excited to welcome many of you, many people tuning into our live stream from all over the world, including some SIPA prospective students. You to, let me say we cannot wait for you to join us in the fall. So thank you. [Applause] You have to do that, right [laughter]? Today's conversation is the first in a new series presented by SIPA which will spotlight the world's foremost political leaders and policymakers, executives and experts, activists and nonprofit heads as they close one chapter in their career and look toward the next. It will be an opportunity for frank reflection and a forum for in-depth discussion on urgent issues. At SIPA, we have identified five global policy challenges that serve as the framework for all of our scholarship and engagement with the world. Climate, energy, and sustainable development, inclusive prosperity and macroeconomic stability, Democratic resilience, technology and innovation, and geopolitical stability. If you have so much as glanced at the news this week, you've seen how these issues intersect and overlap to shape our world. Now more than ever, universities like Columbia, and especially leading policy schools like SIPA, have a duty to help bridge the gaps between the academic community, the private sector, the public sector, and civil society, and translate research and debate into innovative and practical solutions. In other words, I cannot imagine a better moment or two more qualified people to launch this Spotlight Interview series. Before I welcome our distinguished speakers, I want to take a moment to introduce Columbia's president Lee C. Bollinger who will say a few words. This is an exciting time at SIPA but none of it, and I can tell you because I know, would have been possible without his strong support and encouragement. It was Lee who first introduced me to Secretary Clinton and ignited this fantastic partnership. It was also his purpose that inspired our own reimagination of SIPA to make it more impactful. And on a personal note, Lee has been a wonderful mentor. He knows a thing or two about taking an ambitious vision and turning it into a reality. And what a great privilege it has been to work with him this past year as we launch the 2.0 version of our school. Even as he steps down at the end of this academic year, he will always be a part of SIPA, whether he knows it or not. And with that, it is my honor to introduce President Bollinger for some brief remarks. [Applause] >> Thank you very much, Keren. I'm delighted to be a professor at SIPA. [Laughter] So I would like to acknowledge a few things. Jonathan Levine, chair of our board of trustees. [Applause] And Cheryl Milstein, who is the chair of the Barnert board of trustees. And I would like to recognize my wife. [Applause] It is a very, very great pleasure for me to be here to introduce and participate in this way, in this event. This is true for many reasons. But I have three that I want to emphasize. Universities play a critical role in any open and democratic society. To assume that role, we must stand to some extent on the sidelines of the world. We're watchers, observers, thinkers, reflecting on what we see and detect. From that standpoint there will be some things we understand and know better than anyone, including those who are participating in the public realm. But there will be also many things that will elude our intellectual grasp, sometimes because they are known only to those active participants, and sometimes because they are beyond our methods of knowing. The fact is, you can't reason your way to know everything there is to know. Today's conversation with Secretary Clinton and Speaker Emerita Pelosi, two of the most stellar participants in the world of affairs, offers us just an extraordinary opportunity to know a bit more about our world. It's hard to even imagine a better one. The second reason why this is such a special occasion is because these are two people who have literally lived inside our consciousness during an era of immense risk to our political, legal, and social systems. And thank God for them. Strong, intelligent, sane, wise, and caring voices are in very short supply these last many years. And from my point of view, these are two of our nation's and our world's best. And the final reason it's a pleasure to be here is to recognize our wonderful school of international and public affairs, which is one of our primary points of contact and engagement with the public arena. And our energetic, gifted, and unbounded new Dean, Keren Yarhi-Milo, who brings us this historic event today. In the nine months since Keren took on this role as Dean, she has worked tirelessly to create a course she and Secretary Clinton will teach in the fall and to help the school concentrate its focus on critical areas of human need. Geopolitical stability, democratic resilience, climate, inclusive prosperity, and technology and innovation. There is enormous potential here for advances in knowledge and equally importantly, for us to emerge from the sidelines and when appropriate, participate in contribute positively in the public realm, what we at Columbia call the fourth purpose of the university. Thank you, Secretary Clinton, Speaker Emerita Pelosi, and Dean Yarhi-Milo. Thanks very much. [Applause] >> KEREN YARHI-MILO: Thank you, President Bollinger. When Secretary Clinton and I first began talking about Spotlight Interviews, we knew immediately who the first guest should be. We only asked one person, and thankfully she said yes. Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi is a master class in persistence. She started her career in politics as a mother of five, and behind the scenes volunteer, and went on to become the first woman elected as Speaker in the House. She has represented San Francisco in Congress for more than 35 years. She knows from personal experience that engaging with people you disagree with is essential in a democracy, and that there is a world of difference between discussing ideas in the abstract and implementing them in reality. As the leader of the House Democrats for two decades, she helped pass some of the most significant legislation in recent memory, including the affordable care act, Dodd-frank, the American rescue plan, the infrastructure investment and jobs act, the inflation reduction act, the CHIPS and science act and respect for marriage act. She is a staunch champion of America's national security, a respected voice in promoting democratic values abroad, and a passionate advocate for human rights. Most recently she made headlines marshaling building of dollars in security, economic, and humanitarian assistance for the people of Ukraine after Russia's unlawful invasion, and becoming the first, the first House speaker and highest ranking U.S. official to travel to Taiwan in a quarter century. We here at SIPA often tell students, you can't understand policy if you don't understand politics. And you cannot understand politics if you do not understand people. No one understands people better than Speaker Emerita Pelosi. And speaking, and speaking of highly effective leaders who have dedicated their careers to public service, of experts at the intersection of politics and policy, of gutsy women, Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton is the latest addition to the SIPA faculty. And to say we are thrilled issed to be the understatement of the century. She has served as first lady of the United States, United States Senator from New York, Secretary of State under President Obama, she was the first woman to earn a major party's nomination for President of the United States. She is also a fierce advocate for women's rights, which, as she reminded the world so powerfully more than 25 years ago, are human rights, and the rights of other marginalized groups. She has gone toe-to-toe with dictators, stood up for democracy, and been on the front lines of virtually every critical challenge facing our world today. Through her organization Onward Together, she supports a rising generation of leaders who are working on everything from racial justice to voting rights to electing young people to office. Those of us who listen to her podcasts, like myself, you and me both, also know she is a phenomenal interviewer, as you will soon find out. I personally could not have asked for a better partner in planning SIPA's future than Secretary Clinton. I pride myself in being an energetic person, but she runs circles around me, as evidenced by the video we released about the course we'll be teaching. You may or may not have seen this. Join me in welcoming Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi and Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton to the stage. [Applause] >> HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: Thank you all. Oh, thank you. Thank you. Well, it is thrilling to be here at SIPA. Thanks so much to the Dean for her tireless leadership of SIPA and the vision she has for the future. Thanks to you, Lee, for helping us all understand what the fourth purpose of the university is, and kind of charging us all to figure out how best to implement that. And thanks particularly to my long-time friend and colleague and inspiration, someone who literally has an understanding of people, politics, and policy, unlike nearly anyone else I can imagine. So we're going to get right into it, because I want you to have a chance to hear from this extraordinary leader, and to really reflect on what her leadership has meant up until this point, because there is more that lies ahead, as we all know, about her continuing commitment to the values that got her into politics, that made her so successful over such a long period of time. So Nancy, just to kind of acquaint our audience, both here in the room and then watching this online, just give us a little bit of a background about how you did get into politics, and why. And what were the particular skills that you both brought to it, but that you've developed over time? >> NANCY PELOSI: Well, first, may I just say what an honor it is to be here with you today. I'm going to tell you about the first time I met Hillary Clinton. But first I want to thank Mr. President for his leadership and hospitality, President Bollinger, is that Italian? There we are. I thought I felt comfortable. And Karen. Where is Karen? Thank you for your tremendous leadership. When we heard both of them speak, they used two words that were fraught with meaning for me. One, they both talked about reflection, reflecting and reflection, and reimagining the role of a university in all of that, and facing the challenges of your four pillars, or five pillars, climate, inclusiveness, technology and the rest. We're going to be on a first name basis, Lee, Karen, Hillary, Nancy. How little time those in the arena sometimes have for the reflection. So the interaction among universities and the public sector is very -- public, private, nonprofit, as you spelled out. I just want to acknowledge Jonathan Levine because he has been a values-based leader in our country, private sector, public sector, nonprofit sector, chairman of the board of Columbia University. [Applause] And my own daughter, Alexandra Pelosi, she's Italian-American as well. So here's the thing. I'll talk about it, because I don't really like talking about myself except as it might be an example to someone else. First of all, let me tell you the first time I met Hillary and why I'm so excited to be with her any time, but especially in this magnificent, magnificent initiative. The first time I met Hillary Clinton was in the 1970s. I was invited to Los Angeles to meet the Governor or the Governor-to-be, one way or another, of Arkansas. And his wife, or the person who invited me, said, wait until you meet her, wait until you meet her. It was meeting the Governor, but wait until you meet her [laughter]. I go to the place and a friend of mine in Los Angeles, I was like the chair -- not the chair of the whole party but northern California, which means I was a volunteer. So I go to the house, I go to the door, the door opens, who is on the other side of the door but Hillary Clinton, holding Chelsea, a baby, in her arms, a mom. I saw her first as a mom. And her commitment to Chelsea and all children has been such a hallmark of her leadership, among other things. But in the lead, whether in the nonprofit sector, whether in the public sector, she has been the champion. People ask me, what are the three most important issues facing the Congress. And I always say the same thing. Our children, our children, our children. And no one has done more in every aspect of her public and private life for our children, our children, our children, than Hillary Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Clinton. So that's why I'm so excited, because when I say to people who ask me about how to get involved in politics, I always say, know your "why." Know why you want to do this. And that will justify the time, the pain, whatever it is. And Hillary's "why" has been the children. For the children expands a whole universe of concerns. But my "why," I tell them my "why," Alexandra is my baby, she loves being called that, you can see that by the smile on her face now -- not -- is the fact that Paul and I had these five children and one in five children in America goes to sleep hungry at night, lives in poverty. I just couldn't handle that in terms of the greatest country that ever existed in the history of the world, and it still is a challenge in our country. We'll come back to some of that in our policy discussion. So I was a mom of five. I was a volunteer in politics. And then they asked me, sadly, our Congresswoman took ill, she was going to be passing away. She asked me if I would run. I was like, I've never even thought about running, I'm a behind-the-scenes. I love the issues. I know the politics. And I want to promote other people. No, you love the issues, you should be doing this yourself, this or that. So I go to Alexandra and say, Alexandra, mommy has been asked to run for Congress. I've never even thought of it, it's not a goal. They've just asked me to run for Congress. I promised I would consider it. So I just want to know from you, because these kids were 5 and 6 years and one week. I keep reminding my Archbishop of that. The four were already in college. And Alexandra was 16, she was going to be young for senior year. I love my life, I like staying here with you and dad and this and that. Or if I were to go to Congress, I would go maybe three nights a week when we're in session, four days, three nights, this or that. But any answer is good, I'm happy here and I don't even know if I'll win but they're asking me to run. To which she says, mother -- I'm saying mommy, she's saying mother, you know I'm in trouble already -- mother, get a wife. What teenage girl would not want her mother out of house three nights a week? [Laughter] So I got this other life, but still connected to the children. Why I tell you that story is, be ready, we'll talk more about what advice I might have if you ask, and you may, but be ready, you never know. You never know. You know your "why," why you want to study in SIPA, this magnificent opportunity that you have. And really what SIPA will learn from you. I'm sure the president can attest to, more than any of us, we teach and we learn from those we teach. So you bring something so incredible to the table. More on you in a bit. But right now, just be ready, because I had no thought of it. Then I went to Congress, same thing, I loved my work, appropriations, intelligence, all that have. Then they asked me to run for leadership. Why? I'm here to do my issues work. So, from housewife to House speaker, totally unintended. [Applause] >> Did you see Hillary, isn't that beautiful? >> HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: That advice is such good advice because you don't ever know, and being as prepared as you possibly can is critical. I want to turn to a few of the issues that you've been so passionate about your entire life, but particularly now that you are focused on. And for the benefit of our students and faculty and others who are watching, let's start with this little matter of democracy, because I think you and I believe that it's not just in our country, but that's where we see it most clearly. There is a concerted effort to undermine some of the very foundations of democratic governance of a democratic society. There's research, some of it done by SIPA and this university showing that half the world's democracies are back sliding, and that includes, sadly, the United States. So what do you, Nancy, view as the biggest threats and challenges facing our democracy? And what are the opportunities to try to stop that backsliding and turn it around? >> NANCY PELOSI: I appreciate that question but I also appreciate your leadership in this regard. When Secretary Clinton was in the Senate, and first lady, but especially Secretary of State, in a more recent time, she has been and at that time implemented many things showing America's support for democracy. It was her clarity and position to President Putin, the present occupier and leader of Russia, to come out in an illegal campaign, against her campaign. An illegal interference in our democracy because Hillary Clinton was the person he feared most because of the lack of democracy in Russia. That's I think self-evident, so thank you for what you have done. Two things in this regard. First of all, Lincoln said public sentiment is everything. With it you can accomplish almost anything, without it practically nothing, Jonathan has heard me say that a million times. People have to know what is at stake for them in these decisions. It can't just be somebody comes on the scene and sells them a bill of goods. No. What is the reality of it? People have to know. So for sentiment to matter, people have to know. So we have to make sure that as irresponsible and flagrant they are with the facts and misrepresentations, we have to be very strong in showing the public what is at stake even in our own country. But I do also believe that for democracy to be strong, we have to reduce the role of big dark money in politics, increase the level of civility so that more people think I might want to play a role in that. And I respect the decisions that are made by this. You can't have this horror show of the politics of destruction, which frankly began in their assault on the Clintons. That's when this began. It was horrible. It was horrible. But they knew the effectiveness of the Clintons and they had to undermine it with nasty, dirty politics. And that's when most of this started. So what we have to do is show people the value of it, on an ongoing basis, just not to assume, well, everybody knows what everybody knows. We may think they know. But we don't even have civics classes as mandated in school anymore. With a mandate, when I was -- well, it was a long time ago. But now it's an elective, if at all. So we have to always understand the fragility of democracy. It's strong in what it stands for, but fragile in terms of what its freedoms allow people to say. So we have to show young people especially the value of it. And in other countries, because they may not know. Now, what I was told at a recent -- you know, the Munich security conference, I was there this year, I had a workshop, a town hall with the speaker from Ukraine, what we were told there was, don't use the word "democracy" as much as you use the word "freedom." Interesting, isn't it? Democracy is freedom, it's about freedom. But if you talk to people in some of these countries who are not familiar with democracy, but they know what freedom means to them personally. So it's a decision. Everything is a decision. It's a decision. Hillary Clinton, President Clinton, they made a decision to be champions for this. But we all have to recognize that we -- I mean, do you know some really wonderful people, well-educated, maybe even some of them in this excellent institution, who are great, they're successful, nice people and all that, and then boom, they're way on the other side of our democracy in our own country. Why? Because they don't want to pay more taxes? Because they're believing some misrepresentation of what's going on? But we have to be vigilant in our country. Our founders had this brilliant idea of a country that would respect the value of every person. Self-evident. But our documents did not necessarily reflect that, the Constitution, except that they made it amendable. And so for the history of our country, we have always had an expansion of freedom, whether it was abolition of slavery, right to vote for men, then women. So many things. And most recently the respect for marriage and all that. Until Roe v. Wade. Now, what further evidence do you think there could be than the Supreme Court of the United States is saying to women and to families, the most personal of decisions is not theirs. So this could be one place where people see why it's important for them to pay attention, because important decisions are made every day that affect their lives. So I'm going to turn the question on Hillary. What do you think? >> HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: Well, it won't surprise you to hear that I agree with you, and I think it's really important for those of us who, whatever our backgrounds, experience, or political leanings might be, understand that there are certain fundamental values and institutions that maintain democracy, to know that we're in a fight, and that we've got to be willing to stand up and speak out and make the case, and to understand that a lot of people in our country and around the world may have taken democracy for granted, may not have understood that in politics no victory or defeat is permanent, you have to be constantly working to support the position that you take, and in this case the values and the institutions that are at stake. So although I think we have a very serious and continuing threat to democracy by really taking away freedom, and how can one have freedom if one has no right to privacy, which is what you are referring to in the Dobbs decision. How can you be a participant in our democracy if at every turn there are those who want to limit, undermine, or discount your vote? How can you feel that democracy is producing results if there is a concerted effort to try to prevent government from working to produce results? And so you have been literally in the arena, ever since you arrived, but particularly as leader and then as Speaker, up against all of those ongoing threats. And it's important, I think, for not just students but really for everyone, to understand how you, Nancy, have worked wherever you could across the aisle, because we value that, we want that to be a goal that people in public life aspire to. I certainly did it in the Senate. >> NANCY PELOSI: Yes. >> HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: I think I introduced legislation with practically every Republican, without compromising my values but trying to find common ground, but also where you have to stand your ground and say no, no further. Can you give us a couple of examples of that? >> NANCY PELOSI: I appreciate what you said about your service in the Senate and the need for bipartisanship, which we all have a responsibility to strive for. In fact I always say the country needs a strong Republican Party, not a cult, but it needs a strong Republican Party, a strong Democratic Party, but a strong Republican Party. We urge our colleagues to take back their party, because it's really important. But in the meantime, we have to strive to find common ground, respect other people's opinions, and the opinions of the people who sent them to the Congress, because they are Representatives and Senators. I call it the giant kaleidoscope, this is what I learned, 20 years, leader or Speaker, the top Democrat for 20 years, so I've seen a lot come and go. And I've seen a big change in the Republican party, in the Congress, over that time. But the fact is, is that one day of the week, and Hillary, you can attest to this or not, but one day of the week it may be this side versus that side, the next day it could be the front of the room versus the back. Everybody is a resource for you, you never know what the next vote will be and who among your own party or the other party could be that resource that makes a difference. So respect, respect, is a very important part of it. But you have to respect what you came there to do as well. And so when we have legislation that Keren was very generous in naming some of those pieces, our veterans, we had a big bill for our veterans, packed for our veterans in recent time, but the thing is that you understand that compromise is a part of what you do, but you cannot -- I'm all for high splits, let's put it that way, okay? We cannot lose the opportunity. If you fold too soon, you lose the opportunity and somebody thinks you did something great. One example, the bill that we did in the last Congress on gun violence prevention. It's a good bill. It does wonderful things. We hadn't been able to pass a bill of any consequence relating to gun violence since President Clinton was President of the United States, in 1994. Assault weapon ban. That's what this is, it's a ban on assault weapons. And that passed under the Clinton administration. And for the length of time that it was in effect, people's lives were saved, until it expired and wasn't reauthorized, and then all these deaths increased. So now we had a chance to do something in the last Congress. And it has good things, red flag has good things. It doesn't go where we need to go. But it would have been a missed opportunity not to grasp the things that were in the bill. Me, I was not so satisfied. But people like our Members whose families had suffered gun violence, they said, no, we have to take it. Lucy McBath who lost her son to gun violence said we have to take it. If it was good enough for them, just to take the bill, that's the most recent place where we knew there was much more that needed to be done. We must ban assault weapons. We couldn't in that bill, but that doesn't mean we should reject the other things that were in it. >> HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: Along with the polarization between parties, there is a real polarization that has been in many ways exacerbated by certain political voices about, if you can't get it all, then it's not worth taking anything. And I have some direct experience with this from my 2016 campaign, and the primary, because part of what you have to learn if you're in these positions of legislative responsibility, it's exactly as Nancy said. You know, some days you make coalitions with X, Y, and Z. And then a week later you're making coalitions with A, B, and C. And they're diametrically opposed, but you're looking to get, you know, to some kind of result that will move the agenda you believe in forward. And in a time of polarization, it's hard to get credit for how hard that is, how hard it is to bring people together, even in your own party, to agree to pass something that is not perfect by any means, but which does keep the issue moving forward. And so on social media, you know, extremes pay off. The more extreme a position you take, the more attention you get, the more rabbit holes you go down. And it's kind of divorced from human nature, about not just the way individuals work, but how groups of individuals work. And you've always understood that, and you've always had the ability to bring your caucus, the Democrats, or in the case of the Speaker, the House, to make decisions, when a lot of people were not really happy with the outcome, but you persuaded them. This is what we have to do. >> NANCY PELOSI: Well, I appreciate your saying that. Just anecdotally, apropos of your point, Hillary, a lot of our Members, and in my own district, you think you have -- [laughter] I say to my own constituents, you help me elect 218 people in districts like San Francisco and we can have this agenda. So when our colleagues strayed off the Internet, and God bless it, it's a double-edged sword, it's a wonderful education, all of that, but it's also shall we say unfiltered in terms of what it's putting out there. So they come in, blah blah, I say, you know what, I agree with you completely. I have those signs in my basement from 30 years ago, when I was on the street, that's what I was carrying. But now you're in Congress, and we have to make an agreement to get something done. So you bring all of that enthusiasm, all of those values, and also the value of success, to get something done in the lives of the people. A theoretical debate over here forever that does nothing for those kitchen table issues for families is a theoretical debate. And so it is, again -- now, as Leader, 20 years, and Speaker, Member impact, Member impact, Member impact, that's how my heart beats. Member impact, Member impact. What does this mean to the Members in their districts, those kitchen tables in their districts? So you must have tremendous respect and listen to their concerns. Listen to the other side of the aisle to see if we can find any common ground, and sometimes we can. And then sometimes, some members will be unhappy, and other times other members will be happy. But on the ongoing, you are making big progress. And if you recognize -- you respect them, they'll respect you, but you cannot obstruct all the time. I want to make this one point because I feel very strongly about it. People talk about polarization, and yes, it does exist. But this sprang from obstruction. Obstruction. When Barack Obama was elected President, the Leader of the Senate, Mitch McConnell, said I want to make sure that he does not have a successful Presidency. You always want the President to succeed. He's the President of the United States. You don't even know what he's putting forth. You know sort of, but you don't know how much common ground you may have. No matter what it was, just as long as he doesn't have a victory, that's success for us, regardless what have it meant in the lives of the American people. >> HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: You know, that is a part of a long-term strategy that goes back decades, as you pointed out, for people to try to roll back progress that they disagree with. They may disagree with it because it raises their taxes. They may disagree with it on religious or cultural grounds. They may disagree with it just because on a partisan basis, it doesn't seem good for them. So there's a combination of reasons why people take these positions of obstruction and put forget an agenda to try to literally turn the clock back. And you referred earlier to the role that women have played in our society, doors opening up, Constitutional amendments being passed so we could vote, legislation like Title IX so that young women had the same opportunity. It's been a long struggle, and you've been at the forefront of that from the very beginning. But it's not just in this country where we're seeing pushback on women's rights. We're seeing it most egregiously in Afghanistan and in Iran. We also see it in the war in Ukraine, the way women and children are being subjected to crimes against humanity and war crimes of all kinds. But how can we do more at this moment, Nancy, to sort of reassert the rights and opportunities of women and have the United States play a leading role in trying to do that? >> NANCY PELOSI: Well, you've been our champion on this, as you know, both in office and in the academic world in so many ways, so thank you for your leadership and the example, the path that you have shown us. The thing, when people used to say to me, sometimes they still do, what would you do -- what one thing would you do if you ruled the world? What one thing would you do? The education of women and girls. Nothing makes more of a difference in their lives, in their societies, in their culture, in their countries, and in the wellbeing of the world, of the future. Children are the future. And right now, we see, I have the Ukraine pin and the bracelet, I can't say it enough. They're using rape and assaults on women as a weapon of war to demoralize the whole country's war effort, which they're not succeeding, but that's their tactic. They're kidnapping children, taking them to places closer to Alaska than Ukraine, little children who don't know -- you know, babies. They're kidnapping children, raping women in front of their children, in front of their parents, killing them, dismembering them. Women focus on women. It's a horrible, horrible thing that's happening. In Ukraine -- excuse me, in Iran, they have a pin, I don't have that pin with me right now, I have ban assault weapons and Ukraine. This is Afghanistan, the women of Afghanistan. You know how much jewelry we always buy when we go there because the women make the jewelry. Afghanistan, what the Taliban are doing to women. Every place you look, it's ridiculous. But the thing is, is that women are becoming more involved. If you go to these -- I had 50 heads of state of African countries in December before we left, and the women, the women were asserting themselves. Not that they have any presidencies, but that they are asserting themselves in their parliaments and the rest. But we have to encourage that as a country, that our policy in terms of how we go forward. Now, I always use this Kennedy quote, because it was when I was in school. When I was in school, I went to the inauguration of President Kennedy. President Clinton has a picture with President Kennedy when he was -- >> HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: High school. >> NANCY PELOSI: High school picture. Mine was college. [Laughter] So I went to the inauguration, and everybody in the world knows that President Kennedy said to the citizens of America, ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country. You learned that in school, right? It's history to you. It was my youth. But nonetheless, the next sentence is what has stuck with me forever. You don't hear it so much. The next sentence he said to the countries of the world, ask not what America can do for you but what we can do working together for the freedom of mankind. What we can do working together. So however we approach this, it has to be, again, with respect, listening to the concerns that women have in these countries, that countries, leadership in countries who want to do something more for women can do working together, because this is the future. Everything we talked about, Keren, you've talked about climate, you've talked about inclusiveness, technology, and all of that, there's an important word in all of that. Justice. That it's done in a just way, that we have environmental justice, inclusiveness, however we form a country's government, its economics or whatever it is, and employ the technology, that there is justice in it, not just for women but for everyone including minorities in those communities. But I think that America's role has to be one that shows by example, you know, Hillary, or you may not know, what a fearful tremor that Supreme Court decision sent through the world. If this happens in America, that a woman will not even have the ability to make these decisions with her family, with her doctor, with her God, at her own kitchen table, it's an economic issue too as well as a personal and privacy issue. So we have to, by example, in our own country, show that respect for women. And again, listening to how we can help the Iranians, the Afghanis, the Ukrainians. It goes well beyond that. Trafficking. People making a living off of human trafficking of women and young girls. So all of that, we just have to shine a bright light. Lincoln, public sentiment, to show, we see you, we know what this is, and this is not going to be allowed to happen, justice will be done, a price will be paid. But we have to start with our own example. >> HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: You know, you've mentioned Ukraine. Last year, you led congressional delegations to both Ukraine and Taiwan. >> NANCY PELOSI: Yes. >> HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: And you were, as the Dean said, the highest ranking U.S. official at the time to visit Ukraine since the invasion began. You were the first House Speaker, highest ranking U.S. official to travel to Taiwan in a quarter century. Tell us a little bit about both of those decisions, to visit Ukraine and Taiwan, and what signals you think that sent and what you wanted to convey to not just Russia and China but the world. >> NANCY PELOSI: Well, thank you for the question. I went to both of those places because I was invited to go. I was invited to go early to see what was happening in Ukraine. And to tell you the honest truth, it was pretty scary. Without going into the details of the logistics and all of that, I thought we could possibly die, but it's for democracy, because these people are fighting for democracy, not just their own, but ours, but everyone's, whether you're talking about Ukraine, which would be reason enough, NATO, European Union, the United States, and the rest. That's why I'm so glad -- well, I'll go into the next part in a second. But when we went there, it was pretty scary, because you just don't know. You just don't know. But it was so inspiring. President Zelensky, so courageous, so appreciative of what the United States was doing for them, starting out with gratitude, showing the courage of the people and what they -- the integrity with which they were dealing with what we were giving them, and the challenge that they faced. And of course it was about weapons and it was about humanitarian assistance, something like 11 million people, either refugees in another country, displaced within the country or under severe attack in a war zone, so needing humanitarian assistance, some in different ways. Economic assistance, to help them pay the troops and keep the schools going, which they deserve so much credit for. And so many institutions of all learning in our country have been helpful, including Columbia University, thank you, Mr. President, for your help in the academics involved in all of this and the loss of their opportunity or the opportunity that is there. So let's hear it for Columbia University. [Applause] I'm frequently saying -- that's an applause line. And the weapons systems, what they needed, and that's the message we took back, and also the sanctions, that Russia should know that they are not getting away with raping women and all the rest of that, and violating the sovereignty of a border of a country. That whole -- you know many of the violations of the Russians. I asked a very important Russian watcher, I said, see how this war has made brutes of the soldiers, look at what they're doing, they're raping women, their kidnapping children, they're killing moms in front of children, all of that, look at what war has done to them. He said, make no mistake, make no mistake, the Russian troops don't do anything they are not ordered to do. That's shocking. So we're hoping to have sanctions not just for the individual crimes against humanity, against an individual, that is being well-documented, but also a resolution about Russia as an aggressor nation causing all of this, making Putin responsible for every one of those crimes. So Taiwan, I was invited to go there. I had been, you know, in a fight with China for a long time on climate issues -- not climate. Human rights, trade, and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. And -- but we have to work with them on the climate issues, and there are other issues where we -- so when I say that, you're just catering to the Chinese, the reason she made a fuss before I went, the week I went, four or five Senators went, he didn't say boo. I don't know what the Chinese word is, whatever the version is, but he didn't say anything. He knows I've been on his case for a long time. Nuclear proliferation is a big issue for us. We're worried about Iran and their development of a nuclear weapon. Almost everything in Iran in furtherance of making a nuclear weapon came from China, because they were continuing to send -- if you want to make a nuclear weapon, here's what you need, four things. You need technology. You need scientists. You need a delivery system. And you need intent. The only thing indigenous to Iran was intent. The rest of it largely came from China. Including bringing magnets, not that long ago, for the centrifuge for enrichment, more than you want to know on the subject. At any event, I had been, an hour a day, reading on what China is up to today from an intelligence standpoint. They told me to stop reading it at night, Hillary, because it was keeping me up at night. Read it in the morning and then go. I wasn't there to go against China. I was there to support Taiwan. I was not going to have the president of China say, oh, let's isolate Taiwan and you can be part of -- we'll keep you from going there. A democratic country, thriving democracy, climate issues, inclusiveness, the rest, the four or five pillars. It is -- that's why I went, so that they would not be isolated. Little did I know we would have the most-tracked -- what do you call it, tail number. >> HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: Oh, yeah. >> NANCY PELOSI: In the history of the world, everybody was watching our plane land there. When we got there, it was midnight, we had to get tested. By the time we left the airport at midnight, thousands of people waving American flags, it was a remarkable thing. Greg Meeks of New York was on the trip, he was totally wonderful, so values-based, as chairman at that time of the foreign affairs committee. Jim McGovern of Massachusetts, Mr. Food, you know, Mr. Hunger, because Russians were preventing the food to be going to other countries in need of -- they normally depend on food coming from Ukraine. So it was quite a remarkable trip for us. We were very happy about it. To come back to Ukraine now, very happy about that. Mr. Meeks came with me to Taiwan as well. But in any event, we have to -- if I say this over and over again, if we do not speak out for human rights in China because of commercial interests, we lose all moral authority to speak out against human rights violations any other place. If money is just the determinant. Can I tell a story? I go to see His Holiness the Dalai Lama, I've been working with the Dalai Lama for 35 years, about what's happening in Tibet. I bring a bipartisan delegation, we've always had lots of bipartisan support for human rights globally, especially religious human rights, we're talking about Buddhist. We go there and he has me sit with them while these Tibetans are coming over the mountains. This is what's happening in Tibet, it's awful, they're torturing people, they're doing this, they're kissing the hem of His Holiness. The rest of the delegation was touring the temple which I had done many times before. I was sitting with him and his interpreter, so horrible what the Chinese are doing. So after that, we have lunch, Hillary, with a lot of llamas, young llamas from this part of India, His Holiness can't be in Tibet. He gets up and speaks, I get up and speak, the chairman from the foreign judiciary committee, we're going to get visas from the appropriations committee, what they were going to do for the Tibetans in Indian and beyond and all the rest of it. And then I say, if we do not, blah blah, China, what I just said to you before. His Holiness gets up next, and you know His Holiness well, he gets up next and says to the lamas, let us all now pray for Nancy that we rid her of her negative attitudes. [Laughter] They were just kissing his hem and crying. But that's how it is. You always have to have a way, a way to -- but, so, I mean, I'm trying, I don't know. [Laughter] >> HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: I love that, that's such a great story. [Applause] You know, we solicited questions before we started, because we knew that people would have a lot. And Keren, I think you've got some questions that we're going to ask. >> NANCY PELOSI: As Keren tiers up, aren't we proud of Hillary Clinton? Isn't this a remarkable thing? [Applause] I'm always in awe of her, but this SIPA connection, and I'll announce the other thing, I don't know if that's been announced yet, all of the other wonderful things that are coming here, thank you, Mr. President, for making so much of that possible, and thank you to Keren for being such an impetus. This is wonderful. >> KEREN YARHI-MILO: This is wonderful. One of the things I love about our spotlight interviews is it allows the students not only to hear from distinguished guests and speakers but also to ask questions. And these are questions we collected from our own SIPA students. And I think you will agree that these are a very engaged bunch. Let's get to it. First name basis? Okay. So this is for you, Nancy. 2019, you were the subject of the deepfake video that went viral. Now, as we said at SIPA, one of the areas is technology and innovation. How is artificial intelligence a threat to democracy and how should the United States address the risks posed by AI? >> NANCY PELOSI: It was sort of a goofy claim that they made because I don't even drink alcohol. If they said I was overindulging in chocolate ice cream, I don't know if that's a bad thing, but at least it would have been believable. It was Facebook that did that. So any comments I make are about our own domestic platforms, the algorithm, they can do anything. And this of course leads up to the TikTok question as well, which may be here. Here's the thing. Our artificial intelligence, again, a double-edged sword. So many wonderful opportunities that could be there. But the bad use of algorithms can create any reality that you want. And I hope you haven't seen it all, because it's very fearful, to see what they can create. A reality. You just really would not know the difference unless you knew the people or just didn't trust the platform. We've had a problem with Facebook, because Facebook has a business model, it's all about making money. And they made a lot of money from the Russians in the elections in 2016. They said, we didn't know it was coming from Russia. They were paying in rubles. You had to know. And it made a difference in our election, because then they put this fake stuff, these bots, galore on it. That's not democracy. I believe freedom of the press is the most important freedom because it has transparency. You know what elected officials are doing, it holds them accountable, and all the other aspects that weigh in in a society. But this is not about the truth. Again, a wonderful opportunity in many respects. But artificial intelligence, you see now even some people putting the brakes on some of it, because it needs more discretion about it. There has to be some evaluation. Actually I was at Munich two years ago on this very subject with Huawei, we didn't want the Europeans buying into that system, because, Hillary, as a members of the armed services committee, the intelligence piece of that is very important. I have a long history, 30 years, of intelligence, being a Member, the top Democrat, and ex officio as Leader or Speaker for the last 20. I can tell you they use this information, the Chinese, for example, use this information that is on TikTok for -- could use that for espionage purposes. But it's not just TikTok. It's other algorithms as well. Now, let's just take the TikTok algorithm. I don't care about what they say about me, really, that's so trivial. I mean, with all due respect to the question, yes, it's a springboard for a question, but here's the thing with TikTok. And again, in a different way with some of our domestic platforms. In China, they have a law that says if a company is based in China, that government has access to the data. And the concern that we have in our country from an intelligence standpoint is, that data can be used for espionage purposes. If you only care about yourself as a child, you're 12, whatever you're doing, this is not a good thing for them to have on you when you apply to Columbia or wherever you apply to. You just don't know how they distort. Now, the challenge is, we would like to buy that algorithm. The Chinese will not sell it. There may have to be some way for there to be either a ban on the algorithm or a constraint on the algorithm so that people's privacy is protected and our espionage -- their espionage purposes are not fulfilled. But that's why -- they passed this law in 2016. It became the law in '17 in China, that any company that is based in China, they have access to that data. And there's more to it, but that's -- I don't want to say simplification, but that's it. >> HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: I want to just add something to that, because I think this is one of the most consequential decisions facing us as to how we're going to deal with social media, both domestic and foreign. And it is not just a question of how it will impact government or people in public life. It goes in every corner of society, in every way that you can imagine. I just want to give three quick examples. The example you asked Nancy about, so when the fake video about Nancy being drunk, which, you know, was totally -- anybody who knows her knows, craziness, but there it was, and millions of people were watching it. And I was so outraged, I called her office. Her wonderful chief of staff, Terry McAuliffe, who is here, who we adore, we have to try to get this down. And, you know, a lot of public opinion eventually convinced Twitter to take it down, as I remember, convinced YouTube, I think, to take it down. Facebook would not take it down. >> NANCY PELOSI: No, they would not take it down. >> HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: So I called Facebook, who I have somewhat of a checkered history with. [Laughter] I said, what are you doing? "We believe that our customers have the right to make up their own minds." I said, yeah, but this is not something you make up your own mind about, because this is not real. And they would not listen. So that example's a very good one. But then you think about, when Nancy uses the word "espionage," this is not just about espionage against our government. This is about espionage against businesses. So if they have all this data that people have voluntarily given on every social media platform, including ones that they control, you never know how that data will be used against you. And if you are, you know, as Nancy says, applying to Columbia, or maybe you're out of Columbia and you've got a job in some business that is causing either concern or China because they're doing something China doesn't agree with, or maybe because China wants to take it over, the capacity for extortion and blackmail based on your data, including data that is not even 100% true, becomes a huge problem. We are all going to be racing around saying, but I didn't do that, I didn't say that. Yeah, I said that, but I didn't mean this. And we are going to be in a constant state of uncertainty and instability because other people have captured so much information about us. And then the final thing is, to go to the impact on politics and governance and go back to the conversation about democracy, you know, democracy requires at least a minimal level of trust, and how do you compromise with somebody unless you have some way to trust what they're saying and what they will do, for example. So if we are going to turn our politics over to people who may be just for the heck of it are making up stuff to misrepresent leaders, or maybe because they know they can achieve it if they do, then where does it stop? There was just a trial in Brooklyn where a guy who had been one of the main -- I guess he was one of the main people running memes against me in 2016, he went from what you could consider free speech. Both Nancy and I have pretty thick skins, people say all kind of things about us. But he went from that to running a very deliberate effort to mislead people about where and how to vote. So it went from speech to action meant to subvert the election, because thousands of people who they targeted through their algorithms, oh, I can text my vote for Hillary Clinton. Thousands texted their vote. So we already know this has real world consequences. But we're just at the tip of what can happen to us because we are either incapable, unwilling, or just confused about what to do to try to rein all of this in. >> NANCY PELOSI: And it takes to us the beginning of this conversation, about democracy. It's about the money, what Facebook says is about the money, and the TikTok has even other consequences as well. But that person was found guilty. >> HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: Yes. >> NANCY PELOSI: That's a good thing. >> KEREN YARHI-MILO: Staying on the topic of democracy, the question to both of you, we have lots of international students, this is very much a global school. What advice would you give to international students looking to counter polarization in their home countries? Who wants to take it? >> NANCY PELOSI: When I'm overseas, I get invited to universities to talk with them. In fact the London School of Economics, Harvard, Cambridge, Oxford, other places as well. One of the questions that those students there ask me, Hillary, and it's so funny, it's a different year, it's a different time, they say to me, what are you going to do in America to reduce the role of big dark money in politics? And they see that as so un-Democratic. >> HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: It is. >> NANCY PELOSI: It is. It has to happen. That's what we had as our bill in the Senate, we passed it in the House again and again. That's what they ask us about here. What they do have here is something so magnificent, a vision of our founders about this great country. Men and women in uniform who have fought for that freedom and take pride in all of that. And the aspirations of our children as to the democracy that we want them to live in. So we have the tradition, the defense of it, and now our forward-thinking purpose. So Joe Biden says it well, never underestimate the strength of democratic institutions in our country. But you have to care for them. We have to care for them. So as you fight for -- maybe it's a fight for democracy or fight to strengthen democracy, to either get it or strengthen it or expand it in the countries that you are from, it's a decision. It's not anything to be taken for granted. Somebody told a story this morning that when some European said -- and Thomas Friedman wrote this, years ago, it was right around the time of the election in '16, people in America treat democracy as a football that they can kick around. It's more like a Faberge egg that you have to be very fragile about dealing with. And that's one piece of it, is value it, but recognize the fragility that is there. But it is something that I feel optimistic about. I feel optimistic because of young people who are interested. I feel optimistic because we're finally getting a bright light shining on the challenges to it. And I think we have to capture the possibilities of technologies, as you said, for justice and for the rest. But young people give me the most hope. >> HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: You know, I couldn't agree more, because I'm very encouraged by what appears to be a real political commitment on the part of young people increasingly in our country and around the world. Let me just mention a couple of things that might be relevant when you look at protecting democracy elsewhere. You know, Jacinda Ardern, prime minister of New Zealand, an absolutely superb leader, was asked one time recently before she resigned, you know, your politics is tough, but it's not as, you know, really divisive and polarized as, for example, Australia. What accounts for that? And here was your answer. We never let Rupert Murdoch have a television presence. [Laughter] Because when you have a media company that is like Facebook and like other platforms, who do not care what lies they traffic in, as long as they get ad money, you'll have consequences. >> NANCY PELOSI: That's right. >> HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: So one of the -- look, no media is perfect, and state media has its own problems. But don't go where we went, which was to largely unregulated media with no fairness doctrine, no accountability for lies unless of course these lawsuits against Fox are successful, which is, you know, up in the air, in holding them accountable for the torrent of lies about the election. So pay attention to the media environment, who's trying to get into it to manipulate it, what is their agenda, and do you want to open the door to that. That's one thing. Secondly, pay attention to some of the problems we have with our politics. Nancy has mentioned dark money. I mean, just imagine how we ended up in a place where people can put literally millions of dollars into electing or defeating candidates, and those of us who vote, let alone people who run, forget those, those of us who vote, we have no idea who is paying for those ads, who is paying to target you online. We have no idea. Do not let that happen. Try to avoid, if you can, opening up your airwaves to negative advertising. Let people talking about what they're going to be for. Let them draw accurate distinctions between their position and their opponents'. But to spend millions of dollars on ad hominem attacks, on tearing people down, it's not only distorting to the political process, it's undermining people's belief in elections. Who do they believe when they get a steady stream of negativity? And remember, negativity is much better recommended than positivity. >> NANCY PELOSI: That's right. >> HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: Finally, take a look at countries that have avoided some of what we're dealing with, that was frankly pioneered in the Brexit campaign in the UK, where false advertising, outrageous claims, dark money, all of that was really at work. I'll give you just a quick story from my election. So after 2016, and as we were slowly, understanding what had gone on online, you know, buying ads in rubles and all the algorithmic attacks and all of that, McCrone was running for his first term and his campaign called my campaign and they said, can you tell us what happened to you so we can try to avoid it, because remember, Putin was supporting Macron's opponent, Le Pen. My campaign said, here's what happened. Macron had smart folks who seeded their emails with false flags so they could determine whether or not they had been. But probably what really helped Macron was a law in France which said, no coverage of the election 72 hours before. And a lot of the people who were in on this effort to take down Macron, some of the same people who are gone after me, actually, they didn't know about that law. So they started dumping all of this phony information on the Friday before the Sunday election. But because they didn't know about the law, it got no traction. So you've got to know your own election system. You have to know how to operates. You have to know what the pressure points are. You have to learn from our problems. And, you know, it's a really important effort for young people from all over the world to try to engage in. >> NANCY PELOSI: On that score, they were involved in Brexit, the Russians. But many more countries than just the U.S. and Macron, also Brexit. Terrible. Keren Yarhi-Milo I think we have time for one more. And we cannot end this discussion without talking about this issue. This is a question to both of you. Which specific policies or initiatives do you believe are necessary to achieve greater gender parity in politics or leadership roles? Either of you want to go first? >> HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: Well. Keren Yarhi-Milo where to begin? >> HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: I do want Nancy to end with her advice to young people. >> NANCY PELOSI: Let me do that so you can have the last word, I want you to have the last word, "and one more thing." I thank you for acknowledging Terry McAuliffe, first to be chief of staff to a woman Speaker in the history of our country. [Laughter] In terms of advice to young pe people, especially women, but everybody, here's the thing I say to people. First of all, I said it earlier, know your "why." What is it? Is it your passion, is it climate, is it education, children? Is it fairness in our economic system? Is it justice in our society writ large? Whatever it is, know what makes it worth it to you to decide to do this. "Why." Know what you're talking about. You don't have to know all of it. Nobody does. You want to be current so you're up to date. If you want people to respect your judgment and follow your lead, have some standing on the issue that is your motivation. Your passion, your knowledge and judgment. Be strategic about it. How am I going to gather other people to support what I'm doing? I had to think in a strategic way about how you do it. Why, what, and how. But I want you most of all, because that's all up here, people think you can buy that message. I want you to tell them what's in your heart, the authenticity of you. The authenticity of you. The sincerity of you to want to spend your time, your opportunity, and most of you have plenty of other options, otherwise you wouldn't even be drawn to doing this, especially if you hadn't participated in SIPA. The thing is that authenticity is what young people recognize. They know a fake when they see it. Authenticity. In the history of the world, each of you, young men, young women, people of color, whatever our beautiful diversity is, nobody in the history of the world has what you have, your why, your how. Nobody is like you. Take inventory of your upbringing, your education, your exposure to ideas. Whatever it happens to be, or just what's in your heart that motivates you, and understand how important it is for you to speak out, whether to run, to help somebody else run, to get behind an issue, to make the change. But at the same time, be ready, as I said earlier, because you never know when an opportunity might be there that might lead to some other opportunity. And again, the best advice I ever received when I was running, when Alexandra told me to get a life, was to be yourself. As I said, that authentic you. That's what the world is waiting for and wants to see. I've said earlier, we must reduce the role of big dark money in politics if we're going to attract young people and people of color, people who might not have access to the same resources to run for office. But Hillary hit the nail right on the end, as usual. You cannot say to people, run for office, oh, they're going to have ads on TV saying that you're corrupt and you're drunk or whatever. See, I have enough -- been around long enough that I don't care what they said about me. But when people don't know you, enough people don't know you, they could believe some of that, because they just don't know. Especially women. Hillary, people say to me, when I encourage women to run, when I went to Congress, 23 people, 12 Democrats, 11 Republicans, now we have over 90 Democrats, they have about 30 Republicans, they're doing better, but we want more. We want more. And when we try to encourage women to run, I say, this is tough, this is not for the faint of heart, this is not for the faint of heart, and they say, I don't think our family could take the negative advertising that you go through. I said well, you know, that's because I'm -- my kid comes home crying from school because somebody saw an ad on TV? Kids bully at school, it's a very sad thing but it does happen. So we have to make sure that there's not only a rejection of it but a disregard, that people say, tell us, as Hillary said, tell us what you're about, what are you for, what are you for. And then I guess the last thing I would say in that regard is, you really need it. We always say, when women succeed, America succeeds. When any women succeed, any country succeeds. But even to the young men who are here, we need that youth at the table. It doesn't mean that women are better than men or whatever. It means that the diversity is necessary. The diversity is necessary. So know your power in this. But know the challenge. I'll just close by one of my trademark things, is that in that arena that you mentioned, Hillary, Teddy Roosevelt talked about being in the arena, you're no longer a spectator, you are now in the arena. And in the arena, you have to be ready to take a punch. But you have to be ready to throw a punch for the children. [Laughter] [Applause] >> KEREN YARHI-MILO: What a wonderful ending. Great ending. Hillary? >> HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: No, I think that's a great way to end, because you've gotten a little taste of why she's been a leader for so long. >> KEREN YARHI-MILO: So true. >> HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: Because she understands all of her why and how and when. She asks and answers those questions herself in order to put herself out there in a leadership role. And go ahead and take all the slings and arrows, but keep moving forward. And, you know, so much of what -- when we talk about politics today, you know, so many people are just so turned off or so discouraged or whatever. But I guess I would just finally end by saying, you know, Nancy and I would not have done this, she certainly would not have been a leader for as long as she has been, if it also doesn't provide enormous satisfaction and gratification, to make a difference in somebody's life, to get them health care, to get them a sewer system. To get them the chance to have solar energy instead of fossil fuels. To get them the chance to marry who they love. I mean, all of these issues are human concerns. They're not made up out of, you know, thin air. They're because we're trying to create a bigger circle of opportunity for more people to be able to live up to their potential, and to do it in a way that is fair and just. And Nancy has been really the -- you know, the avatar of that for Washington for so long. And she's been able to do it in these ridiculously high heels. [Laughter] >> KEREN YARHI-MILO: Beautiful. >> HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: If I didn't love her, I would hate her. I mean, purple. They're at least six inches. Stiletto doesn't describe them. But she's somebody who gets up every day, literally suits up and goes to work, and yes, to fight, on behalf of, you know, people who need a champion. And for that, we are eternally grateful. >> KEREN YARHI-MILO: Grateful. And we are grateful for you. [Applause] >> KEREN YARHI-MILO: And we are grateful, we are grateful for these two legends to come and launch this spotlight interview. Thank you so much. Please take a seat. Thank you for the candor and insight. Please, if you enjoyed this in live stream, thank you for being with us. If you don't mind, remain in your seats so our guests can depart. But thank you for coming and join once again in thanking Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi and Secretary Hillary Clinton. [Applause]
