tv Politics and Public Policy Today CSPAN September 3, 2015 11:00am-1:01pm EDT
and got excite d because they were talking about policy. that's what americans wabt to hear is policy. they don't want the hear how someone offended you. they want to know they're sending someone up to the white house that's going to become and cool tempered, and not get mad at someone just because they criticize him. we would really have a world war if that happens. >> how would you respond? clearly making reference to trump's remarks toward megyn kelly or jeb bush? your reaction. >> yeah, i think the american people want toughness in their president. i think they're getting teared of getting rolleded at the negotiation table by the chinese, the mexicans, by a number of other countries. trump's anger is a controlled anger. he does it for effect, but if you go back to a piece that matt lay bash wrote back in 2000,
where he was speaking to an enormous group in orange county, california, he said, look, if somebody punches you, you punch them back, only harder. he comes from a tough world of manhattan real estate. people in manhattan real estate as he has said, are killers and they are. so the idea that trump is somehow out of control or doesn't do this things for effect i think is wrong. above all right now, i think we need toughness. leadership. we need somebody who won't be rolled by our adversaries around the globe. all this talk about party unity is great. but the truth is that george bush attacked reagan and reagan attacks bush. politics in the yit is not bean bag and trump is a very, very tough competitor. >> gary is first up from outside of buffalo. democrats line with rogers stone. good morning. >> yes.
good morning. mr. stone, i'm a democrat that happens to support donald trump. here's the way i see mr. trump's problem. his most difficult achievement will be to get the gop nomination. if he accomplishes that, i see a tremendous amount of support among independents and even surprisingly, i see a tremendous amount of support out there for a trump on a national ticket with democrats like me. what's your assessment? >> gary, before we get his response, can i ask you a couple of questions? >> sure. >> as a democrat, did you support barack obama in 2008? and 2012? >> yes, i did. >> and what changed your thinking about the democratic party and moved you into trump's camp? >> well, two or three things. one of the most important was
the fact that like a lot of people, we're waking up to the fact that candidates are bought and sold through this obscene campaign finance system. trump is a billionaire. he's financing his own campaign. as far as i know, nobody has bought him yet. and i could go on two or three other items. >> that's one of the big ones. the fact he is funding his own campaign is a big one for you. >> absolutely because i'm sick and tired, like a lot of my friends with campaigns being, with the candidates being baugh and sold. >> thank you. roger stone. >> well, i agree with gary. i think one of the mistakes that analysts make is they look at the republican primary electorate as monolithic. it is not. there are all different types of republicans. trump has said a number of
things that would appear to violate the republican orthodox but i think that's because he appeal tos a specific type of populous conservative. within the republican party ranks. these are the same people reagan appealed to. trump is the candidate of main street, not of wall street. he's certainly not the candidate of the financial or political elite. he does have a fight on his hands for the republican nomination because the republican establishment is quaking in their boots. literally wetting their brichs. here is a guy who can't be bought by the lobbyists, special interests, by the billionaires or superpacs or special pleaders. he's entirely financially independent. gary's right. trump can't be bought and bullied. and i think it has turned the political establishment in washington on its ear. it's interesting to me that each one of these candidates that has come out and attacked him, rick
perry, lindsey graham, and others, as soon as they attack tru trump, they trop like a stone. i do think he would have the ability to assemble the old reagan coalition in a jen election. meaning the republicans as a base, by the way, a recent poll showed him that, showed that he was getting 79% of the republicans in the two-way race. against hillary clinton. he was only trailing hillary clinton by six points, which is stroid. that number, 79% of republicans has to do to the 80s for him to win, but it's clearly headed there. but then, yes, he has to break out to the so-called reagan democrats. p white, catholic, conservative democrats and independents and i think that coalition can be reassembled, but only trump can reassemble it. >> but as you know, he has to get a fair amount of the hispanic votes. something romney failed to do back in 2012.
so, when he criticizes jeb bush for speaking in spanish, does that help or hurt if he is the nominee, in trying to secure a significant portion of the hispanic vote next fall? >> i think the key to the vote is going to be economic opportunity. job opportunity. prosperity. it's interesting, those who are here at legal immigrants are just as upset about illegal immigrants as all americans. so, trump has to make and will make an extroid nair appeal based on his ability to write this economy. he's a job creator. he's a business man. he knows how to look at the bottom line. if you think there is no fat in federal government, then you're obviously smoking something. it's going to take somebody with trump like trump with the guts to streamline the federal government, to cut out hundreds
of millions, if not trillions of dollars worth of waste. to get the economy moving. hispanic voters want the same thing all voters want. economic opportunity. they want jobs. they want a solid future for their children. they want good school, safe neighborhoods. i think trump can and will appeal to hispanic voters on that basis. >> this tweet from a viewer. meet the new chief of staff in the trump administration. yes, no, or maybe, would you sir? >> i don't think i'm cut out for government. i will pass on that opportunity. >> i do think is one of trump's greatest strengths. very much like eisenhower. trump doesn't propose to be an expert on every subject. he finds very, very good people, gets educate and hires good people and supports them, backs them. this has been one of the secrets to his business.
he has an extroid nair eye for talent, so i think you would have a very capable eye for administration. the idea of sending carl icahn or jack welsh to go negotiate with a chinese, maybe we'd come back with a win. >> ben is next. good morning, republican line, with roger stone in new york. >> good morning. you said that i like eisenhower because he's wanted us to watch out for the military complex and as far as reagan, he was a disaster. he got 250 marines killed and we went 200 years before we know what a trillion dollar debt was and reagan was so ir responsible. when he left, we had a $4 trillion debt and the stupid
farmer from basset, nebraska, called in, there's too many stupid people in the united states, they don't even know what stupid means, evidently. they vote for the wrong people who listen to all the baloney that you have to listen to nowadays. don't even own the public air waves anymore. if you want to respond, i'll listen. >> i don't think we've ever had a perfect president. reagan won the cold war, which was costing us hundreds of millions of doll lors. he restored our confidence. second to eisenhower was the second greatest president in my lifetime. it would be hard to pick a president who did effort perfectly. reagan certainly made mistake, but just remember, one man's bah loney is another's filet mingon. >> i would love to see a leader cut waste in the government.
>> yeah, trump has in his book, time to get tough, outlines two things that i think are interesting. one, there's approximately a trillion dollars sitting in federal bank accounts that every president up until barack obama, has swept into the jen fund. obama is the first president who has not touched those funds, so before you talk about cutting social security or medicaid, let's sweep all the funds that are already in the federal hands and use them for these vital programs. then secondarily, trump identifies in his book, i think it was 122 inspectors jens jen reports about waste or froud, which could be a savings of several hundred dollar, approaching a billion. it's going to take somebody with a very sharp scalpel and somebody who's not afraid to
gore oxes. all those dollars have special pleaders and spress attached to them who like things the way they are. trump has the guts to take on the status quo. i have no doubt he can trim the federal budget in way that no president has ever been able to do. >> josh barrow, of the upshot in "the new york times," has a look at what to expect when trump releases his own tax proposal, called eight things to watch for in donald trump's tax plan. also including a photograph of him in mobile, alabama, last month. we'll go to ralph from battle creek, michigan. democrats line, good morning. >> maybe you can explain to me more about the deportation plan of donald trump's. i hear the number that, anywhere between 11 million illegal aliens or donald seems think in his mind, there are 30 million. it's a little bit of dispute,
but so, would donald deport like 30 million people and would they be rounded up by like let's say police with weapons and they would go like door to door and then put them into holding places like maybe camps and then run them to the border, the mexican border or would they send them to the guatemalan border or nicaraguan border? another question, revoking of the citizenship, he seems to think, donald, donald seems to think that the 14th amendment doesn't apply anymore. is that the 14th amendment doesn't apply, so the birthright citizenship is no not accurate or is not enforced? so, tell me how to deport these, and what would be the cost? how much money, you'd be hiring
fbi agents nsi agents to deport these people and tear up families. explain to me how that would work. >> there's at least four questions there. take them one otah time. there's not in the 14th amendment that guarantees birthright citizenship. that's done stat torly. legal scholars have profound disagreements about what exactly the 14th amendment means. it is absolutely clear, however, that el chapo, his wife was smuggled into the united states to have her baby so the baby could be an american citizen, later be eligible for all the social services we guarantee for americans. we have an epidemic of this. the costs will break us if they haven't already, so it has to be dealt delt with. in terms of expelling people, i think the most fundamental piece is to seal our border.
our border is porous. there are people coming over it every day. some people like jeb bush say it can't be done. trump, who is a builder, who has built some architectural masterpieces, says it can be done. i believe trump. how you would go about deporting 11 million people, conjured up camps, that was very, very creative. but i think this is really more a question of using our computer technology to track people. as chris christie pointed out, we can track federal express packages through driver's licenses an other databases. we can find people. people who leave voluntarily, i think should get some priority about their return. but the idea is to start over, a fresh start. the details in the program are not fleshed out by trump. i do think symbolically, at least within the context of the republican party, he has hit a
very important cord. the logistics of actually doing this, that's something that's going to have to unfold in the campaign. >> houston powers is a contributor to "usa today" and also a fox news analyst has a piece this morning in "usa today," i want to share just a portion of what she wrote. donald trump, evan jell cal, scam artist is the essay and says, quote, donald trump is a lot of thing, but stupid isn't one. he determined the only way to win the republican nomination was to appeal to evan jell cal, his support for abortion, his -- that trump has emerged as their favorite candidate and basically, says that religious voters need to wise up. >> i think religious voters who take jesus christ as their personal savior believe in
redems and change. he believes what he believes today. he's forthright about the fact there was a time when he supp t supported abortion, but that a very close friend of his late in life, had a child. thought about aborting that child. did not abort that child. now, that child is thriving. and is the absolute center piece of this family. so, he's changed his mind. people are entitled to change their mind. ronald reagan was a divorced president. we, divorce, is a common day thing. no american is perfect. no christian thinks any individual is perfect. i take trump at face value in terms of what he believes today. i'm not sure what she is driving at in terms of criticism beyond the pro-life issue, but trump did i think it was in iowa, bring a photo of his first communion. the trumps have always been
religious people. i'm not going to question another man's faith. >> robert from brooklyn, new york, independent line, good morning. >> i'm calling from -- hello? >> yes, go ahead. >> okay, i'm calling to correct a -- made by mr. stone. he said reagan came from outside politics. he was governor of california before he became president. >> yes. he served two term, but majority of his life, he spent as an actor and union lead e. that's where he came from. akin to being a two-term governor of california, trump has run a billion dollar business enterprise. probably as challenging as running the state of california. again, i'm talking about where these individuals originate. it would be foolish to say that eisenhower was not political.
there's plolitics in the armimet one does not become a five star jen overnight, but they still came from the discipline outside of politics and they were both good at politics when they got there. i still believe eisenhower and reagan were the two greatest presidents of my lifetime. >> rob is joining us. democrats line. >> good morning. i just want to say that i've talked to a lot of democrats in georgia. in fact, i went up to see trump in greenville. i think democratic party is very, very solid with trump. it's time that we get a business man into the white house. that will run our government like a business. and on immigration situation, if someone broke into your house and you caught them, would you call a contractor and build them a room to live in the rest of their life? we cannot do it. let's do something about making this country great again. >> thanks for the call. roger stone, there's renewed
speculation on vice-president joe biden. what is your sense? will he jump in or stay on the sidelines? >> i don't think it matters. he's an incredibly weak candidate. last time he ran for president, he garnered 1% and dropped out. i also think he appeals to the same people hillary clinton appeals to. establishment democrats and union leaders. hillary clinton's vulnerability lies to her left, although the way she's moving, there's not a lot of room there, but this is why in a match up say with elizabeth warren, he comes out on the bottom. i still think there will be another candidate for the democratic nomination. mrs.new revelation, a new development regarding her e-mail scandal. watergate.ough the difference between the and and hillary clinton is hillary clinton destroyed the evidence. and did not and have brought him down. host: anthony on the republican
line, good morning. caller: please let me get everything out. first i want to commend and congratulate mr. stone on being employee of the year. he is certainly disconnected from mr. trump but did it in a classy way, did it with respect, and space favorably of his former employee. it with respect and speaks very favorably of his former employee.in and i think we need more stories like this. today in america. of on trump, you can argue with the delivery, with his sense of humor, you can argue whatever yo you can argue, but you can argue, you can't argue with his poll numbers. you can't argue withme i his wef with being politically correct. it's time in this country to call -- what they are. undocumented illegals.
and china, mexico, india, outsourcing for what it is.i se and that brings me to cspan. i'm m watching cspan all the ti. i see the republican coverage and i don't see much trump on cspan and i wanted to challenge, back in 2008, hillary clinton went ons cspan and said, i will pick corn in new hampshire takes .residents so, if there is the next hillaro clinton debate, i'd like to to be played by cspan and see how that could be addressed. thank you. >> anthony, thanks for the call. let roger stone respond to your first point, buthaov clearly, i you've been watching this network over the last couple of months, you know that we have been a covering trump. we were with them in alabama. a we're covering him today at 2:0d
eastern time. we have been do providing the comprehensive unfittered coverage of this campaign and will continue to do so. we take you there, we really do want to be your source and nobody else will provide you the depth of coverage. so i would take your one point because we have and will continue to cover trump and the gu candidates. roger stone, your thoughts? >> well, i appreciate the caller's sentiments.g paid i'm not in the ed rollins school of political consultants. i don't believe in getting paid, then trashing your is client. the way he trashed michele bachmann, ross hangperot, mike t huckabee. i think it's unprofessal. i have not changed my views on trump. i was honored to work on his book, the america we deserve, in 2000. i was honored to be the president of his committee that year. i was very honored to work on his current book, time to get g tough.
i think i have a very good constitutional knowledge of where trump has been on issues. and there are issues on which he's e involved. i think only a fool does not change their mind on the basis of no information. as we look at this crop of establishme establishment politicians, i don't see anybody who's bold.nau i see focussed groups and careful calculations.et. trump is a man who's working without a net. what you see is what you get. un he's completely spontaneous, uncrypted. unhandled. unmanaged.inai he is the strategist in his campaign. this is always been the case. he's a vor ray reader. if you feel strongly about something, write him a memo. sometimes, he'll agree with you, sometimes, he'll disagree.nixo there's no doubt that were e he president, he'd be the barack n
obama. >> back to your ek pxpertise working with reagan and eisenhow eisenhower. up from trumpism. t polit isn't trump's political appeal s kind of cartoon version of ri richardwi nixon? is the current candidates are to come to grips with trump. none has put the pieces together as reagan did. that is is the question of the hour. your response. >> yeah, i read that piece yesterday and i actually tweete bill kristol gets with the program. it's huge. i think what he's saying is this trump is a pragmatic conservative, not a purist. hcun so, for example, he believes we should tax hedge fund managers who are avoiding millions of dollars worth of tax. trump gets no advantage. he payshi enormous amount of
taxes. why should this special niche of financial operators making s the millions not pay? that violates the orthodoxy of many republicans. i went to a terrific dinner party at larry kudlow's house saturday and many were agast atc thisan idea.l i think it will sell to the wilg american ivpeople, pop list republican, in a general election. i'll give you another example. he did propose in 2000, that there would be a one time surtax on the super, super wealthy, dedicating all that money to deficit reduction. knock out the entire deficit ong time. again, thatr ri violated the republican orthodoxy because it was taxing with super, super rich. not the wealthy.addition the super rich.er his o trump we figured would have owed an additional $450 million in additional taxes and he was
prepared to pay it.ha had we done so, we'd be in stronger shape today. the deficit has ballooned since ta time. now, today, trump's proposal would not lodgistically or t financially be possible. it's a perfect example of trump challenging the orthodox. he's a pragmatic conservative. he wants to do what will work. i think this comes from being in business.e le >> in a preview of the next debate will take place in less than two weeks at the reagan presidential library in california. kathleen parker in her peiece i "the washington post," telling republicans it is time to take the gloves off and go after trump. karen is next.: independent line. good morning. >> i think people, the women t that come over and have babies
have the, are people that come over illegally have to wait fivn years before they can get any benefits and that's not so. all they have to do is either be pregnant or getat i pregnant so they get here and then they're available for everything.t and that's one reason we can't afford to build roads and ing pe bridges and take care of our vets and old people because we have toy cut our military, stopping people from having baby after baby that they know they can't afford then expecting us to pay for them. >> thank you, karen. >> did you want to respond? >> it was more of a statement in a question, but i think she put her finger on what is propelling the trump campaign. take the issue of veterans health care. s nobody suggested this to trump. it didn't come out of some poll or focus group.where he as he's moved around the coun y
country, everywhere he goes, he is besieged by veterans and they're telling him horror rly n stories about their inability to get health care. they're very,he very angry. yeas at barack obama and. particulary at john mccain. he's been a memberdica of the veterans affairs committee nor i 30 years.is a l 1,000 veterans died waiting for medical care. the administration tried to hide that and to this day, nobody has been held soresponsible. it's a lot like benghazi.ans somebody screws up, americans die, but nobody is held reasonabledy. the fact that trump is elevated the veterans affairs issue is a perfect example of the strength and importance of his campaignd. he hit upon this issue based on talking to average americans, our veterans health care in this country is a disgrace.vetera does anyone think this donald r trump could not build the greatest veterans health care p hospital system in the world is this i believe he can. >> next is cliff from maryland. good morning.
>> hey, good morning. i'm a democrat and yet, i'm very, very excited about donald trump.r and i think it stems for a couple of republicans. first of all, i just loathe the thought of hillary clinton.lintn it's funny i voted democrat my . whole life, but i never could vote for her and i'm excited about trump and i don't know, maybe your guest would want to comment, i've read a number of articles about these angry, y le uneducated white men, i'm a graduate, i have a graduate degree from an ivy league i am university. i've ne an been working for 30 something years and i'm not crac going to p sit there and say i'd angry. maybe i'm probably more angry at the democratic party. nomin eight years of barack obama in office and what do we have?mp. hillary clinton as the lead nominee, so, i'm very excited
about trump and i don't take alh of his rhetoric, deporting all these people seriously. this is the politician comes out. how many politicians, they promt this, they promise that, they don't do it when they get in. but i do resent the idea because i'm some kind of -- supporting trump. i think he's tapping into something and i hope he can take it all the way. >> thank you, cliff. roger stone. >> there's a growing trend in the mainstream media to try to lampoon trump's supporters as yahoos, white supremacists, red necks, angry white males. it is of course false. it's a care kaiture. mem yesterday, i did an interview with talking points memo and they asked me about several white supremacists who have come forward and said positive thingn
about trump. first of all, i think he disavows that support. secondarily, if someone supporte trump, that means they support trump's views, not that trump supports their views. i've met people across - the- country who are trump supporters. the they tend to be employeed, however, taxpayers. they tend to be the quiet people, the forgotten americans, the so-called silentre majorityo and they are very angry, angry because they don't like what's happening to america. realize they don't like the direction we are headed. they realize we're headed towards fiscal calamity, that we have a looming debt, that we are falling behind militarily. that we are bein ig made a fools in trade negotiations, with countries like china and mexico and others. and i think trump sums it up in. saying when is the last time wel won? when will america go back to winning? is trump, above all, is a winner.ink he w
in the real estate world, he is so soesuated with excellence. i just want somebody who's looking out for the united states, for our bottom line. trump has made himself an enormous amount of money. whether it's 9 billion or 10 billion or 11 billion, it's a moving tarkt because he has so n many businesses and so much economic opportunity. ric trump now can make the american people rich. he can make your family rich. my familyun itrich. he can restore the american dream. opportunity will be the key to this election.ople you don't hear much talk about it, but i think people are read to returnca to this being a prosperous and productive country. and only trump can do that. >> in that article, it indicated that you are still avising trump. >> that's not really what it ar. says. it says i still talk to him. we've been friends for 35 years.
our conversations are cordial. he's always interested in listening to other people's i i. opinions, but i have no formal or informal role in his campaign. i have been out on a media tour because i know him uniquely. i have huge affection for him and i know his strengths and i really want to educate people as to why i think, having worked s closely with him, he has the potential to be a great president and to save the country. i have no role in this campaign. zbr is one of the great thing about the cspan video library, you can check past appearances here on the network dating back to the late 1980s and this is bill clinton when he was running for president in 1991. criticizing trump.name let's watch.e >> was he p warden in the 1980s that the students nicknamed the investment banking club the th unindicted and the warden wall of fame, which honors famous alumni, kept photos of trump,
who glorified the art of the deal without productivity. the art of the deal. and the and michael mill ken. on display until one went your bankrupt and the other was on his way to jail. >> that was in 1992.t your comment? >> first of all,who bill clint' the last person in the world who should talk about unindicted.to anyonens who read peter spitzer back on clinton cash will realize they have been lining ea their pockets with the nex us of the state department and the -- which is a slush fund for griffithers, to both enrich themselves and to create a . luxury travel service for themselves. d secondarily, trump never went bruft.es into he used the bankruptcy laws in atlantic city, brought some companies into bankruptcy, which is a completely legitimate financial technique. is th in all e honesty, he saved himsf
hundreds of millions of dollars. that's what i want running the federal budget. i think it's smart. bill clinton really is the last person in the world who should be commenting on responsibility. >> from long island, new york. karen is next. republican line, good morning. s >> good morning. and nice to talk to you, mr. stone. i am a strong supporter of gret donald trump. what he caught me my attention was make america great again. some of us have lived in the ve america where we could use amea everything. there wasn't anything we ever couldn't do, and unfortunately, either people have forgotten our america or have never lived in o the can do america. all we hear is we can't do this and that. it's too expensive. it's take too long. too confusing.
everything is a down. we can't do anything. well, what i admire about mr. l trump and i pray that he does get elected is because finally, we have someone who loves america. and wants to make her great again. that we can do things. we used to say we can go to then moon and we went to the wmoon.. wept to integrate and we integrated. wept to win world war i and ii.h wept to take care of our vets, we did it. build housing, we did everything wepted to do. unfortunately, today, people toi have become so complacent. they're to used to being told we can't do anything. and we're getting that again from even the republican party. when they talk against trump. it's we can't do it because it's too expensive. how dare he think of a dream. wn how dare he have a dream to make america great again. this is exactly what the american heart wants.
wept america again. wept to be able to be proud. wept to not to stop making excuses for what we do.everyt and donald trump embodied prou everything that the american spirit is.him. and i am so proud to be supporting him. i vote, i'm ashamed to say, i'm embarrassed to say, i did vote for obama. i don't vote parden people. i vote for the person, the issue. and we needed at that time, i o was blind and i thought we needed to have an obama to straighten out the bush's problems. >> thank you for the call. >> well, the sad truth is is that the policies of the clintons and bushes and the obamas are identical.an i've come to the conclusion after many, many years, as a republican on the former young republican national chairman, i worked i pn eight national
republican presidential campaign, had the privilege of p working for three republican a presidents, but the truth is, the two parties have morphed into one. it's a big government party. it's a big war party. it's therty.g de erosion of civ liberties party. it's the big debt party. it's the big spending party. the party's endeavor to sound tl different. they tryic rhetorically to souny different, but are responsible for the decline of america. i always wanted trump to run as an independent candidate so he could criticize both parties, but i'm just happy he's running now as a republican, although he's running against the rs a republican establishment, so he's still the outsider in this race. i think he puts his finger on it when he says our leader rs weak. we're in the position we're in because our leaders d have been weak. they have made bad deals for thi united states. a c they have bought into the idea that we are aou onl country in e and things can only get worse. they cannot get better. no president has disagreed with that since reagan.
i appreciate the caller's sentiments. i think she's very typical ofto americans who are just fed up and want this country to be e fl great a again. >> you think he has staying power moving into the fall and winter? >> i do. that's really up to him. frankly, i think there needs to be further discussion of his at economic plan, t which he's promised for september and i'm very optimistic about that.abou i think he's going to have to o talk about hi world view.ne but there's a lot to talk about. he's only laid out one set of t policy prescriptions andha thatf on immigration and that is dominating the political debate so far.ou so, i thinkt ti that the great g about trump is he's always interesting. you never know what he's going to say. he's not scripted. and i think as long as he is interesting to the w voters, as long as he is engaging the voters in a way that none of these other candidates seem able to do, i think that he can have staying power. i also think we should have no
illusions about what a campaign for president of the united states costs.s fi this is a hundredna million dolr endeavor in my opinion. it i csom noteworthy that when s filed his financial disclosure form with the federal election commission, he showed he had a d net v worth just south of 10 billion, but more importantly, in very little debt and he had $358 million worth of cash or cash equivalents, so he has the money to do what is necessary and it's money with no strings on it. jeb bush has $100 million, but d that's wall street money t and every dollar in that account has a string on it. there's something those people want. trump is exactly right about this.etwork a >> as you might imagine, a lot of political junkies not only oi watch this network, but work tao here and one of the questions everyone asked before we sat u down to talk with you this morning is your ta too. i want to ask you because i know you tweeted it out. is it real and if so, when did
you get it?is e >> iqu actually have a ta too o richard nixon on my back, about the size of ia pineapple, equaa distant between my shoulders and here's why i did it. it is not an idea lonl calt statement. it's a daily reminder that in life, when things don't go your way, when you have whesetbackst knocked down, face ve to disappointments, when you think things are bleak, you have an obligation to get back up and get back in the game. that's the story of richard nixon. he was an introvert in an extrovert's business. he was a man with demon, very re flawed and very great. he segregated the public schoolr reached arms control agreements with the soviets. poured money into the african-american community, developed black capitalism.ecti founded the environmental protection agency.on
the first real environmental protection, which we needed. he was in manypr ways, a very se great rspresident, despite his many problems in failure.r. so, it's a personal reminder, i got the tatoo, artist had done for someone else.as vey a tatoo of jen pat ton, great likeness. it was very painful. but it's there as a daily remind reminder that eryou, that you nf to have the same kind of resilience, the same kind of stick to ittiveness, the same kindre o of indestructibility a nixon. philosophically, i'm more of a reagan republican. what i admire about nixon is his
t tenacity. the fact that through a difficult and long career, he d got knocked down repeatedly, but got back up. >> was nixon alive when you had the tatoo put on your back and if so, did he see it? reaction?e ti unfortunately, he had passed by the time i got the tatoo. i did it in remembrance of him. he was a very good friend and mentor of mine. to the it was president nixon who n' introduced me to the reagan people. richard nixon gave me myt politics, for which i will always be grateful. host: mr. stone, thank you for being with us. we appreciate it. guest: great to be here. host: we will have live coverage of donald trump's news conference from new york city at 2:00 eastern time on c-span television. the washington post with wrenching photos driving home
the tragedy of the syrian refugee crisis. coming up, bill frelick will be with us. on, what the iran nuclear deal means now that the president has 34 democratic votes. lawmakers return next week. this is c-span's washington journal for this thursday morning september 3. we are back in a moment. >> with a sudden death of president harding, vice president calvin coolidge takes office. grace coolidge was a very enormously popular first lady. she became a style icon. she noticed a man known as silent cal.
she use her office to bring attention to issues she cared about. grace coolidge the sunday night on c-span's original series first ladies, influence an image, examining the public and private lives of first ladies and the influence on presidency from martha washington to michelle obama. on american history tv on c-span3. >> a signature feature of book tv is our all-day coverage of book fairs and festivals from across the country with top nonfiction authors. here is our schedule. beginning this weekend, we are alive from the 15th annual national book festival from our nations capital. we are in new york for the brooklyn festival celebrating its 10th year. in early october, it is the southern festival of books in nashville. the weekend after that, we are live from austin for the
texas book festival. new the end of the month we will cover two festivals on the same weekend. the wisconsin book festival in madison. on the east coast, the boston book festival. in november, we will be in portland for word stock followed by the national book awards from new york city. at the end of november, we alive for the 18th year in a row from florida for the miami book fair international. that is a few of the fairs and festivals this fall on c-span twos book tv. >> "washington journal" continues. rightsill frelick as a program director for the organization human rights watch. good morning and thanks for being with us. i want to share with you the independent, which is a british publication. it has a photograph with the situation along the turkish border. it reads the following.
let us begin with that question. guest: it is a good question. the last time the debate was precipitated was with one of the massive drownings on the mediterranean in which hundreds of people were killed. we have been looking at numbers, numbers, numbers. , seeing the image of one child one person and saying this is not just about numbers, this is actually about individual human beings. each one has their own story and their own reasons for having been forced out of their homes or chosen to leave their homes in some cases. we need to look and understand why they are leaving and that they are human beings that need to be treated in a decent way. let us agree on that much and we can sort out how they are processed and who is doing the processing and all of the other
questions that come up. host: an estimated 350,000 have come from syria in the middle east since generate. if you look at these numbers, -- 4000refugees refugees a day in germany and greece and italy. 1000 or 2000 and great britain. how did it reach this point? guest: in the case of syrians, you have to look at the point of origin for this massive this placement of people. at the point of origin, you have a very violent war that has been going on since 2011. continues government flying helicopters over places where people have been internally displaced. there are about 8 million people this placed within syria itself, dropping barrel bombs on them, pushing them to cross difficult
crossings into jordan, lebanon, and turkey, where there are now more than 4 million refugees in that region alone. putting into perspective the number that actually reached the european union, while that is a large number of people, relatively speaking, most of the people are still displaced within syria or are in the immediately surrounding countries. others have continued to move on from there. the numbers when you actually begin to think about what will happen if this conflict continues unabated israeli something that -- is really something you should take pause and think about and should be addressed at its root. why people are fleeing from syria. that is not the end of the story. we still have afghanistan, somalia as major producers of refugees. those conflicts have been going on for 30 years. there is also economic migration coming from africa and other
places. that needs to be sorted out. host: do you think the situation long-term would be taken care of in syria, with these refugees go back to syria or will they remain in europe? guest: prior to 2011, there were no syrian asylum-seekers or economic migrants. they were not coming to europe. they simply were not they were living at home. . they were living peaceful lives. crisis a precipitated by violence and conflict. i have spoken to syrians in turkey, jordan, lebanon, serbia. many of them say they are committed to going back to their homes. they want to go back to their homes. they love syria. stress.t under the
they have been uprooted and their homes have been destroyed. they are committed to going back, but they cannot go back now. it will depend who is in control. well isis be in control? assad? they need some sense when they can go back to a place and live normal lives and feel like it is a place they can raise their children and that they can live peacefully. host: the channel which connects france to great britain has been shut down over the summer during different periods of time because of the influx of the refugees trying to move from france into southern england. we have seen the pictures over the last 24 or 48 hours in stations havein been shut down to try to stop the flow of refugees. overall, the response by the european government in general and individual countries in particular. guest: within the european union, the word union is becoming quite strained. it is each country for itself. toy have agreed in principle
a set of common standards for asylum, the cedars, the way to handle this issue. they have a system for deciding which country is responsible for examining the asylum claims. it is a system that in some ways unfair.p that are dublin says the responsibility for examining a claim rests with the country where you first entered, where you first set foot. on its face, it is an unfair set up. it insulates the countries on the interior like germany and sweden and puts the onus on countries on the external borders of the european union that often have the least capacity to actually receive people and treat them in a decent way. host: countries like bulgaria and greece. let us bring in our viewers with bill frelick. larry, you are life.
-- live. caller: you are on speaker. the situation in the middle east with the civil war in syria, iraq, and africa. isis stated they want to flood europe. you also have the tourists coming in with them. germany is brewing angela merkel. events a watershed because america's coalition will collapse. when it does, the world will behold the fourth reich. the middle east is not going back together. this is a very dangerous situation. watch the mechanism of europe change rapidly because of these asylum-seekers and the terrorists behind them. this will be a watershed event
2016.5 and guest: no one one minimizes terrorism. trying to understand where terrorists come from, how they arrive -- we have homegrown terrorists. if you are a well-funded terrorist, the last thing you will want to do is risk your life going on a boat somewhere. there are easier ways to get into the european union if you have the resources to do so. threatr the terrorist represents, that needle in the haystack is extremely difficult to find. it is extremely important to find it, but you should not have to throw the haystack completely. there are innocent people far more innocent people whose lives are at stake here. to stigmatize them with overwhelmingly
these are people who are fleeing isis and fleeing repression and somalia.l-shabab in these are people that want no part of that. they want to go to a place that people can feel they are safe. host: you can user description heart wrenching or horrific. this is a photograph in the "washington post." the body washed on the turkish or. this is a photograph of him when he was alive. you can see quite the difference and it drives home the point that he was with his family off the coast of greece when the boat capsized. his body washed ashore. this picture capturing social media yesterday and generating a lot of attention in coverage. guest: we actually have researchers that are on the ground working there.
i am heading off on saturday to join them. they really debated do we put this up on our twitter feed. said he could not look at this image of this child without thinking of his own children. he could not think of his little aboutwithout thinking what he does in the morning putting shoes on his children and getting the left shoe on the right foot and this kind of thing. ,s horrible as the image is people need to see it because what is more horrible is the reality that it represents. host: it also represents the utter fear these folks must have and the determination to flee the country under some horrible situations. we saw what happened in austria. 70 were on a truck and they all
died. guest: it is unimaginable to think to suffocate and die in that way in a place like that, but that does indicate the desperation. it indicates that people who have refugee claims, and i am not saying everyone has a legitimate claims, but those with refugee claims and do not have a safe legal mechanism for entering the european union to lots of those claims and make those cases, what they face rather than orderly mechanisms for entry are more and more obstacles to entry. what that does is it forces them into the hands of smugglers. there are people that run trucks like that that have rickety boats and overload them. they are putting their lives at risk him up with a are taking a risk because they feel desperate and because they feel they have nothing to go back to. host: our guest is with the human rights watch. g.e website is hrw.or
we will go to dorothy in new york good morning. . caller: good morning and thank you for taking my question this morning. i have been following this and my heart breaks for these people. but for them to escape the tyranny of their country to wind up in europe like in a place like hungary who does not want them, why are they not expediting it so they can go on to germany and the other countries in europe that have open doors that are expecting them, that is willing to help them. i am so angry when i look at that. let them go. this is not fair. that just escaped to come there them. you to do this to thank you so much. host: thank you. guest: the european union has place called the dublin
regulation which says the country when you first enter is the country responsible for processing the claim. they would not be able to under that rule go to germany. to her credit, chancellor merkel has criticized that rule, even though the consequence of breaking the rule is people going to her country. she projects there will be 800,000 asylum applications pending by the end of this year. she has not panicked. she has not started building fences or anything of the sort. she has called pensioners to come back to silva service. they will hire 700 new adjudicators in the final claims they will. harm this out within germany among the states, among the municipalities so not one party overwhelmed.s
the idea is hungary should not be overwhelmed by this. greece or italy should not be overwhelmed by this. it should be a shared responsibility, and it can be shared in a responsible way. you look at the gdp and population density and the capacity to process the claims. you can manage the problem. host: turkey, greece, and spain are the main entry points. this is a map from the recent addition of the economic magazine. gregory is next from virginia. good morning. caller: good morning. what i was wondering is because have done well explaining the policies and stuff like this, but this has been going on since i was a kid. refugees fleeing war-torn areas to others. this is the systemic attitude the world has in general that has not evolved generally.
we still have a problem and it comes from a race issue.if these immigrants were coming from other countries and were under different circumstances, we would not have these issues. you do not hear these issues with immigrants of different ethnic qualities. you only hear these issues with immigrants who areissues with ih different ethnic backgrounds. has anyone looked at that? has anyone address that on a global scale? i think once that issue is resolved, simple racism, then i think that will be the watershed moment that we will all have to get past all these minor problems like these refugees. if you look at who the refugees are in the trouble they are having i think that is the issue that no one wants to speak about, and i want to know, even though germany is taking the forefront, has any european country really addressed this? host: thank you greg. guest: first on the history here, we are looking at the high
commissioner for refugees, and currently almost 6 million that is refugees, internally displaced people. this rose by about 10 million just in the last year. it is the largest number of refugees in the world since the end of world war ii. so well this has been going on for decades we actually have reached a point now where the numbers are unprecedented since the second world war. the ethnicn -- from all refugees come different kinds of backgrounds, so i wouldn't characterize them as coming from one area or another. on the other hand i would not dismiss the colors concerns -- ofler's concerns in terms sensitivity. i think there is a sort of whole
us them mentality of basically relating to people that they can identify with. you see people more willing to open their homes and to provide assistance and support to people that they can relate to. i think this picture, this image of this child may help people to actually recognize the humanity, the common humanity. whatever the ethnic label that is put on a child or the religious label. i think in the case of europe i would not points to race, per se, but i do think that religion, many of these people are muslims coming from conflict and phenomenally muslim countries, is something that in a predominately christian europe has been a cause for some of the tensions and some of the concerns. this has actually been articulated by some of the leadership in slovakia, for example, saying they will take refugees that only christians. host: and many of the point our
this morning is available in an essay he has written for nbc. this is what it looks like. crisis is getting worse, here is how to fix it. available at msnbc.com. and bill frelick, it is being reported that a great number of is from iran and iraq. that's the tweet. is that true? iraq numbers have gone down somewhat but they are going up again. much largerll a number of internally displaced people within iraq, that is people that are predominately , for example, fleeing from predominately sunni aryans into fromminately -- phenomenally sunni area into predominately shia areas.
in the case afghanistan -- of afghanistan, yes. afghanistan has been consistently producing refugees since the 1970's, the end of the 1970's. themany many years countries of the world that hosted the most refugees were iran and pakistan. those were largely afghan refugees. worldthe country in the that host the largest number of refugees of any country in the entire world is turkey. that represent subtly to 1.9 million syrian refugees that are in turkey but a very large number of afghan refugees as well, not to mention somalis and others. and it ised -- estimated at just under 350,000 since january of this year. we have had one caller trying to andg race into the problem, a tweet that says it is about war and poverty, not race.
guest: i would agree with that. this war and poverty is motivated by what we would call ethnic cleansing. , wherethe in yugoslavia they were all white again, it is not race per se, but people are targeted for persecution on the basis of their ethnicity and their race. that can be a reason people sleep. i can be a reason for becoming a refugee. but political conflicts, indiscriminate violence, these are also reasons for people to flee involuntarily. people are not making a choice economicng for an opportunity but are people who have been rendered homeless by violence. comments fromr the earlier point, this is from mary, she says something has to be done. the smugglers need to be captured and jailed, tried for crimes against humanity. the rest of the european union needs to step up.
let's go to timothy, in boston. good morning. caller: good morning. ok we will move on to peter from salem, new york. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you very much to c-span for giving americans of voice. it is so important to us. my question is this. guest used an expression which indicates to me he is aligned with the u.s. state department there to -- their attempt which basically -- narrative which basically delegitimize is the aside government. government. i believe they are trying to do the same thing in syria, undermine the legitimate government there for geopolitical reasons.
they created a tremendous chaotic situation in the middle east. host: thank you. we'll get a response. watch first, human rights and me personally are not in any way, shape, or form affiliated with the state department. we are completely independent. we take no government funding and we answer to no one. we are completely independent. look at our webpage, look at the criticisms that we have made of the u.s. government, and my entire career has been quite critical of the u.s. government on many, many fronts. with respect to the question, by humanocumented rights watch, my organization, as one of the leading causes of death in the country. in fact the only party to the conflict that has the capacity to fly helicopters and drop bomse bonds, they -- bonds --
bs, they are filled with metal , and indiscriminately they kill and maim everyone in sight. again iterday -- mentioned my colleague who is actually in the region right now -- he was talking to a syrian dr. who has spent the last war years working in this little village passing people up, keeping below live. working heroically despite all of the problems and all of the conflict there, stuck with it until he finally reached the point where he was talking to a friend of his, a bond came down -- bomb came down, it hit nearby, and the man he was talking to was killed right in front of him. at that point he was so traumatized that he decided he had to leave the country. my colleague at just spoke to him yesterday in the train station in hungary where he is at the moment traps. he is trying to get to germany. this is a man who was committed to staying in syria, wanted to
stay in syria, is a doctor who had a great deal to offer, and yet was forced out by these bonds -- bombs. his specific, individual testimony about that is what propelled him out. asking thisis question. what can or what should the usa do about the situation? u.s. is a leader when it comes to humanitarian systems and refugee protection generally. united states has provided about one third of the humanitarian funding for the syrian crisis. however, the u.n. appeal for this crisis has only been one third mess. in other words, it is an over $4 billion appeal. think about -- i think about 1.6 billion has actually been committed by the countries of the world, of which the united states is funding one third.
the u.s. does this sort of on a formula basis. under the circumstances it could do more, that it really needs to be pushing allies to pony up as well. the other part of it is the sharing of the human burden. here the united states i think has really fallen short. since the beginning of the conflict in 2011 the united states has resettled only 1000 -- 1200 43 syrian refugees since the beginning of the conflict. 1243 syrian refugees since the beginning of the conflict. the quota worldwide is 70,000, which is not often met, but that is the capacity of the united states.
those are recommended to the united states and the high commission and others as being among the 6 million refugees out their the ones that most need to be brought out of terrible situations. so the united states is to do more on humanitarian front, on the refugee resettlement front, and ultimately we are talking about conflict resolution. we are talking about diplomatic failures as the security council level that have enabled these conflicts to drag on. seenis where we have not as much effort as we would like to see on the part of the united states. the u.s. has held back. i think under the obama administration consciously so. we have reached a point where the sibley can't go on. the u.s. really needs to assert leadership here and needs to rally allies and government set are not considered to be allies to basically say, this can't go on. this needs to be resolved. host: we should point out yesterday the "washington post"
pointing out the u.s. beginning drum strikes in syria. britain takes and so refugees from -- so few refugees in syria they would fit on a subway train. let's go to glenn and connecticut. we are talking about the situation across the continent of europe. good morning. caller: good morning and thinking taking my call. but i would like to say -- what i would like to say is when this conflict started president obama made a call to the world to get involved in forcing the syrian leader out diplomatically. no other nation wanted to even get involved, so the united states was left making threats. president obama got in trouble with the congress because he did not send in a troops, which was the first thing that the
of the congress wanted to do. all i am saying is we have no a presidential candidate, donald trump, who is talking about building a wall on the southern borders of america to keep refugees and immigrants from coming into this country from south america. i don't understand why it is always america that has to be a leader as far as accepting or giving other countries -- getting other countries to do things that would help solve a situation. host: thank you. we'll get a response. guest: well, the united states, for better or worse is the major superpower in the world today. so it has influenced. it has power. it can convince, using bully pulpit, using funding, providing refugee resettlement. these are tools that the united states has used for decades.
this is nothing new. this goes back as long as you can count in any of our lifetimes. looking at any number of , the united states basically in a refugee flow sets up to the plate and convinces allies that they need to take refugees. we will take refugees. we will take more than our fair share at times. it has actually served as well. refugees have done well in this country. i have seen the kids that have come in with their parents as babies and end up being valedictorian's at their high school graduation. this is not an uncommon theme. you have, i think, benefited from a lot of this diversity. i think part of the message to europe is that you can be welcoming here and it is not necessarily going to hurt you.
this is something that you have to get over. there are bumps in the road. once you integrate people into your society they may have a great deal to contribute to that society if you give them the opportunity, you give them the chance. earlier aboutd the situation in hungary, and this is a photograph from "the washington post." theives you the sense of magnitude of the problem at one major transition in hungary. guest: one of my colleagues was in that transition and she at a certain point put down her notebook, as a human rights watch investigator, and she started handing out blankets and handing out water to people that were in that transition. she herself is gary and -- hungarian although should her parents -- although her parents fled hungary and she grew up in sweden. so she actually returned to hungry, works for human rights but at a certain
point both her identity as a human being and as a hungarian trumped the role of human rights watch. she actually changed from a human right worker into a humanitarian volunteer trying to welcome them in just a human way and connect to them and give them food and water and blankets. pointbill makes this saying that russia does not taken syrian refugees. it could help humanity by doing so. guest: russia, saudi arabia, i could add quite a number of countries to the list. yes. by all means. we think that this is an international responsibility. the european union, which is a which havetates certain rules for sharing the burden, if you want to put it that way, which i actually would
put it that way. we are talking about a burden here. but responsibility for refugees are a global responsibility. there is no reason that by lebanon, geography -- a country of only 4.5 million , should have to carry the burden of the influx of 1.1 million refugees. that is 20 to 25% of the total population. it is an enormous burden for a country that is economically and politically itself teetering precariously. russia and any number of other countries have much greater capacity to come in to help both financially and ensuring the human burden. host: from michigan, laura is next. the republican line. caller: good morning. you know, this little discussion about russia i find quite upsetting.
you know, in the history of europe americans are so ignorant about what is going on or what has gone on historically. offended bylarly our intrusion into the ukrainian situation. crimea belongs to russia three centuries. tsar had a palace that he visited often in the warmer weather. i find it is offensive for us to be intruding into all aspects of , inciting people against russia. i happen to be russian-american. i was born in america, my parents were born in russia, but i have studied russian and i'd like to think i know a little bit about history. i have visited the country many times. you are saying now russia should help.
why are we going against the russian populace? have all these different rules and regulations against russia. i have many friends that are and russian and ukrainian's are like brothers and sisters. host: we will get a response. thank you for the call. guest: well, they may be like brothers and sisters but a lot of those brothers and sisters are displaced within the ukraine. i have had to flee from crimea, they have had to flee from the east. very large numbers of ukrainians who have lost their homes and have been pushed out. there are also refugees that have fled the country entirely, most going east and west. that means russia itself is host to ukrainian refugees and there are ukrainian asylum-seekers in the european union as well.
the point that i was making earlier is simply that russia is part of the community of nations. ofis a responsible member the community. it has responsibilities as a member of that community. help under as to refugee emergency. my point is that it should not be simply a matter of geography. if you happen by misfortune to be located next to a country that is in conflict -- look at a country like jordan or like turkey. for years they have suffered waves of refugees. jordan, you go back to the palestinians from 1978. then you have the iraqi conflict , hundreds of thousands of iraqi refugees. now you have syrian refugees. over half a million
in jordan alone. because jordan happens to be situated geographically where it is they are the ones to bear the brunt of this. all i'm saying is that those countries that are part -- farther afield, not in the region itself, they should offer a helping hand. russia is no exception to that. host: our last call is from minnesota. jack, independent line. good morning. caller: good morning gentlemen. i would like to echo the feelings from the caller from new york and the last caller from michigan. you seem to be waltzing around the main culprit of this and the main culprit is us. our modus operandi in the world is pretty well known, economic warfare, subversion, etc.. and of course the last of these means is overt invasion like we did in iraq, which was a war of
aggression. a war of aggression, by the way, is the supreme international crime according to the nuremberg charter. theontains within itself accumulated evil of the whole. and part of the accumulated evil is the of people we are calling -- causing in syria. that is us. that is our allies that fomented that. in libya, in iraq, we are the cause of all of this as far as i'm concerned. you is --uestion to so burning u.n. resolution, 1973, acted as isis's force in libya, destroying the country which had the highest involvement in africa and has now created an absolute chaotic evil state from which all of
these people are trying to escape. way, 500o bombs by the ,ound, thousand pound bombs what the hell is the difference between those and be -- the barrel bombs? guest: hardly know where to begin on that one. it is a bit of conspiracy theory. as i said, the u.s. is the world super -- leading superpower in the world. but i think to attribute every displacement, every refugee crisis to the hand of the united intos is playing conspiratorial thinking. you actually have to think when you talk to refugees as well, i it iswe need to look -- important to look at the causes and try to understand those
causes, but i would encourage a more pragmatic way of basically saying you can keep digging into economicper motivations or whatever they might be. at a certain point you have to resolve conflict. you have to have enemies sit down with each other. for example there are many external actors, i ran among them, as well as russia and others, that attract different parties to the conflict. i don't think that it is to focus on helpful that. i think we need to pragmatically look at how we can get them to get through this to find a thatution -- resolution will be acceptable to stop this killing from happening. whether the killing front comes -- whether the killing comes bomb, fromg, from --a isis.
we want to stop that killing,. . our conversation with bill frelick. he is with human rights watch. and you for adding your perspective. inls lesniewski is waiting the c-span greater. all thingsall of -- congress and will be joining us to talk about what is coming up next especially now that the president has the votes he needed -- he needs to block republican opposition to the iran deal. we will be right back. >> the c-span cities to her, working with our cable affiliates and visiting cities
across the country. this weekend we are joined by charter communications to learn more about the life of grand junction colorado. the mining of a certain mineral had a long-term importance to this part of colorado. all over the colorado plateau and especially here outside of grant option -- grand junction we are surrounded by morrison rock. we find a mineral that contains three different elements. it contains radium, which is radioactive and was used by marie curie to help solve and fight cancer. it also contains an element which is used to strengthen steel. during the buildup to world war ii and during the war itself, that was of extreme value. and it also contains uranium. is one ofs we know,
the best sources for atomic power and atomic weapons. >> colorado congressman wayne aspinall was responsible for the areas development. he fought the battle to preserve water for western colorado by making sure that we got our fair share. how did you do that? well, beginning in his state career and then going on to his federal career he climbed up the ladder of security and was able to exercise i think more power than you might normally have, certainly in the united states government. he was able to make sure colorado and western colorado would be treated fairly in any divisions of water. his first major success was the passage of the colorado river project in 1956. >> see all of our programs from
grand junction saturday at 7:00 p.m. eastern on c-span two booktv. as sunday afternoon at 2:00 on american history tv on c-span3. >> washington journal continues. host: we want to welcome back niels lesniewski who follows all things congress. guest: good to be here. host: let me begin with the enough and yesterday by house , a few hoursader after senate democrats announce that deborah mikulski was the 34 vote in the senate. what is going to happen in the house. -- what are we going to see in the house? guest: what we are going to see as mccarthy announced they are going to take up a resolution of disapproval against the nuclear agreement with iran and that is probably going to be -- at least some democrats will vote for, but it will move through the house with a largely partisan
vote. that is going to happen simultaneously to the start of the senate debate on effectively the same measure. the speculation in the last 24 hours is that one of the reasons why the house may want to move forward at the time they do is to make sure that they have a vote before the potential filibuster happens in the senate. there is increasing speculation there are not even going to be the 60 votes needed to get over procedural hurdles in the senate, which would be really ought if the house were to not vote on the disapproval resolution against the iran deal before it was already blocked in the senate. it would seem to be a moot point at that point, which may contribute to why the house is going to act so quickly. and we see a member's
letter by nancy pelosi, basically telling those who have not yet announced their support or disapproval saying it is time to speak up. guest: i think that is what we are going to see very quickly with a lot of members. not necessarily everybody, but we are going to see a lot of lawmakers who are going to want to make a decision fairly quickly. we have been seeing this little trickle effect on both sides of capitol in the last couple of weeks. i would not be surprised -- there may be another briefing or something that happens before this, but i would not be surprised if there is a day lose either over the labor day weekend or in the first couple of days after that. is the story this morning, front page of "the new york times," pointing out from a delaware democrat who said that that there was a meeting that took place before the august recess with diplomats basically
saying there is not going to be a better deal. we are not going to a back to the negotiating table. this is it. host: -- guest: right. and i talked with chris coons, the democrat -- delegate from delaware, and he said that that was sort of a moment for him where he had been a bit of a skeptic among democrats over the agreement, that when it became clear that the other negotiating europeans, in the particular, were not going to be , it to a renegotiation really became a situation where this became more of an all or nothing deal that he had thought. host: senator mikulski yesterday became the 34th senator. running for reelection. we still don't know about senator hardin, correct? jacket --?cardin
guest: that's right. he has been doing events with undergraduates for the past few days. he was at johns hopkins in baltimore. he has been talking to college students, but he is one of them who has not announced a position yet. key vote as is cory booker, the junior senator from new jersey. richard blumenthal of connecticut, those are three of the democrats we are watching was carefully in terms of whether or not we are now going harry reid, the senate and if there are the 41 votes that are necessary fromck the disapproval advancing in the senate. host: and this is from barbara perfect, no deal is especially one negotiated with the iranian regime.
i have concluded that this joint cover has a plan of action is the best option available to block iran from having a nuclear bomb. however she said congress must also reaffirm our commitment to the safety and security of israel. guest: yes. that is going to be a recurring theme. we have already heard a little bit from bob corker, chairman of the foreign relations committee, who opposes the deal. he will be leading the floor debate against it. however, even as he is doing that he has already sort of see the writing on the wall and is already telling folks back home in tennessee that he is looking forward to next steps that will lead to enforcement. so there could be some kind of i partisan consensus that emerges in the weeks -- bipartisan consensus that emerges in the weeks after the blow-by-blow over the deal itself. host: so again in terms of title ix -- timeline, the hustle to get up next wednesday and maybe
a final vote on disapproval on friday. the senate would then take it up the following week to meet the mid-september deadline. guest: yes. there is a dual tracking here. in effect the senate will be debating the same thing the house is debating next week, although the key senate votes, which will likely now be on a motion by mitch mcconnell -- the majority leader -- to limit debate to cut off a filibuster threat, that key vote probably won't happen until the second week of the session. host: andy, rhode island. good morning. democrats line. caller: good morning. i just wanted to say how pleased i am that president obama has the support necessary to implement this deal. especially after having read the associated press article last week that benjamin netanyahu had, on a number of occasions,
tried to get israel to bomb iran over the last few years. he is a warmonger and he has been playing the united states for years. that's really all i wanted to say. host: thank you. guest: one of the things that we had is a lot of members of congress going to israel. one of the things that will come out of this agreement that i am not sure, in particular, now that it has the support would be what the lasting repercussions may be for israel and its relationship with the democrats in the united states. part ofwe will see -- that will be determined by what happens in terms of the legislation that moves forward after the disapproval both are toe in terms of enhancements israel's security. including, as chris coons suggested a couple of days ago in delaware, maybe some offense of sort of capabilities.
or at least capabilities that are not purely defensive in nature. host: on the republican line, sylvie is next in north carolina. good morning. caller: good morning. yeah. there should not be a deal with iran period. the democrats that have signed kerry,al, obama, john appendages will have a full head of blood on them. inse people they voted obama -- they just wanted something for nothing as they are going to get what they deserve when isis and iran comes over here because of obama said he was going to fundamentally change america. good job ofa damn destroying america and the people. he don't care about the black
people. he doesn't care about the white people. he cares about his agenda. that a president that is supposed to be working the democrats -- and the republicans -- and they don't give a shit about nothing. host: i'll stop you there. obviously very passionate about the issues. we do ask that you refrain from any profanity. guest: i think that this will be the question that is determined not only in this election -- in this election cycle in 2016, and subsequent election cycles, because the odds that we really doingxactly what iran is and if they are complying with the agreement -- by the 26 election, who knows.
remember, senators serve six-year terms. fact irane that if in is not complying with his -- this agreement that that would come back to bite people politically in the cycle ahead if that were to happen. host: we shared a tweet from speaker of the house john boehner who is been very critical of the iran nuclear deal. he said -- why should iran be own nuclear do its infections at a military site in trying to hide from the world? that is one of the most significant arguments for those who are against the deal. he is reporting what critics have called side agreements between iran and the international atomic energy agency, they are another one of these flashpoints in the debate. therenot clear entirely
are conflicting reports about what exactly was agreed to in terms of who would conduct inspections. that is another reason why some people are skeptical. one of the reasons why people are skeptical is not necessarily partisan. host: dana is next in los angeles, democrat line. the morning. caller: good morning. i think the point that was made +1 partners not willing to go back to renegotiate the deal is the fundamental point of importance, because the detractors can say we can go back and put the sanctions back on, but we don't have anyone else to go with it at that point. in essence if we decide to back out of the deal we will be doing it alone. host: thank you. guest: right. the issue that the caller raises
there is an important one. if you have the united states itself trying to reapply sanctions, the take here is that while the u.s. banking system is a very important thing to have access to in a global economy, if you have companies in european countries, british companies, french companies, german companies that were willing to do business with iran , that might not be nearly as effective as when you have u.s. partners and european not able to do business with them either. host: our next caller is from ellis, virginia. democrats line. good morning mary and -- marion. caller: thank you for taking my call. i just have a couple of thought that i am wondering if i'm correct. , nowems like netanyahu
that we are going to get israel $20 billion, is getting a little bit less combative about this iran deal. then i was again also that often times war makes money. in a capitalist society anytime you make money that is morally correct. it is all just really about money. i guess that is my question. itsounds to me like iran -- is no threat to us whatsoever. is this really about the industrial complex needing another war? that is the way to make money. that is capitalism. if you could just comment on that. these are just the thoughts that keep coming through my head as i do my daily chores. host: thank you. we appreciate it. guest: the one thing that i would say about that is that to the extent that israel is getting additional, or will be getting additional support for
ilitary development -- wouldn't necessarily say anything to be a fact that people are looking -- to the effects that people are looking for war, but it would be fair to say that of israel is getting more money from western countries for defensive capabilities than that probably means there will be more money for defense contractors in the united states selling weapons and systems. host: kerry is next in wisconsin. good morning. caller: good morning. i have a statement and a question to ask. ,he thing is, this iran deal the senate they finally made it. 34. oh my goodness. not a word about the house. has the house got nothing to do with the? i don't understand this at all.
nothing is ever explained about the house. host: we began our conversation, remember it is going to come up in the house first. the question is whether he will make it through the senate because of the procedural the senate. caller: i don't understand that at all. the other thing is there is a new book, "exceptionalism here cap -- exceptionalism. he claims that he things obama is apologetic to every country because america was nasty to everybody and he thinks he has muslim leanings on account of his kenyan upbringing. i'd like to hear about that. host: why don't you just excited plain to him again what is going to happen. guest: i will take the first part of that and say i will probably get some criticism for people who might be watching for saying this about the house,
this is not always true of the house but in this case house does not really matter. for withere looking either chamber -- the house or the senate -- to have enough democrats to be able to sustain of theby president obama disapproval resolution against the iranian nuclear deal. once it became clear that it looks like the senate was going to be the one that was going to be able to do that. you need 67 votes to overcome a presidential veto. once it became clear that we were inching towards 34 votes against the disapproval resolution, or in favor of the deal in the senate, the focus went to the senate because either chamber could cause the blockade here. is niels guest lesniewski who writes for "roll call." yesterdayhed a story
from an interview that mitch mcconnell conducted with nyt -- myt tv. [video clip] >> we have some big differences about what we are going to spend. the senate democrats have a big enough number to prevent us from doing things. they have prevented us from doing any of the bills we want to do, thereby forcing the negotiation when we go back in after labor day, which i will be engaged in with the administration and others to try to sort out how much we are going to spend and where we are going to spend it. ,ost: and niels lesniewski based on this, he goes on to say that to prevent any government shutdown there will be a debate over planned parenthood. what can we expect? guest: what it looks like we're headed toward -- and senator mcconnell was fairly straightforward in that conversation with the television
station in eastern kentucky -- is that there is going to be some kind of high-level negotiation over what the top line funding level means -- needs to be from october 1 onward, and those negotiations are probably going to start fairly quickly once congress returns next week. now who exactly will be in these negotiations? we don't know yet. mitch mcconnell is usually one of the players involved and now he is the majority leader so that is all the more likely. the onene of these -- that is probably the most notable in recent years -- involved vice president joe biden as mcconnell's dancing partner in the administration. i have no idea if, given the sort of recurring speculation about whether or not the vice president is going to run for president, whether or not joe biden will be the one at the table or talking with mitch mcconnell. thate are going to have
sort of negotiation going on on one side. the other piece of this is the planned parenthood funding debate. what we are going to see their -- mcconnell said at least, it is that he does not have the votes. there is no way to get 60 votes in the current senate for a rider of an appropriations bill defunding planned parenthood. that issue really waits to see if we get a republican president in 2017. the conservatives saw this, saw other reports from this interview with kentucky, and sort of went crazy -- perhaps rightly so -- saying we now control the house and the senate and yet we still can't do it. so that will be the big fight. is mcconnell and also speak or boehner on the , how do they get past the planned parenthood bait without having a government shutdown come about?
host: in addition to your work that is available online, how can people follow you on twitter? i think it has probably been on the bottom of the screen at some point, but my .witter handle is my full name if you see the name on the bottom of the screen you can just push it all together. that is where i am. host: and we go to bruce in missouri, democrat line. good morning. -- ruth. caller: thank you for taking my call. this is quite embarrassing. it saddens me to hear the statement that, that are being made by these people that are not qualified. they are uninformed. reagan tradingut behind-the-scenes, his deal with the hostages in 1979. forget about iran-contra.
breaks that people are not qualified. this is an agreement between six nations, the iaea. the -- these people took two years to make this agreement. it saddens me. it breaks my heart to think that people are so hateful. they hate this president. administration if they remember, we had all these ,efugees floating into europe babies, children, women dying because of the wars that were brought on by the last administration. do they forget? are they so ill-informed and misinformed? it saddens me. i don't know what else to say. it breaks my heart to listen to c-span because i hear these collars and i hear these -- i
hear these callers and they don't make any sense. they are full of hate. we need to get our history lessons back in school. we need to get people informed correctly. it breaks my heart. it really does. , toaddens me to hear c-span hear the comments that people are making. i don't know what else to say. thank you for c-span. you for adding your voice to the program. i hope you will continue to watch us. we will get a response. supportivele who are of the agreement, that is one of the things that they are saying. we are going to be looking towards this as we look toward a week from wednesday when this rally is occurring on the outside of the capital building, not far from where we are sitting right now. there is going to be a rally
against the iran agreement. it is going to feature presidential candidates ted cruz, the senator from texas, as well as donald trump, perhaps the most notable of the republican presidential candidates are now, along with a number of members of congress who are against the deal. but that is the sort of thing where you are going to see people who are against the agreement -- or you're going to see people who are for the agreement is starting to say, look at the people who are against the agreement. that is going to be one of the themes that i think we will see more in the coming weeks. we have seen it from the white house already and i think we will see more. host: we'll be covering early next week, september 9. it will be on the c-span network and you can also view it -- listen to it on c-span radio. arizona, ishandler, next. independent line.
good morning. caller: good morning. i want to talk about our president. i can't understand what is wrong with him. all these migrants with no place to go, sitting around there with no place to go. that little kid that drowned yesterday. i don't understand why we don't take our air force over there and just blow air -- blow isis up the the map. our president is over there trying to put his hand on oil. are getting too many irons in the fire. host: we will get a response. thank you larry. guest: one thing i might suggest to larry is he sounds, in some ways, i kin to what senator lindsey graham -- who is one of the 17 running for president on the republican side -- he sounds similar to what senator graham has been saying, although senator graham also says in
order for a campaign against isis of that sort to work it is not just air power but he wants some 10,000 or so u.s. forces involved in that fight as part of a coalition. ofre certainly are people larry's point of view who are out there, and i'm sure we will hear more of that as the presidential contest goes on. host: you have a fan in felicia davis who says on twitter, excellent on all things congressional. go to todd in blacksburg, virginia. republican line. good morning todd. caller: good morning todd -- good morning. why don't we hear a little bit more about bob corker who helped change the rules in the senate so they could get a simple vote on this.
and mcconnell is going to do the same thing harry reid and all of them did, cram all of them together and say that is the best we can do. y'all have a good day. host: thank you todd. guest: i will take both of those pieces. the first thing is is what happened with the initial resolution -- or the bill that provided the way to get the disapproval about, -- the disapproval vote, it then became that you can have this disapproval vote be showed -- the toad -- vetoed. to some extent was the president determines that this was an executive agreement rather than a treaty the leverage of senator corker and others was significantly limited. i saw this morning a tweet from arkansasom cotton of
suggesting -- and i have heard others say -- suggesting that is an affront to congressional prerogatives in the constitution , but i would remind everyone that the constitution allows the two chambers of congress to set their own rules. whether or not you like the way that they took this approach it is certainly within the purview of the rules for them to do that. and then to the other point about senator mcconnell and the clip we had earlier from the station, thision is where we are at this point in terms of needing to cram together a bill at the end of the year. we saw this one coming. when the democrats decided not to allow any of the appropriation bills to move at the level that mcconnell and company wanted to see them move, it was inevitable that we were going to have one of these temper showdown yet again --
september showdowns yet again. of ourn fact one marvelous producers is pulling up that tweet, calling it an insult to the constitution. ands go to george wisconsin, independent line. good morning. caller: i bring up some interesting tidbits. first of all, the clerics. the religious leaders of iran. they have a prophecy. they believe that they have to kill the jews and they have to kill the great satan, which is the united states. russia right now does not have a lot of money so they are making a deal with iran and selling ballistic missiles iran. what is going to stop putin from -- in the future because iran will have the ballistic missile they already have the south -- the subs -- eventually they
could give them ballistic missiles. for the call. i going to add his voice and also some others, jeb bush. he said a tweet -- that reads -- -- the partisan minority should not block a bipartisan effort to stop a bad deal that will fund mullahs, destabilize region, and paid iran's path to the ball. bomb.the balm -- host: that is person -- part and parcel to the argument we have been hearing. we are going to hear more of that. but the other thing is that senator mcconnell at least in visions -- and visions -- env isions having sort of a grand old school debate in the senate chamber. senators are sort of sitting at
their desks and actually listening to each other, which is something that viewers notice is not often happening. if that happens the questions we will have coming out of that will be what is the level, the tone and the rhetoric that people who are in the senate use when making their arguments on the floor? host: and one of our viewers saying tom cotton's presence in the senate is an insult to the country. will senators be seated during the debate? is that what the is hoping for? guest: that is what mcconnell is hoping for. whether that actually plays out we will have to see. but if the majority leader has his way we are going to have a debate where he does not want committee's meeting and he does not want people to have a lot of other business going on. it could be a rather unusual debate to watch. one thing that i would say is that if people are in or around the nation's capital, or coming
this way, as much as it is interesting to watch on , they are, on c-span not c-span cameras. there are a lot of things that go on in the chamber that you can't even see on c-span. if you are around -- if in fact this debate happens, it might be a good time to visit your senator's office, get a pass, and watch the proceedings in person. host: that is an open independent -- invitation. of course if you're not here in washington you can watch the senate debate on our companion network, c-span2. another tweet from senator lindsey graham who said -- the only reason the ayatollah and arch dancing in the streets of tehran is they don't believe in dancing. and another tweet