tv Washington Journal CSPAN July 13, 2013 7:00am-10:01am EDT
within the republican party on foreign policy. and we will listen to recordings of phone calls president nexen made in the summer of 1972 and discussed them with historian richard norton smith. ♪ good morning, the debate over changing the senate filibuster, known as the nuclear option will continue this weekend with senator harry reid and senator mitch mcconnell here tomorrow on nbc's "meet the press." on monday night, behind closed doors, the full senate will meet in the old senate chamber to discuss and debate the issue. "the new york times" called the exchange, -- and another new headline this morning, "is congress broken?
sarah wheaton has a q&a on a book focusing on the dodd frank legislation. you can read it online at nytimes.com. nytimes.com.t one of the questions from sarah wheaton, her take away from the book, is there something fundamentally broken about washington? his results were -- the 2010 elections says robert kaiser wiped out the majority in the house. we obviously have a gridlock again. on the issue of changing the senate filibuster rule, which
the senate is taking up this week, the so-called nuclear option as it has been coined over the last couple of months, here is more from orin hatch of utah from a what he has to say about that possibility -- , this isas you can see a real mess. thes not a good mess area fact of the matter is the senate has been the most lucrative body in the world because we protect the right of the minority. it was just a few years ago that the majority leader was arguing for those rights themselves, saying the senate will be destroyed if we went to a nuclear option, which nobody did. it has never been done before and frankly it should not be done now. theyact of the matter is are playing parliamentary tricks with regard to this and they are doing it to the detriment of the united states senate. >> the comments of senator orin
hatch as he spoke to reporters last week. politico has this story on the nuclear option, based on a closed-door meeting with democratic colleagues -- "his potential move to invoke the nuclear option is raising a bigger and more sweeping question that could have huge consequences for president of both parties, is this the beginning of the end of the filibuster? and if the filibuster goes the senate will lose a crucial check on minority rights and will start looking like the house, where the majority gets its way." the question this morning, is congress broken? a lot of you tweeting him, this is from ron on our twitter page -- joseph is joining us from
california on our line for independents. caller: we welcome you to the conversation. good morning, doma for having c-span. i feel that we should have adopted a zero court system. go back toould people and ask their approval for anything they should want to do. it should be the people rule. , know that is a funny concept we have always had emperors and dictators. we should take control of all congressman. they should be happy to go back -- they should be having to go back to the people. they should not vote for anything the people did not approve. host: our phone lines are open.
we also have a line for independents and our question this morning, "is congress broken?" this is based on a book by robert kaiser. we want to get your calls and comments in light of next week a senate convenes in the closed- door session that will take place in the old senate chamber. that was an idea put forth by some senate republicans, including bob corker. we will be monitoring what happens outside the chamber and we will be getting your calls and comments as well. back to the peace by jennifer steinhauer, "a day of friction notable even for a fractious congress." all this coming to a head. the big issue continues to be a number of the president's nominees. sarah binder is going to be joining us later in the programs talk specifically about what impact this potentially could have on the ugnate as an institution.
h north carolina, democrat line, good morning. still dressing sharp. listen, on the filibuster rule, there have never been so many filibusters registered by the republicans under this resident -- under any other president. we cannot t anything done because every time we turn around they are filibustering. that is the reason we have gridlock's and nothing getting done in the senate. he want to filibuster everything. when he became president they said they are not going to let anything he come up with go through. mitch mcconnell said this, he said we are going to stop everything he does. we are going to run him into the ground. this is a sad thing. i voted for barack obama twice. i thought america had changed.
it is just the same thing. host: what is the solution? whoer: we have to remember we are, we are american citizens. we have to go back and change things. earth of all we have to stop being hateful to one another. this country has to come around and stop this thing. the votere right now control registration has turned it into a hellhole. statemonday i go to state capital protest drenched finish -- to protest against this evil right-wing registration. thanks for the call. democrats line from north carolina.
the question, "is congress broken?" from rhode island, independent line, welcome to the conversation. caller: i believe congress is broken because on the first day , ifhe legislative session i am correct, the only time the senate rules can be changed -- i mentioned this to the senator when he was up for reelection they had the chance to change the rules but apparently harry reid believes that mitch mcconnell was going to play nice area of none of those people play nice, that is why i am an independent. they had a chance to change the rules, they didn't, and now we are stuck for a never dose years -- we are stuck for another two years. janet napolitano will be
stepping down as homeland security, this is the headline of "the arizona republic." she will do so in september. the headline from "the l.a. times" is slightly different -- the to "new york tabloids" -- a story from inside "the new york post most quote reject it points out that immediately after the announcement of janet napolitano stepping down a powerhouse of immigration issues trumped his support for ray kelly. back to your calls, christopher joining us from north carolina. the question, "is congress broken?" caller: congress is not broken. if congress would
trust outside of their interior , trust the average a joe that wants their voice to be heard -- if congress and the senate would accept that the voice and come to terms with , thenndependent voice this would no longer be an issue. what it is is a trust issue. congress needs to learn how to trust the independent person, especially after they have been analyzed and their background has been checked and they turn out to be not such a bad person. they might have a pass, of course we all do -- they might
have a past, of course we all do. it comes down to a trust issue. aboutthis is a story janet napolitano stepping down as secretary of homeland security -- doug from bridgewater virginia, good morning. welcome to the program. caller: thank you. what i wanted to talk about was the 17th amendment and the senate. when they put the 17th amendment 1916, that, about changed the entire nature of the senate and filibuster he was a useful thing before that -- and filibustering was a useful
thing before that. tot we really have now is houses instead of a senate and a house where the senate represents the state legislatures rather than the senators being elected by the general public. mary has this point -- you can join the conversation area the focus of immigration is the subject of this commerce story -- of this cover story -- according to "the des moines des moinesosed quote -- des moines register come quote --
we want to share you something else on "the wall street -- on theme quote wall street journal." it points out that states on the border of mexico are home to about 27 .5 million hispanics, about half the total of the u.s. hispanic population. policy immigration shows the same pattern here as the rest of the country, most of the democratic officials backing a broad overhaul of the immigration bill. republicans are opposed to it, one reason is hispanics are requested in democratic party districts. see there are 57 democratic seats, 44 republican seats, and the breakdown of hispanic votes in those congressional districts. that is from inside "the wall street journal." it is also available on the website. in this invest -- in this
cartoon with the character of the republican party -- sandra is joining us from massachusetts on the independent line. good morning. caller: congress does what congress wants, only if they profit. to area that they come from show favor to how good am i -- that is so they can get the vote. at is what i believe in. i think they are very selfish and self-centered. they have aggravated me terribly. host: dick durbin also spoke
out on changing the filibuster rule. this is what he had to say. [video clip] the gridlock in the senate has to come to an end. let me say how sad it is we are where we are today. we had a glorious moment a few weeks ago where on a bipartisan basis we put together an immigration bill. is a 60 vote margins, filibusters, 30 votes on the floor, people looking very closely their television screens on c-span to see if there is heavy -- to see if there's any evidence of life on the senate. that is become the norm of this institution. us american people expect to step up and solve problems, they expect us to do it without gridlock. this is the only way we can move this forward. host: his comments on the senate as an closed-door
sessions will take place monday evening, a rare session inside the old senate chamber. we will go back to robert kaiser's piece from the new york , the question posed by sarah wheaton, "is congress broken?" she responded this way, -- instead he says the people attracted to run for congress today are more likely to be partisan warriors eager to do battle with the enemy. on theece is available new york times website.
rightestion, you can see there. kathy is joining us from harbor springs, michigan, democrats line, good morning. the one gentleman talked about trust, that is something this morning.blog i do not have time to sit in front of my tv watching c-span, i am trying to make a living. term limits states this is what will help. we have people that will be in there for decades and decades. we need the young people in office. i live in subsidized housing, everything is included. , but the per week ,ime i pay the minimum food car insurance, gasoline, i am left with $150.
this is the reality. how they are being so hateful , we have aple turnover in staff, we have a , people wouldeas be more inclined to visit with constituents. not just people that can contribute to the campaign in large sums. i think we should try to get on the national ballots. , eight years. that includes supreme court. and he appointed official, that would help rate lee -- that would help greatly. am a 25%e in denmark
of the workforce -- there is not a huge negative impact. let me play devil's advocate because we have talked about term limits and one of the downsides is that it would thete an empowered staff, people behind the members of congress who would yield more power because they would not be term limited. caller: they should go. if that is going to be their attitude, if we are going to be then they need to either go or be shuffled around somewhere else. it is wrong. host: thank you for the call. one of our viewers has this to say -- this story from "cq," he points out republicans
celebrated independence day a week late -- the vote on the farm bill, 216 -- 216-208. -- because they faced down the club for growth and one in this bill without relying on a single democratic vote. that story this morning from robert is joining us on the republican line. good morning. wanted to call regarding the senate filibuster.
i think what the real issue is our election systems are broken. we in arizona, we have public finance. to hold backable some of the extremes from both sides. that are note holding to corporate interests that are elected by the people and donations by the people. i think that is the only way to fix the congress as it currently stands. even if you had term limits it would not be fixed because the people who are being elected by the corporations and not by the people who actually work for a , instead of the investment class. on thehe phone lines are screen. we welcome those watching outside of the united states, on our twitter page, dan has
paranoiaing stew of and dysfunction that is the house of representatives, it may be the least of the lower chambers problems read republican leadership has spent the summer in survivor mode, hampering down various calamities but in a way that makes their eventual outcome not much better and not much worse. in the fall we are going to see a perfect combination of disasters." you can check out the entire story at newyorkmagazine.com. on the issue of congress, george from ", connecticut, independent line, good morning. caller: good morning. i believe the filibusters should be kept -- i think the problem is we have a bunch of spoiled brats in the senate and republican side. for her president obama's
rhetoric and i voted for him. what they are trying to do is hold back a socialist regime that is trying to come to power. i think it is inadvertent but that is where we are heading with them trying to pass at this point. i believe what is happening in the senate right now needs to happen. jan, who regularly tweets in the on this program, has this point -- "the financial times" has a story to reese -- to restore the glass-steagall act --
it used to be, once upon a time somebody came up for would dogcatcher, there be no senator opposed to it. now that requires a 50 vote margin just to proceed to the floor. then they have 30 hours of debate. they need 60 votes. if you do not get closure you do not get confirmed or denied whether the guy used to be the head dogcatcher. they do this on every single thing. there is no such thing as comedy anymore. they do not cooperate anything. a are just blocking every single thing, regardless it does not matter. they complain about the virus causing a scandal. but they would not confirm
anybody to be the head of the irs. they filibustered the guy for two years straight. name any particular agency, organization caught that the senate has to deal with, you are going to get the exact same thing every single time. host: coming up in 10 minutes we will have a conversation with tom dufresne, who covered president gerald ford. he has written a piece for "the national journal" this week. he will be joining us in 10 minutes. ill has this point on our twitter page, the question we are asking, is congress broken? some news from sunday's newsmakers --
fromthe -- from thehill.com -- here on c-span and on c-span radio, here is a portion -- [video clip] >> i think i and other members are open to the idea that they should have a way to come out of the shadows, to be able to work, to have their own businesses, to pay their taxes, to travel back and forth to their home country and elsewhere. having a special pathway to citizenship, like the senate bill has, where people who have immigrated lawfully to the
country for generations, and sometimes wait in line for 10 years or more based upon employment-based petitions, refugee status, political status, to create a new category for people who come here legally does not sit well with a great many americans. for that we are concerned. bob goodlatte joins us tomorrow at 10:00 eastern time. the news that he made appeared on a couple of websites. oryou are just tuning in listening on c-span radio, the question we are asking, "is congress broken?" phyllis joining us on the independent caller: line from south carolina. phil is joining us on the independent line from south carolina. caller: it is not just the senate, it is the whole congress. johnkennedy asked --
kennedy said, "ask not what the country can do for you, ask what you can do for the country. co. who out there is not kind to figure out what they can get from the government for free? it begins with the people wanting stuff but not wanting to give. it begins with people who are wrapped up in their rights but are not rasp it to the got their responsibilities. your fingers to the congress. john boehner is the flavor of the month to beat up on. if you put nancy pelosi there instead of him you have the other side talking about her in the same way. as a society expect more from our government than they are able to provide. they have their foibles. , iyou throw them all out
know schweitzer has been on the , they allfore ingratiate themselves. when you get done to it it is -- on the governmental level the government people are looking what is good for them on an individual level. we as a society are looking at what is good for us. the country be damped. one of the points on the twitter page -- wall -- inside "the wall street journal," the story points out --
pittsburgh caller:, democrats line, good morning. -- pittsburgh, democrats line, good morning. thanks for taking my call. i just wanted to ask if anyone we caneorge to talk so compared the voice to the voice that is on the recorder? there would be a difference andeen a 17-year-old voice however old george zimmerman is. kerry is joining us from pennsylvania. i just want to get my
thoughts concerning congress and [indiscernible] these people run for office and get newly elected. they get into washington and find it is tough to get inside the beltway. , i wish that someone could make a difference the first term. i felt it could happen and if they get the second term it is lucky. host: do you impose term limits? caller: absolutely. i think we should have term limits. it is the good old boys network. i think every elected office should have term limits, from
the story this morning is also available online at nytimes.com. from mississippi, good morning. kaiser i agree with your article about people in congress not being qualified. i will agree with the other calls that it is not congress that is broken, it is america that is broken. it is too big to govern. it is to polarize. maybe we should be like canada, --e provincial areas to
eventual areas. we need to help each other. robert says the pop -- robert says the pop of is we have politicians who are not this longer than most dictators. .aller: thank you for having me i would like to say congress is not broken. it is too much of a broad stroke. the problem is the people, where is the money coming from? the money is coming from the special interest. that is why congress is broken. but it has been the case -- that has been the case since day one. you are putting it on everyone when it is only some people that are breaking congress. those in the house of representatives, they are blocking every single thing that can get done to make this country better.
somebody needs to call them out on it. host: thanks for the call. a couple of points -- this morning from "the wall street journal, quote -- street --rnal," this morning, from "the weekly ,tandard," attorney generals the unsung heroes in challenging the obama administration. you can read it online. it says rejig -- it says --
that is this morning from "the weekly standard." ed is joining us from georgia on the republican mind. caller: i do not think congress is broken. i didn't think the american people -- i do think the american people do not realize that by 2050 we are going to have half a billion people here in the united states with immigration the way it is going. where are we going to get half a million jobs by 2050? the democrats are crazy, they want to build this country up with people. they are leading people in this country every year and by 20 if the we are going to have half a billion people. also gears.nt is we are going to beat in a bunch of trouble.
keep letting more people in and pretty soon we will all be drags. this suggestion -- we are going to do so in just a couple of minutes. we will show you some -- we will share with you some of the comments by republicans and democrats a decade ago. all of this is leading up to a closed-door meeting on monday at 6:00 in the old senate chamber. time magazine out this weekend with its focus on egypt, the world's best protesters, the world's worst democrats. a look at what is next in that middle east country. prices joining us from cleveland, ohio. good morning. is joining us from cleveland, ohio. good morning. i do believe congress
is broken and the only answer to how to fix this is a car -- to how to fix this is a sarcastic answer. i think we should have all of our congressmen, senators, get paid minimum wage. give them food stamp and medicare and medicaid and they will start thinking about what they are doing. -- : arnold has this point robert kaiser with the question we posed this morning, "is congress broken?" tom to frame, author on a book of president gerald ward has written a piece. tom defrank is joining us. it thank you for joining us. as you talk about president
gerald ford, who would've turned 100 tomorrow, would he recognize the current republican house? i believe he would be spending a lot of time holding his head in his hand. he could be a fierce partisan but he always liked to try to find a way to deal with the democrats. closest friends in congress were democrats. he once said to me, "i would rather get something than nothing, even if there are some parts of something more hard to swallow." -- he was like ronald reagan in many respects. thatnk today he would say a lot of colleagues in the house of representatives would rather get nothing than something and feel like they came here to blow up the system. i think he would be very
distressed, i think, about the state of his the love and house republicans. host: the photograph that accompanied your piece, to ,igures in republican politics dick cheney in donald rumsfeld. you wrote that ford was the leader when vice president nixon -- today's house republicans would never have anointed ford as their leader in the first place. in his days he would be too moderate for today's gop red hot. >> that is exactly the case. he, like john boehner, is what i would described -- he is as john boehner is. conservative republicans, to be sure. people would like to figure out a way to get something done who
are willing to compromise. in the house republican caucus, -- it is athan not large number of republicans in the house and especially younger they do notthink want anything to do with obama and what they should do with their own majors. that is why i think skeeter boehner has been running scared for years now. they deny it up course, but that is my opinion. host: we are talking with tom defrank. his pieces on the national journal this week. ronald successfully received a nomination by a few votes at the
republican convention and it really foreshadowed the changes and the republican party. ronald reagan is viewed by many as the leader who changed the republican party to this day. guest: i was there in kansas city in 1976 when reagan came within a couple of dozen delegate votes. ironically, i think today president reagan would have a lot of trouble with this particular house republican membership area they would think he is not sufficiently conservative. reagan once said he would rather get half of what he wants rather than jump off the cliff with the flag flying and get nothing. president reagan was an icon to
millions of republicans. he would have a lot of trouble with this house republican caucus. host: you put your words into a book. he would be 100 years old tomorrow. what was your last conversation it was only six weeks before he died and i was at palm springs -- i had been asked to give a speech and i wanted to see him. it was kind of like president bush, 41. ford had good days, ford had bad days. the morning that i got to see him i got a call that said that he wanted to see me, he is feeling better. i saw him at his house, he was in a hospital bed. it was near the thunderbird golf course and it was very difficult because he couldn't -- he was dying.
the last words he ever uttered to me were, "come back again." very gracious, typically gracious to the very end. i remember many things about him. that last encounter was not an interview. it was basically a goodbye. host: tom defrank's pieces of available online at the national journal website. his piece on gerald ford's birth day come up this weekend. bynk you for being with us. the way, former president push, often referred to as 41, will be at the white house on monday as president obama pays tribute to the thousand points of light. we will be focusing on the nixon presidency as we look at the nixon tape from 1972 and 1973.
, sarah binder is going to be at the table to talk more about the senate as an institution. she is an expert at the brookings institution. aboutstuart reid senator rand paul and how he has become a force on foreign- policy. watching "washington journal." we will be back in a bit. ♪ >> it is absolutely vital we identify our enemies correctly. it is very hard to find someone you do not identify correctly. these attacks on our homeland
and others, such as the 2000 five london bombing -- 2005 london bombing -- they were all adherence to the jihadist gold of islamist domination. the murder of free, innocent people whom they regard to as infidels in order to accomplish that goal. >> let me speak to the old adage that you cannot establish and the relationship during an apprentice treated we have a significant presence on social media and we have engaged in a dialogue with people of the tea about all sorts of issues. we were able to use social media effectively in the minutes after the blast to inform people .s to where they could go there was an enormous amount of upset and the community.
we used social media to camp that down. >> this week, the house and senate homeland security committees look look at the boston marathon bombings, today at 10 a.m. eastern. bennetktv," bill questions, "is college worth it?" 's "americann three history, tv" bannana wars -- "washignton journal" continues. issue offocus on the the filibuster and the nuclear option that has been referred to for the past couple of months. i want to take you back to last thursday, the exchange between the senate republican leader mitch o'connell and the senate and the craddick leader harry reid. collects user dark days in the history of the senate -- collects these are dark days in the history of the senate.
witnessed the majority leader break his word in the united states senate. our request of a joint meeting has been set for monday night at a time when attendance is frequently quite spotty. to keepvious effort many of his members for hearing the concerns and arguments from the other side as possible. it remains our view that for this debate, the kind of joint session that it ought to be, given the tendency of this daft to have sparse attendance on monday night, to have this meeting on tuesday before it is too late. mr. president, i do not want him to feel sorry for the senate. i am going to try to continue to speak in a tone that is appropriate.
the theoryfollows that the more you say something the more people believe it. , -- it is quite interesting that he thinks there is nothing wrong with this man. democrats and republicans have said he is a good guy. this man has been waiting 724 days. assistant secretary of defense, 292 days. monetary fund governor, 192 days. epa, 192 days. average time waiting is nine months. sarah binder of the
brookings institution, what is going on here? guest: the two parties in the form of senator reed and majority leader -- of senator reed and mitch mcconnell, they are going head-to-head over filibuster and a narrow application of the filibuster. block the minority executive branch nominees? the majority is saying the minority has gone a step too far. we should not need 60 votes to confirm nominees. the minority is saying they have not blocked any nominees, they are using advice defensively. that has boiled up into this issue as to whether the democrats want to change the rules to prevent filibusters of the executive branch nominees. host: we heard some dramatic words from senator mitch mcconnell that it was changing the institution, 200 years of congress going out the door, this is a legacy that harry reid have on his tombstone. sometimes it is hard to
know what is staged drama for the floor and audience and how much is really intense disagreement between these two senate leaders. that theind filibuster was not original to the senate. there was no filibuster of george washington's nominees or most of the 19th century. we do not have filibusters of cabinet level nominees until very recently. it is hard to know whether we totally ruled -- totally ruined the senate by doing away with filibusters area -- with filibusters. host: it will take place on guest: monday, how unusual is that? guest:it is unusual for both parties to meet behind closed doors. they did in the run-up to the -- impeachmentld trial for president clinton. what do you think the
atmosphere will be like? we heard it is a tough time for lawmakers to be here but it is 6:00 in the evening and the session is earlier in the day. republicans have been reaching out to friends on their side to try to diffuse the situation. prettyh is it will be tense but time 6 p.m. rolls around on monday. -- by the time 6 p.m. rolls around on monday. the minority seems intent on not giving up. host: if the democrats agreed to this, and we are going to hear from some democrats a few years ago, what impact will it have if they are on the minority in 2017 or 2019? the minority party, if you change the rules by majority vote we will go nuclear.
we will low every procedural rich insight in the senate. that is what they threatened. objected yesterday. the senate needs consent in the afternoon when committees are on the floor. it is considerable that the minority could make the majority quite difficult. it is also conceivable that if democrats do this republicans will come back in office and take away the filibuster on other elements of senate procedure. , it mightminority give the democrats some pods as to what is left as their rights as a minority. -- some pause as to what is left as their rights as a minority. host: you can send us an e-mail or send us a tweet. voices on this, including senator barack obama
on the senate floor in 2005. [video clip] >> one day democrats will be in the majority again. mr. president, licensed the talk is more about power than fairness -- i sense the talk is more about power than fairness t. they can get away with it. the right -- if the right of free and open debate is taken away from the minority party i fear the party atmosphere in washington will be poisoned to the point where no one will be able to agree on anything. that does not serve anyone's best interest at it is not what the patriots who founded this democracy had in mind. old line, "where you
."and depends on where you sit three years later barack obama is in the white house and dealing with some of the same issues that has frustrated previous guest: presidents, including george w. bush. guest:where you stand depends on where you sit applies to all senators. the minority you are going to fight to keep all the rights you have. itn you're in the majority, is quite frustrating to live in a world where minorities can exploit any number of rules to slow down the clock. host: let us look at this graph about approving federal judges, . ae executive employments comparison on the issue of federal judges between president obama, which has had 92 % confirmed and president bush that has had 97 % confirmed.
that does not seem out of the realm. guest: judging from any of these numbers, they can be sliced and diced in a number of different ways. if we look at conch permission rates -- that confirmation rates by congress, they have plummeted since the 80s. recent congresses have dipped down into the 60s and it has been a little precarious. the perception that it is harder to get nominees from the bench at both levels, it is quite true. host: the filibuster has a ridiculously romantic all right about it. guest: the many people that weieve and agree with that,
saw senator rand paul earlier -- we do not see these kind of filibusters in part because the minority does not want to spend the time on the floor and the majority does not want to spend time on the floor like that. typically the this is from the senate , publican leader bill frist the republican leader and what he had to say a decade ago on the filibuster. [video clip] the democratic, negotiatedi, have and taught everything to come to a negotiating position that does what is right. it gives every nominee an up or down vote. -- you see usnd i
talk in every day. that relationship will continue in a constructive and positive way. we were unable to reach an agreement consistent with the principle of our down votes for all nominees. you do not arbitrarily exclude certain nominees in order to avoid the constitutional option. response. guest: when you are in the majority and you are the leader, the efforts by the minority to slow down and filibuster nominees is frustrating. many people believe the president should have the capacity to put the team on the bench. the majority -- the minority does not want to give that leeway. you see senator reid equally frustrated over the tactics.
from a viewer.t democracy is mob rule. our facebook page. the government is broken because the gop is splitting down the middle between normal republicans and the far right. be careful what you wish for. divisions inare the republican party making it difficult for the legislative process. that has the lock step republican opposition. this is not a renegade group of republicans. this is the republican party position about these agencies. from again, sarah binder the brookings institution. i just wanted to call
and give a comment on your previous question about congress. i didn'tnted to say necessarily think it is congress that is broken. that are side groups not mentioned a lot in the media, such as the trilateral commission, the federal reserve, and all of these groups of manipulating the currency and using false flag terror attacks to get us into these wars all over the world trying to move society into a global order. bavarian high the luminosity in 1776 -- bavarian in 1776 --
host: on our website, a lot of people focusing on these outside groups. the impact of foreign money. guest: here is a lot of money that fuels the campaign. there is an inordinate amount of time spent by senators in their election year raising money. there are differences of opinion on whether the money makes a difference. the time warp on the chase for the dollar certainly makes a difference. i hope you make the distinction when you play the comparison of the democrats in 2005 but this is specifically tailored to the president's nominees, not the entire filibuster. i think the filibuster should
be lowered to 55 because the days of the huge majority are gone. they tend to go to been far. remember in 1995 when republicans took control of the house and they railed against the earmarks. there were 16,000 earmarks. when the republicans took over, it jumped to 36,000. same thing with the filibuster. as the leader, had 1. republicans want to draw out the game and get nothing done until the end of the term. there is an old at age that when democrats take power, though there is there is an old democrats taken
power, they seek more power. the old folks are not the problem. it is the young republicans who are intent on be constructing the government, making it not work from inside -- de constructing the government, making it not work from the inside. statespeople in the red suffer the consequences to cut services, they do not suffer because the democrats protect the poor and working-class, democrats and republicans. he railed against what benefits to them and do not suffer the consequences when these things are chopped up. >host: i will leave it there. thanks for your comments. guest: you are correct about this parliament carry arms race: 20 --the senate for 15 or
arms race going on in the senate for 15 or 20 years. we see the filibuster spread from the desire to measures to judicial nominees to executive branch nominees. it is tough to a clampdown on. if you do not, it is tough to get the -- it is tough to clamp down on. if you do not, it is tough to get the senate to work. host: let me show you this article. a day of friction notable for even a fraction congress. the chaos reflects the reality that congress has been reduced from a law making entity to a political operation in which positions are taken and fermented largely in the name of maintaining party unity rather than attracting votes from the other side. the minority is powerless to do anything but protests.
senate republicans have the power to filibuster, which is why they are so adamantly opposed to the democrats' g ambit. is a lot of truth to what we call message politics. taking a vote to drive a message to each policy states. the less inclination there is to meet and legislate. the senate worked its way through immigration reform with over 60 votes. there was a farm build this year. i do not think we should over estimate the extent of this message politics. it is there. precluded entirely legislative progress. ary.: this point from g
if the nuclear option in the senate goes through, it'll be the first step to another shooting civil war in this country. this from facebook. constantice taking opinion polls within their district to see which way the wind is blowing about their base so they won't accidentally alta against it. guest: one person's finger in the wind is another person's hyper-responsiveness. how much do we want them tied to their constituencies? answer too right that. that is what people disagree about these numbers and the stance they are willing to take. host: we will go to roger on the in thing . good morning. caller: our founding fathers came up with a solution in the
constitution. for anided an option upward mobility within politics. haven't they utilize that hawaii?58 in high -- we have problems with voting and voter apathy. host: ok. we will get a response. thanks, roger. have a first to create new congressional districts in more representatives for the district of columbia. that has proven quite contentious. the parties disagree. they do not want the other party to benefit. if they cannot add a seats, they cannot at a state. is a graduatender of yale university and earned
her doctorate from the university of minnesota. she worked in the house in the 1980's. she has altered or co-authored a number of books. she is also a former professor at george washington university. we are here to take your calls as we looked at the senate filibuster rule. there will be a meeting on monday. closed to cameras. we wish we could be inside. not remember why the old senate chamber has such historical links to it. caning of ae senator from massachusetts. the history of the place is a little bit tainted from the past. host: a familiar figure on
capitol hill, senator chuck schumer of new york had this to say. [video clip] >> we are on the precipice of a constitutional crisis. the checks and balances that have been at the core of this republic are about be evaporated by the nuclear option. the checks and balances which say that if you get 51% of the vote, you do not get your way 100% of the time. it is almost a temper tantrum by those on the hard right. their way every single time. it will change the rules, the rate the rules, miss read the misread the -- constitution so they will get their way. that is not becoming of the leadership on the republican side of the aisle.
that is what we call abuse of power. , from mayh binder 2005 from chuck schumer. is this a constitutional issue or are these simply senate rules? at part ofs a look the israelites in the senate. parliamentary life in the senate. parliamentary life in the senate. the senate cannot put too many restrictions on how it changes its rules. if you look in the senate rule, you'll book requires a two- voting -- the 2/3 .ule book requires two-thirds
the constitution let us run our own rules. it has never been tested like this before. it has not been used to change the threshold of rule 22. that is what is making it so explosive. host: we are focusing on the filibuster rule. bob is on the phone from jacksonville, florida. good morning. calm good morning. good morning. caller: good morning. together, they threw
the heritage foundation, this larger group of people, and got a parliamentarian from the johnson administration. big mass audience and c-span went live to it and think that showed it three times since then. in my bedroom. they had it on all night long. a head to hit up and turned the tv on to see who these crazy folks were. they are insane about this. who were of the people pushing harry reid to go january of this year. we spoke to liberal folks and all we are going to get that. and we did. the agreement he had was that he would do the nuclear option but the republicans would filibuster.
they have filibustered everything since then. what can he do? there is nothing left for him to do. the heritage foundation left out everything but the republican talking points. if you want to listen to that and c-span wanted you to -- i hope c-span charges heritage. on the street at 12:00 and c-span will show up with cameras. host: we will get a response. .arah binder guest: , picked up on what we saw on the floor last week -- picks up on what we saw on the floor last week. senator reid has been frustrated that the changes did not go up.
they believe the minority has not kept its side of the bargain, which would be to suspend filibusters in occasions with these are not extraordinary circumstances. to the brinking it to say he is going to go through with a compromise. he feels he has been burned in a compromise. in it will actually go through. host: let me show you a comment from our facebook page. there were 4 million people in the u.s. one of our constitution was written. there are 315 million. times have changed. in our constitution should be updated with the times. maybe congress will work better under of data rules. it is a good point about the difficulty of running a
modern senate with old rules. frist before him are not the first to complain about the senate where a minority factions rule the day. this is an old problem. it lends support to the forces the say perhaps it is time to fine-tune some of these rules. host: best about the process of what will happen on monday. takewill gavel about 530, it will call voted and recessed to -- at about 5:30 p.m., take a roll call and recess.
one thing to keep in mind if you have a notion to change the rules, it is supposed to stay on the calendar overnight. i would keep my eye on whether put it on majority the calendar to change the rules. whatey want to rely on tactics their corn to take, there is no set nuclear option. and what tactics they are going to take. the majority reenter precise rules. it is kind of a mix. we need a precise set of steps that might be taken.
host: how significant is this debate for the senate as an institution? guest: my guess is it does not actually happen in the caucus, but it happens this weekend in conversation or after the caucus. senatet imagine the replicating the type of debate we saw on the floor in augusta. the question is, once the cameras go away, is there any more meeting of the month. is there a procedural path that will give the two size with a 1? i am not so sure. host: senator reid and senator mcconnell will be appearing tomorrow morning on meet the press. you can listen to that nbc program beginning at noon eastern on c-span radio at 9:00 a.m.
is joining us from sebastian, florida on the republican line. caller: good morning. numerous comments have been made. so many things have changed since the 17th amendment. k street and involvement of the lobbyists and the possibility. the senate was supposed to be a popular vote. it represents the states and the government. why do we have the problem with the courts? haven't popular representative and not a state rep. there were so many things never change in the early 20th century that affect us now that have done even been mentioned. host: thanks for the call. we will get a response.
guest: the caller is right. we had constitutional amendments to change the makeup of the senate. of days of stay selection their senators were not as rosy as we think. different factions would buy off their members to send them to the senate. is there another way we might think the moves to elected senators i have been an improvement, even if we still see money in the system? host: michael is joining us from akron, ohio. good morning. caller: i have two comments concerning the fact that people claim obama never had a honeymoon after he took office. those people who make that claim are absolutely right. there are two reasons he never had a honeymoon after he took office. those are george w. bush and oprah winfrey.
elected,ge w. bush was it took six weeks to really claim a victory in that election. oh, knew the nine of his election that he had won. i recall rush limbaugh and other consultants on the radio beam data that a bomb went around the on the with a big -- work mad that obama went around the country with a big placard saying president of the united states. host: we will get a response. sarah binder? guest: present a bomb had a pretty hard time despite having a democratic house and the democratic sen. he did not give any cooperation from the minority party. they claim they were excluded. democrats claimed they did not want to play ball.
the president got quite a been done in his first two years. -- quite a bit gun in his first two years. that came to a halt with the republicans gaining the house in 2010. host: let's look at the republicans at the center of harry reid.led by thelabor secretary nominee, epa administrator, the head of the export-import bank. there are a number nominee -- a number of nominees to serve on the national labor relations board. where is this coming from? guest: here is a lot of organized pressure coming from groups on the left including strong constituencies from national labor relations board. seen these pressures
before. when have seen labor unions. they understand that for their agenda, they'll understand the importance of a functioning cent. i do not think senators will do things they would not otherwise do even if there is pressure from the left of the right on them. it is keeping the pressure on senator reid not to give in on these particular executive branch nominees. otherwise, these agencies will not reach the light of day. one of your rights that the senate should focus on legislating and that become part of the problem. it is inside the beltway, hard to know what is perceived outside the beltway. onre is a lot of attention
counting up all of these nominations and trying to weigh these claims. the data can be used in all sorts of ways. tough job for journalists to make sense of competing claims. sense of this debate is orrin hatch from utah. [video clip] this is acan see, mess. it is not a good mess. we protect the rights of the minority. it was just a few years ago that the majority leader was arguing for those rights himself, saying the senate would be destroyed if we went to a nuclear option, which nobody did. it has never been done before and should not be done now. the fact of the matter is they
are playing parliamentary tricks with regard to this. they are doing it to the detriment of the united states senate. host: the comments of senator orrin hatch. even in a congress where bipartisanship and comedy are the exception to the regular order, the near employers and on capitol hill was notable and both chambers erupted in the end furor that lasted the rest of the day. guest: the farm bill. ripping up a 50 year agreements in order to get it passed with conservative republicans. we had senator reid and senator mcconnell going at it all day. it is rare to see that much attention paid in that much passion on the floor of the
house and the senate. both majorities and minorities are upset over the prospects of what was happening in their own chambers. host: we have a few seconds left with sarah binder from the brookings institution. make a i would like to couple of points. the president nominate someone, they give him deference and he gets the people he wants for his cabinet. the that the number as compared to president obama and present bush and other republicans. filibustering obama's nominees for next to nothing. i hope harry reid goes nuclear and gets rid of the filibuster. withan anyone negotiate these is the tea party people
like ted crews and these other ones and rand paul? they refuse cruz and rand paul and the other ones. they refuse to compromise. host: this is george joining us from georgia on the republican line. go ahead, please. theer: every time republicans oppose a bill or something like that, harry reid closes it down. does c-span.org anybody have a record? has anything gotten on the floor that the republicans have proposed or is it always harry reid's way or the highway? the second point, the caller is tapping a concern that is raised by republicans. if you look at the number of
cloture votes, it has gone up exponentially even in the last four years. democrats claim that is because republicans filibuster everything. the republicans claimed the democrats are trigger happy. we disagree about what is the program about of debate and what of section there is and what is cheering all of these cloture motions. democratic norm is the majority set agendas. if it were the case that only democrats got bills on the floor, that would not be egregious. he and my that they got immigration reform. the democrats needed a 60 votes and the only have 54 or 55 within their own branch. there always have -- always has to be compromise.
the two parties disagree. the republicans say, we have not s.d any successful filibuster got intoe nominees their offices. the democrats say, you try to filibuster them. the question is, should the president be able to put a cabin in office without questioning the minority. it would be the republican majority if they were the majority. host: how long do you think the meeting will take place on monday and what you think the outcome will be? guest: it depends on what happens beforehand. my hunch is that it goes an hour or two, but senators do not want
to spend an hour. why stay there for an hour and half the there is no conclusion. that is the debate. the son of trauma spilled over since tuesday. some sort of trauma spilled over tuesday. will join usreid in a couple of minutes. he is with foreign affairs magazine. he will talk about the role of one freshman senator, rand paul. discussion of the history of watergate and the nixon tapes, many of which can be heard on c-span radio. you are watching "washington journal" for this saturday
morning, july 13. we will be back in a moment. >> it is absolutely vital that we identify our enemy correctly. it is hard to find someone that you cannot identify correctly. our homeland on and others, such as the 2005 london bombing, have been connected by a singular purpose. he underwear bomber, the times hassan, tempt, major who announced a fort hood that he was killing in the name of allah, involve the murder of free and innocent people whom they regard as infidels to accomplish their goals. >> here is an old adage that you cannot establish a relationship
during a crisis. we have a significant presence on social media, where we engaged in a one-way communication and a dialogue with people in the community about all sorts of issues day in and day out. we were able to use social media immediately to a form people as to where they could go, where it happens, where they could meet loved ones. they would use social media to temper that down. that down. >> this weekend, bill bennett questions, is college worth it? and on c-span 3's american history tv, electors in history. sunday at 1:00 p.m. >> earlier, someone touched upon the idea that women cannot ruling predict there wrote in
entering into the white house. i found one political observer who commented on the 1860 election. mary started with mr. lincoln when he was a poor young man with no more idea of being called to the presidency than being a cannibal. i tried to lay out in my book an educated guess that mary lincoln would not let a little thing like a human sacrifice, between her and her goal. she was a determined woman. she did talk about mr. lincoln's roll of entering the white house. she was a true political partner. >> as we continue our conversation on first place, we will talk about the will of the first lady and how it has changed along with the nation. monday night at 9:00 eastern on c-span. "washington journal" continues.
reid.joining us is stuart he wrote a book called the education of rand paul. you are right, for a decade,- ruled the republican party foreign-policy establishment from president eisenhower to george herbert walker bush, who called for a new world order. on domestic issues, the moderates got squeezed out. can you explain? guest: the republican party was the party of foreign policy for decades. his peak in the joint is w. bush -- the peak in busheorge h.w. came.stration after he lost the election and
lostut of power, realists sway. they were replaced by new conservatives, who had a different view of the world. -- whoho shaped the port shaped the foreign policy in which 42 and bush 43. james baker, secretary of state. in the second bush administration, the news -- the new conservative members the would-neo conservative members -- neo conservative members. a different foreign policy took over. host: what struck you the most in terms of the republican party and where do you see it going
down the road? what astonishes me is how split the republican party has become. the libyaaround intervention, it has pulled out into the open. he'll consult since are now led by john mccain and lindsay gramm. there are the risch change tea party policy wings. and have been opened and criticizing the meal service. when i was interviewing senator disdain for open the neo conservatives and the direction they have taken republican foreign policy. h of: he said the brashis senator paul's positions will
likely never become u.s. foreign policy. his success on the return of the landscape could prove to be more lasting. thingsthere are certain rand paul believes. he doesn't have enough power and there are too many roadblocks for those used to be turned into policy. cutting off aid to egypt. that looks more likely than it did a month ago. as far as where the republican party is going, he is representing a new voice and is changing the landscape. certain things are now discuss in a way that they were not. conservatives have lost their monopoly on republican foreign policy. he is tapping into a market for those views. host: stuart reiditor with fores
magazine. we have been covering senator rand paul because he is thinking about running for president. he has been visiting some of the early primary states. here is what he had to say at a recent south carolina republican party stands. [video clip] are 50 tyrantsre -- terrorists we could not have miningwithout this data of phone calls. they could all have been gotten with a traditional phone call. i am for catching terrorist. ts. you can go after them by getting a tip. we got a tip from the boston,. bomber. the boston
we are mining of billion phone calls in america. we are not spending the time to look through a target list of a guy who has been tipped off to us. you referour piece, ,o senator paul's filibuster holding up the senate in a 13- hour speech that got a lot of attention as a freshman senator. guest: the major part of rand paul's overall views, including foreign policy views regarding celebrities -- he has made this a big part of his persona. he has a transportation security demonstration and he is a chronic critic. nsa inalluding to the that clip. when it comes to drugs, this is the way he frames his criticism.
it goes between principle -- isn it comes to drones, this the way he francis criticism. there is concern about the u.s. government using a drawn on an american citizen on u.s. soil. this is less likely. host: this is a picture from the senate filibuster. it has been getting a lot of attention since he spoke on the senate floor in march. as you watch that, what was going through your mind? filibuster was nothing if not billions political theater. 12 hours and 52 minutes. he managed to take his name and go national. into -- heapped found a creative way to attack the obama administration, which played well among republicans. he won twitter and dominated the airwaves.
from other parts of the republican party was immediate. there was the wall street journal editorial. there were comments from liz andt and senator came, -- senator mccain made clear that they the best there were graham andom lindsey senator mccain. he may have lost points from the republican party for doing that. writes fort reid washington monthly on the education in the republican party. from new york city, good morning. caller: thank you for taking my question. the basis of so much of our foreign policy, why isn't foreign affairs magazine demanding a real investigation on why building number 7 fell?
guest: the caller's conspiracy theory taps into rand paul. he has not distanced himself thingsople believing that are not in evidence. if rand paul is one to have a campaign that goes national, he has to learn how to dismiss and distance himself from people. host: the points he made in those 13 hours were heavy. anyone who listened learn something. whether you agree or does agree on his views on the drug issue, you said it was political theater. it was also education on how the and reminiscent of that famous jimmy stewart film from the 1930's, mr. smith goes to washington.
yesterday's someone brought rand paul a thermos of water and an apple. he had a big briefing books prepared. he read from op-eds. heat up an effective way to highlight this issue. he believes it is a legitimate concern. host: hit the election of bill clinton and his presidency also change the view of how people look at the democratic party? guest: potentially. the dividend -- the democrats have always had this issue with foreign policy. especially with the killing of bin laden. qaedaealt a blow to al and help the democratic party
bonafides on foreign policy. they adopted a foreign policy that the republican realists of the first bush administration might have much to complement. realisticed this restrained role for american foreign policy. it is helping the democrats secure their legacy on that. host: our topic is our policy. our guest is stuart reid. independent line, good morning. would you have a political affiliation? would you claim a party? as a: i wrote this article journalist and did not take a side. if you reviewed the article you
will see that i give a judicious treatment to both sides. caller: that is a problem. i like national news and international news. beenm to feel it has all conglomerate into one being mass. people in the federal government, republicans and democrats, are so at times in effect to will. we see this bipartisan fighting going on and on. i think it is a front. like certain issues with immigration and stuff like that, they already know what they want. get soes says we will many people in the next canyons. in the tenuous, we will wake up and it will be that many more. i just feel that people like you who have the opportunity to see things clear and you have a plan
to point that i do not have, that seems to be wishing washy and just blending in and taking what you are given. fairly the system is corrupt. it is not an opinion. his it is something that i have come to from reading hours and hours. i would have a stack like the bible of different excess i would take from newspapers all over the place. host: i will stop you there. you made a couple of points and we will hit a response. mentioned theler media has conglomerates. that may be true from a corporate perspective. the media has been invited more than ever. of politicaloblems polarization in this country is the fact that every political parts of the spectrum has their own news source.
conservative blogs, liberal blocks. instead of conglomeration, i see diffusion in the media. -- conservative blogs, a liberal blogs. host: is there any chance ranch would run for president -- rand paul would run for president? as a third-party candidate? guest: there has not been a successful third-party candidate for decades. a war weary public concern to more about public debt and foreign affairs. this has created an opening for restraint alternatives. senator rand paul has seized that opportunity. guest: if you believe the united states should adopt a more limited role abroad, there has never been a better time for your views to find a receptive
audience than now. the economy is still weak. people are concerned more about fiscal issues and foreign policy. they are looking for places to save money. they believe the pentagon is now exempt from cuts. second of all, you have the wars in iraq and afghanistan. the was such a failure that republicans tarnished their brand on foreign policy. america has grown tired of that war. toward war have created an opportunity for somebody like rand paul. host: on the democratic line, good morning. caller: good morning. in new york times columnist said con is aticle that neo- euphemism for a zionist jews.
key have any comments on his observation? -- do you have any comments on his observation? guest: it is a legitimate category. you can debate if it falls into it or not. caller is from ohio, just out of cleveland. caller: i would like to ask a question ofnmr. r -- of mr. reid. when is the republican party going to get their act together? and ted cruz paul and we could have it all. guest: there is a difference between marco rubio and rand paul. they have both taken similar
positions on economic policy and fiscal policy. when it comes to foreign policy, that is where they converge. your piece begins on wednesday, march 6 as rand paul took to the floor of the senate to block the nomination of john brennan to serve as the senate nomination. here is part of what senator paul had to say on the floor of the senate. [video clip] >> i will speak until i can no longer speak. i will speak until the alarm is sounded coast-to-coast. the constitution is important. your rights to trial by jury are precious. no american can be killed by drone on american soil without first being found guilty of a crime in an american
court. that an american can be killed in a cafe in san francisco or in a restaurant in houston or in their home in kentucky is an abomination. it is something that should not and cannot be tolerated in our country. march on thest senate floor, senator rand paul. what was the aftermath of his filibuster? was not successful in that the nomination went through. he bolstered his political support and public appeal. he managed to get the white house -- the department of justice -- to issue in an appointee of that no the west that the u.s. government does -- the part of justice and no u.s. government agency has the right.
a symbolic statement that forced the, administration to admit a legal point it should have been able to commit any way. it isher way to look at that there are some americans. john mccain admitted to me in the article. there are american context that are not sure the obama demonstration was not used drones on their soil. than -- the line -- a dentist in kentucky. guest: he never held political office before senator. he is being taken seriously as a 2016 candidate.
in six years, he could be running for president. that is a pretty fast and sent -- ascent. caller: will the republican party, after all it has been through, learned that the problems in the middle east are because of decades of flawed foreign policy and not necessarily because we are free and they are nine, or we are christian and they are not? particularly with respect to rand paul. he seems to be of that camp. his father, ron paul, seems to be of the camp that has actually acknowledged that decades of foreign policy have created so many problems it will take that case to get out of it.
i would like to get your spin on that, please. guest: there is a difference between ron paul and rand paul and it is less than you are suggesting. it is a matter of rhetorical presentation. rand paul has been fairly open in admitting the united states has had flawed policies in the newly the best in the middle east. they criticize the president for theping up -- policies in middle east. it criticized the president for propping up mubarak's all those years. host: why would rand paul be treated differently from his father and get the gop nomination? guest: that is the central challenge that rand paul has right now. he has done a lot of work trying to distance themselves from his father. in the article, -- he has done a
lot of work trying to distance himself from his father. to throw is willing his father under the bus when it came to israel. he made a concerted effort privately to make sure he does not share all of his father's views. the second thing is the rhetorical presentation. run policies and self as a truth teller and is willing to say what he believes, forgetting how that will be received. rand paul is more politically savvy. -- tows he has to teeth keep different coalitions satisfied. his views on foreign policy are more mainstream than his father 's. host: one of our viewers says rand paul has to win over his
father's his supporters. is with foreign affairs magazine. caller: i have a question for stuart. just curious if you are familiar with the concept of common law. if so, give us your definition. guest: i am not a lawyer. i will leave that question for those who are. host: we heard the line wacko- bird, for which senator mccann apologize for. mccain apologized for.
people like john mccain in the senate are willing to call them wacko birds and make it clear that they disagree with their views. in fact, the views are dangerous for foreign policy in the world. host: there is a reference to ronald reagan in your piece. can you explain? guest: guest: every republican wants to associate themselves with ronald reagan. then there is the question of who is the heir to his legacy. rand paul tried to claim the reaganof reagan saying did increase restrained foreign
policy and was careful about how he used force. kagan had a, robert column criticizing back and saying it was a ridiculous because reagan was willing to stand up to dictators here and there. the interesting thing is rand paul is right, that reagan was careful about the way he used foreign policy. he did not see the united states in major wars. he withdrew from lebanon after the bombing. however, ronald reagan was more of an internationalist. cutsgned the nuclear agreements with the soviets. he was willing to be part of the global world order and active participant. onre is something to be said alsopaul's side, but ronald reagan would not completely agree with rand paul's foreign policy.
host: the next call is on the republican line. caller: i am a conservative republican. conservative republicans continue to pander to the communists in china in terms of trade policy and other issues? how conservatives control over for the communist regime -- can roll over for a communist regime. guest: i think you are seeing the divide between human rights and a ideological issues. in a way, the republican party might be torn on this issue. trade,he party of free promoting business interests in the united states. on the other hand, when it comes to china, that would mean dealing with the regime that has a terrible record on human rights. hasforeign policy elite
sided with the economic interests in that case. pointyou touched on this tweeted in. of st he earned a lot reet cred for the old-fashioned filibuster. we are seeing strange alliances of liberal democrats with rand paul and his supporters. the senator from oregon, a democrat, joined rand paul's filibuster. conferenceoke at the and talk about foreign policy. all of these events are part of our c-span the library. here is more with senator paul. [video clip]
angers me to support regimes that put questions to death. -- that put christians to death. i say no more money to countries doing that. [applause] there is a war on christianity, not just from the liberal elites at home, but worldwide. your government, or more correctly you, are having to pay for it. things youof the have seen with rand paul is he made a big trip to israel in january. there were two purposes of the trip. one was to reassure the pro- israel cruddy does not share all of his father's views. the other purpose was to rally his evangelical christian base
senator paul has appealed to christians. he talked about refusing to intervene in syria. he makes the point that christians would be at risk if assad fell. he is playing to multiple cross. one of those is the evangelical supporters. host: the next call is from spencer -- jeff. caller: you have touched on this a little bit. --er president of fish president bush, who declared himself the war president, you touched on this a little bit with the judeo-christian beliefs and how it's tied to israel and our antagonists in the middle east. i firmly believe if mitt romney would have one president, we
would have paratroopers and marines in syria right now. we would probably be on our way to egypt to stop the so-called military coup. people are american getting tired and they know if we get republicans back in there, my kid will probably end up fighting in the middle east for either religious beliefs or oil. i would like your opinion on that. thanks. host: thank you. guest: i think one thing the caller is tapping into is the reputation the republican party has acquired in recent years or recently because of the george being theministration party of supporting foreign industry -- intervention. it was not always this way.
you see people tapping into the concerns the caller raised. host: john is joining us from iowa on the democrats learned. caller: i have a question. i tune in and heard something about a republican debate on foreign policy. it seemed like a bunch of grandstanding for rand paul. because we're focused on a piece about rand issue ofhe larger republican foreign policy. curious if your guest could point out major differences amongst the foreign policies. obama expanded military spending, expanded the war,
expanded and preserved a lot of fromorst post policies foreign policy. the nsa stuff that has come out, nobody on the democrat side and hardly anyone on the republican side is speaking out against it. everyone is being hush hush letting george zimmerman trial overflow the airwaves in the media. it is disheartening. i was wondering if there are major differences your guest thinks. guest: it depends on how you define major. what you point out is true. there is a bipartisan consensus on u.s. foreign policy. you see that with obama's continuation of the bush administration counterterrorism policies. you see that with the nsa domestic surveillance program.
yearshas been for many this consensus where a lot of voters are thinking what is the difference between the two parties. paul winggue the rand of the republican party is proposing something different. it is a matter of whether you want that difference. host: here is a question from one of our viewers. is the difference? guest: interesting question. i do not presume to speak for the republican elite or average voters. i think within the foreign policy elite you probably see people more willing to engage with turner realizing they are one of the world's largest economies and that you cannot just boycott it or you will hurt u.s. jobs and new ways. the average voter, china is not an issue in domestic politics.
to the extent they care about it, perhaps they wish we would have cracked down more when it came to human rights. i just do not think it is a salient issue. for: a couple more calls our guest, stuart reid. from south carolina, good morning. about: a want to talk foreign policy with egypt. i am from egypt. i have been in the united states since 1974. i have been working with the republicans since the 1980's when i took my citizenship. right now the situation is getting worse. we have a new president. the government of the united states does not want to recognize him.
they want to work with the military. they refuse to talk to him. were in thet romney white house, with our approach to egypt different? caller: i think it would. i think it would be much different. i do not like senator mccain. my sister is lindsey graham. i do not like their positions about egypt. i think the question of egypt is a difficult foreign policy issue. foreign policy is choosing among very bad options. what you are seeing with egypt is the limits of american power. romneyuld doa president do? i do not think there is a better answer to egyptian policy than any alternative. it is a difficult question.
things are not going well. that does not mean there is something the united states can do to make sure it goes better. host: the piece is by stuart reid on rand paul. gop he passesay's for a moderate. the next call is from the bronze on the independent line. caller: my concern about rand paul and his for a fair -- and his foreign affairs issues is he does not understand how to keep a united america. hell are you going to do anything overseas courts murphy most frightening part about it is the republican party is for getting the most important resource in america is the american people. the most frightening part is the with multiple
millions of illegals, party crashers come to our country and now they want to take away resources from us. when you look at our foreign affairs from egypt, you will have to understand there is a bigger issue in egypt. thank god we have enough money and influence over there to make sure we have a safer position. host: in response? guest: a think the caller is getting to the issue of domestic issues and foreign policy. the events of the world are trying to draw the united states in. at the same time, domestic concerns in the united states are strictly about national things such as the debt, immigration. i think there is this tension at a time when egypt is imploding and syria is getting worse, most
americans want to pay attention to domestic issues and do nation-building at home run of them abroad. host: stuart reid is a senior editor of "foreign affairs" magazine. thank you for being with us. 40 years ago when, we learned there was a recording device inside the nixon white house. as the tapes became available to the public, we learned how richard nixon operated. ofing up, the perspective author and historian richard norton smith as with the recordings of richard nixon from 1972 and 1973 as "washington journal" continues on this saturday morning. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> and one to the representative
look of american life. a representative look at american life. i was interested in the recurring pattern you see with newt gingrich, oprah, jay-z, sam walton. people begin in humble places and not unlike the main characters but sort of reinvent themselves as something new and find a new language and idea that is proving to americans. through that, they build an empire. they cannot stop building it. it is almost like an imperative with a corporation that you have to keep growing. as a person and a brand you have to keep growing. eventually, a sort of decadence sets in where the language becomes a parody of itself. they no longer seem to be producing something good.
they just continue to produce. newt gingrich keeps writing a book after book. oprah is on the cover of every issue of her magazine. they become a celebrity as we are familiar with who dominate our imaginations and in a way have come to replace the institutions that have faltered in this time. >> he intertwines the struggle of three americans whose american way of life has failed them on sunday at 8:00. >> someone touched upon the idea that women could not entering intorole the white house. i did find one political observer that, and to the 1860's election, mary started with mr. lincoln when he was a poor young man with no idea of being called to the presidency than of being a terrible -- cannible.
i tried to lay out the idea that mary lincoln would not have let a little thing like human sacrifice come between her and her goal. she was ambitious. she did talk about him perhaps entering the white house. she was a true political partner. >> as we continue our conversation on first ladies, we will hear from historians and authors about the role of first lady and how it has changed along with the nation. journal" continues. host: richard norton smith has and exact ae director of a number of presidential libraries. he is also an author and lecturer at george mason university. it was 40 years ago this summer we learned about the nixon tapes. cover the had on its caricature of the recording
device inside the white house. i want to share some of those conversations including this from august of 1972 as president nixon running for reelection in a phone call on the upcoming campaign and his rival senator john mcgovern. [video clip] it is moresuggest than a little lie. i would not let him get away with the hitler stuff. >> he did a good job on that yesterday. we have a bunch of people hitting that. >> that is good. to say a word.on the purpose of this is defensive. of what the charge and words used -- it is a dirty campaign of slander, lies, vilification.
a hit on that last night. >> about the hitler thing? expected george mcgovern to conduct a high-level campaign and he has not. >> let them say that. figure out a better word, a campaign of smear and fear. >> slender, smear and fear. host: let's put this in perspective. it was august of 1972. it was after the break-in. you have a sense of richard 's political insight. guest: it is a fascinating conversation on different levels. richard nixon is riding high in
the polls. he has a two to one lead over george mcgovern. it is fascinating that with the thatof thing in the making the president is parsing mcgovern's -- one of the interesting things about richard nixon is people who knew him well observed he was in much better campaign manager for other people than he was for himself. to putll presidents tend themselves in the position of campaign and enter -- and campaign manager. it is fascinating listening to him come up with slogans to encompass with the anti-mcgovern message should be when in fact mcgovern was destroying his own campaign. host: talking about the nixon tapes. our phone lines are open. we welcome your comments and
questions. have the line for democrats, republicans, and our address on the internet. you can also send us a tweet. richard nixon was not the first president to have a recording device in the white house. he certainly was not the last. i think if you gave historians sodium pentothal, they would give you differing answers. post-ne, especially nixon, decries the practice. certainly in our lifetime it will never happen again. on the other hand, there is a thatation of historians have been able to find things as a result of the nixon and kennedy tapes. there is a lot that is different about the nixon tapes. lots of people think he had them
from the beginning. he did not. one of the first things he did was take out president johnson's elaborate taping system. he only installed one of his own halfway through the first term. when we talk about the nixon tapes, we're talking about from 19 -- january of 1971 until july of 1973. the biggest difference in addition to how large part they were, they were not just in the oval office. they were at camp david. they were in the lincoln room. they were extensive. all the other taping systems have been manually operated. that meant he was up to the president to decide whether or not to activate. in the case of richard nixon, in part because those who knew him well knew he was not very adept with things technological, something i can sympathize with, it was not manual.
.t was a voice activated everyone who ventured into these areas was preserved for posterity. not terribly well. one of the problems for people who have studied the tapes, there are a lot of technological shortcomings beginning with the tape itself. think of the practice, and it is hard to countenance it morally, historians will tell you is produced -- has produced what nixon wanted, the best chronicle that documented american presidency in history. host: do you think he forgot the recordings were on? guest: i think he forgot. it is a great question.
it requires us to get inside richard nixon's head, not an easy thing to do. those who have listened to the tapes are of the opinion there are times he is speaking for history, he is very cognizant of it. one of the theories as to why he installed the taping system was because at the beginning in 1971, that is the year when the and the sovietna union, when these historic policies took shape. nixon knew they were in the sure hed wanted to make had a comprehensive historical record. but for the most part, i think after a while he forgot they were on. host: all this month on c-span , you will have a chance to hear more of these nixon recordings as we look back at
what the former president said in these conversations, including one with his national security adviser and later secretary of state henry kissinger on the situation in vietnam. this from 1972. [video clip] >> i would like to hope not. >> everything is going along. killing a lot of vietnamese. >> it must be a murder scene. >> the vietnamese are planning a protest. that is what we want. >> basically grind them up. >> whatever they can do in september and october. >> that have not to occur to me, but you are right. lam sahn. theythey shoot them, cannot shoot later. your intelligence
folder this morning. i do it every now and then to keep my head in a. what was impressive to me is thank god we have the carriers and b-52s out there. we have the extra ones. that is the point. they can lambaste the hell out of them. >> we could not have accomplished it otherwise. i keep getting a lot of reports about how much they are hurting. one othertally, thing. there is a column in the "washington post" this morning mcgovern.hanoi loves that is something. >> so true. host: a want to ask about the relationship between richard nixon and henry kissinger. equality these recordings are
different from what we heard in the johnson tapes and early roosevelt recordings in a difficult year. than a lotch better of the nixon tapes. i have to tell you i have not listened to a lot of the nixon tapes. what we hear this morning is considerably better than much of what has been present -- been preserved. host: richard nixon and henry kissinger. guest: last word about the relationship will not be written for a long time. one of the theories on why he installed the taping system was given the diplomatic initiatives he wanted to pursue was to make sure history would credit him and not his secretary. at that time, he was not a secretary of state. he was a national security adviser. there was always at its best a creative tension between the president henry kissinger. historians are still angling
over who is responsible for what. one thing these calls made clear it does not matter who is president or what party they presidents want to hear people agreeing with them. it is the single biggest danger in many ways. people talk about the bible. there is a physical bubble that comes with the presidency. there is a more dangerous bubble. it is the tendency of people, ambitious people, people who are your supporters, people who have an agenda, to tell you what they think you want to hear. line where is one henry kissinger says, mr. president, that was the finest speech ever delivered by anyone. from one of our
viewers going back to the 1972 campaign. did he micromanage? guest: that is a great question. i think he was significantly involved in terms of setting the themes. i do not think he was at the level of determining schedules and where he would go, that sort of thing. richard nixon never ran for office without in effect running his campaign. that was no exception. the reality is he could have gone away for three months. he could have sat on an island somewhere for three months and would have won 60% of the vote. 1973, cover0, story. "the nixon tapes."
jimmy is joining us from georgia. caller: i would like to ask about the canada letter -- skieeth letter and mucki campaign that failed. was it ever shown one of nixon's people had anything to do with the kenneth letter that to start crying? tricksthere was a dirty operation. i want to be careful. there was a gentleman named donald involved in some of those activities. tracing direct lines to the oval office is difficult. but there is no doubt the nixon campaign pursued the activities
you mentioned. the leader hads using typical language. he referred to dwight eisenhower. if you lived in new hampshire in those days, you either loved or hated "the union leader." was edmund muskie was responding to that editorial. he stood outside the "union leader" building in manchester in a snowstorm to defend the honor of his wife. to this day, there is an argument over whether he was "crying" or whether there was
snow on his face milton. one of thet, it was first instances where a flock flap would not have been a but wascant development woul magnified. there was no doubt richard nixon would rather run against george mcgovern and edward muskie -- then it edmund muskie. host: there is memorabilia including the front page from the next day with him on the flatbed truck. robert how is this. robert has this. guest: i am not familiar with disputee so i would not
it. there is no doubt a view thatated the white house was not unique to the nixon white house but highly developed in the nixon white house of ontimization, particularly vietnam. richard nixon felt he had inherited an unpopular war and lots of folks who had reluctantly supported the law as lot with the war as long as there was a democrat in the white house changed their positions as long as there was a republican in the white house. that said, it is never an attractive stance for the so- called most powerful man in the world to see himself as a victim of more powerful forces, including a talk-show host.
host: vietnam was the topic of inference -- conversation june of 1974. less than a week after the watergate break-in. here's more from that conversation with president nixon in 1972. [video clip] draftee thing. that was well-handled, i presume. >> it was good. tough questioning about the air force personnel and thailand. it went very well. it was a whole commentary of support in this vein -- this thing, that this is the best thing the north vietnamese can expect. i always get concerned when
they raise the question about air and naval forces. do not worry about it. more important than the 10,000 people in my opinion is the no draftees. that depersonalizes it. mothers know their kids do not have to go off and get shot at. kids know it. if they want to be there, that is their business. that changes the character of it significantly. but did play well. -- that did play well. you will have an opportunity -- i suppose the question is how many draftees are in the air force and naval forces. do you get my point? >> yes, sir. some insights on richard nixon, his conversation with
chuck colson, june 24, 1972. one take away from the conversation is a different media environment than today. guest: very true. were threeys, there television networks. they controlled 95% of the audience we did not have cable tv. we did not have the internet. it worked both ways. richard nixon was one of the last american presidents who could use the bully pulpit in ways that moved in numbers. the white house could calle threonine in new york city at 1:00 and be assured of having -- 3 man in new york city at 1:00 in the morning and be assured of having primetime that night. verax of wrightwood offer was called instant analysis.
today the president wants to make a speech. he may not be on three networks. and does not particularly a matter. he will be on cable. cable is defined by their own ideological color races. forget. seeral ride -- eric vereid. before he is halfway through his speech, millions are twittering their analysis. it is a different environment. it was the mistress of the chief job of the president is to persuade people. it is a lot harder to persuade people today than it was in richard nixon's time. nixons one reason why seems obsessed with the media and what they are saying about him. he knows how powerful an instrument they are for public office. guest is richard
norton smith. we're looking at the nixon tapes 40 years after they become became public knowledge. we're airing these on c-span radio during the month of july. you can listen to the recordings anytime online at c-span.org. the next call is from california on the independent line. have a question -- when president johnson was in the white house, i think he was talking to senator dirksen. president johnson knew nixon's thele were messing with promising to get out
of the war. if johnson would have brought up, the think it would be possible nixon would never have been president? host: appreciate the call. this is from another viewer about a secret plan. guest: the idea of the secret plan was called vietnamization. i think he was surprised and disappointed the north vietnamese were as intractable in response to his efforts to gradually extract the united states from the war as they were to any offers from lbj. the other question the caller raises, i think what he is referring to is at the end of the 1968 campaign when hubert humphrey had broken with lbj and
indicated he would go further than president johnson in terms of stopping the bombing of north last days,j in the thursday before the election, announced a bombing pause. that peaceion was was at hand. this is something still disputed on both sides. clearly there were nixon supporters who sent the message to the president in saigon that is not in your interest to cooperate. give us a few days. you will have a friendlier president in the white house. line about history is arguments without end.
we're still wrangling over what happened and what was behind it. the tapes help but they are just one tool. host: we will air some of the johnson recordings next month on c-span radio. all this information is available on our website. this month, we're focusing on the nixon tapes. you had a thought? guest: the johnson tapes are fascinating. unlike the nixon tapes, the johnson tapes turned out to be his memoirs. he wrote a book where he expunged almost any sign of personality. he took out everything that was lyndon johnson. his strength and idiosyncracies, for that you have to listen to tapes. closedre supposed to be for 50 years. mrs. johnson gave her permission
to open the tapes. they have probably done more to aid his reputation than anything he ever wrote. the nixon tapes have not had the same impact. is turning 90 this month. president ford would be turning 100. both are often referred to in the nixon tapes. did you ever talk to fort ord dole about the tapes? guest: it is interesting. dole made a joke about it. i am not speaking ill of the dead. everyone knew that chuckles and underwent a profound spiritual conversion in his later years -- that chuck colson underwent a profound spiritual conversion in his later years. he was a tough guy. he would send speeches out to bob dole that he would not
deliver. they were about over the top. in particular, personal attacks on the publisher of the "washington post." le on occasions that i am not saying this. this did not sit well in the nixon white house. after the 1972 landslide, one of the first people to lose their jobs was the republican national chairman, bob dole, who was replaced by george herbert walker bush, and the rest is history. host: david joins us from 9 million, texas -- magnolia, texas. caller: i used to work at the "washington post" in 1973. i worked the press room. we would get off at 4:00 in the morning. we lived in virginia.
go from the white house to the bridge to get into virginia. re at 4:00o by the or 4: 30 in the morning. there would be limousines, cadillacs on the grass. no offense then, on the white house. say any time we seen all of those cars we knew something was getting ready to big and we knew we would retire the next day. host: thank you for the call and personal insight. much has emerged from that period. to bell, everyone wanted woodward and bernstein. 40 years later and newspapers are on life support. host: the next call is from springfield on the republican line.
caller: good morning. my question goes to the taping program itself. it seemed to be quite extensive. ran theious as to who taping program itself. was this the secret service? was this a separate apartment within the white house? what were the mechanics, especially in light of today with the nsa program, etc.? who was responsible? host: thanks for the call. it is a great question. this was something that did not happen until january of 1971. presumably the president had given it a lot of thought about the mechanics of the thing. the fact is it was operated by secret service.
not by caa or other security operatives, precisely because of concerns it might leak. the story is that no more than five people knew of the existence of the system. , at sad, over the years number of people have said they surmised without having proof when they were in the oval office that they were probably being taped. who knows how many people. in terms of people actually knew of this and more involved with this region what happened is they had to store these tapes. they had a slow-running tape. they were not transcribed. the president made that decision. they were not to be transcribed. that was one more guarantee against the worst, which in the
end happened. safe in the wall of the secret service locker room underneath the oval office. they stored them there. at least initially. alexander butterfield was an agent. it was 40 years ago today in private session with the congressional committee investigators, while he was being interviewed prior to his televised public appearance of butterfield reveal the existence of the taping system. it would be three days later on july 16 he was on national tv answering the question from fred dawson confirming this. transformed the entire investigation.
for the rest of the nixon presidency, it was all about the tapes. access to the tapes, who would see the tapes, whether they would be edited. of course, it wound up at the supreme court. story fromer cover "con" magazine. -- from "time" magazine. the locker room conversation between president nixon and his incoming attorney general, this conversation from june of 1972 just a week before the watergate break-in. [video clip] >> how day you like that court? >> it is really good. >> they have been doing well. >> one more. >> one more man. who are you going to shoot?
>> i will give some redheaded broad and sic them on dou glas. >> they have tried everything on him and nothing works. >> you can always hope. [laughter] >> i imagine there would be many willing to make the sacrifice. this is a conspiratorial conversation. i hope the line is not attacked. a call from camp david. we're on the radio telephone. we're broadcasting to the entire world. host: richard norton smith. guest: freezing is perfect, locker room conversations. i do not mean off color or profane. i suspect if you put tape recording devices in most of -- zero offices, you would sooner or later pick up
conversations like this. i am not suggesting this is typical or universal. but the fact is presidents blow off steam. richard nixon had a well- developed sense of who his adversaries were, who his enemies real or imagined were, around those few people he he would indulge himself in that. who understooder politics and knew intimately everything on the tapes, why did he not destroy them? guest: but he did not know what was on the tapes. the hardest thing for us to grasp for years later, because we know what happened, is a richard nixon always believed the tapes would exonerate him.
earlier i said presidents are surrounded by people who tell them what they want to hear. i go back to the bubble. believe what they are doing is for the right reason. it will be historically appreciated even if it is not journalistically appreciated. presidents do not spend a lot of time questioning their motives. probably spent less time than most. --hard nixon believed remember he used lincoln to the court later ruled were abuse of power. he saw himself not just as an embattled president. he saw himself in a country where a civil insurrection was under way over the war and the like. was that justifying him and
taking all sorts of measures? it is easy for anyone sitting behind that desk to justify almost anything. richard nixon is not unique in that regard. smith, miked norton is on the phone from california. caller: i have a couple of things. i will be brief. professor smith, do you think when it came to dirty tricks, nixon was unique compared to other people? if i am not mistaken, the book your working on is about rockefeller. is that correct? i look forward to reading it. guest: the book is almost done. it will be published by random house in the fall of 2014. thank you for your expression of interest.
host: particularly along the lines of nixon and rockefeller, their relationship. guest: nixon once said the republican party was not big enough for both of them. ironically, they lived in the same building in new york between 1961 and 1969. nelson rockefeller went to his grave believing, and he heard it from john mitchell, that the nixon folks had bugged his in 1968.plane what goes around comes around. his numbere picked one supporter as his running mate, spiro agnew. guest: he had become his former number one supporter. notefeller humiliated agnew telling him when he pulled out of the race. , an invitation
from nixon went out to governor agnew and they discovered previously hidden virtues in each other. the question about nixon and dirty tricks, there is a long history of presidents of both parties of using government anncies, including the irs investigatory functions. it is a large subject. what sets the nixon administration apart is the magnitude of wrongdoing. quite frankly, the threat posed to american democracy if this were to become the norm.
host: we're talking about the nixon tapes that can be heard on c-span reveal all this money into all this month. our guest is author and historian richard norton smith. we want to direct your attention to a website, presidents andpatriots.com. year, a couple of times a lots ofa bus and visit presidential homes and libraries and battlefields and other attractions. with ther, coinciding peak of the fall foliage season, we're doing a flagship trip. it is 11 presidents in nine days. adams sites,
with's cottage, hyde park the newly renovated fdr library. five-star hotels. you can go online to find out more information. you can call a real live human 657-7444 to find out more. host: we will keep that number on the screen and put a thing website. we go to george. caller: this is interesting. thank you. when i was a child, i remember gathering around -- i was visiting an elderly relative in a public housing development. everybody was crying when nixon rose resigning. i talked to one of the elderly people and asked why she was crying.
she said he brought us ssi for the elderly. can you talk about nixon creating ssi? all of these people were shocked when he resigned. in this elderly housing project, there were all these tears. a lot of people were not understanding and just listening to his tone of voice. one elderly woman counted the inmber of times he said "um" his speech, over 1000 times. thingsthere are so many we take for granted. nixon portrayed himself as a foreign-policy president. there has been a lot of scholarship in recent years that has put the spotlight back on his domestic presidency. one reason nixon is a man without a party today has
nothing to do with watergate. the fact is richard nixon in some ways with last new deal president. indexed social security and other social programs' benefits. osha was created under richard nixon. the environmental protection agency was created under richard nixon. of bern medvedev -- affirmative action in the workplace was brought into the public arena. richard nixon got no publicity or credit, but it was the nixon presidency that desegregated southern schools. for all their was a southern strategy, at the same time, nixon was doing what his quaker conscience told him was the right thing to do. it is one reason why he is extraordinarily complicated. he said it would be 50 years
before anyone could write about him objectively. we have not gotten to that point yet. there are people out there trying. part of the problem is he is -- there are so many -- for example, if he was the last new deal president but was shrewd enough to do what demographics told him he had to do. once he was reelected, he basically had a mandate to move in a more conservative direction. there is a subtlety about the nixon presidency that today's modern republican party might benefit from. host: richard norton smith, your new book on rockefeller is coming out next fall.
andpatriots.com. thank you for being with us. we will continue the conversation tomorrow morning on "washington journal." us guest will be joining from "the hill" to talk about the affordable care act and action in the house and senate next week. we will talk about the andementation of obamacare perspective on the latest on egypt and the middle east from a former ambassador who served as a middle east adviser to president carter. that is all tomorrow morning. thank you for joining us on "washington journal." enjoy the rest of your weekend. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]
, some >> today on c-span of the house and senate homeland security hearings on the boston marathon bombing followed by the special inspector general for iraq reconstruction. the they house homeland security committee hears testimony from rudy giuliani on the boston marathon bombings. witnesses also include a national counterterrorism center former direct or and a georgetown university professor. this portion of the hearing is one hour. >>