Skip to main content

tv   Washington Journal 10082017  CSPAN  October 8, 2017 7:00am-10:01am EDT

7:00 am
and then director and caribbean talks about u.s. cuba tensions. frank mora. ♪ host: you may not be surprised to hear that the partisan political divide in america is wider than ever mentioned. you is howrprise quickly the views have evolved. good morning and welcome to on thiston journal," sunday morning. october the eighth, 2000 17. we look at a poll on partisanship as it came out this week from the few research center. you can read this online. we ask you how we can bridge the political divide in america. .epublicans call (202) 748-8001
7:01 am
democrats, (202) 748-8000. all others, (202) 748-8002. we welcome your posts on facebook as well. and we look for your tweets. send those. we will get to your calls momentarily. again, this is a poll that came out from the pew research center . a couple of the leading paragraphs that came out this weekend. a busy newsweek and we thought they get around to hearing your thoughts on this. the key take away -- for more than two decorates, partisan divide has been a force in politics. today, the divide between pins and democrats on fundamental issues including the role of government, it worse education issues.graphic "what is striking is how little
7:02 am
common ground there is among partisans today. even on issues on which republicans and democrats have moved in the same direction -- for example, growing numbers in both parties say homosexuality should be accepted rather than discouraged -- the partisan differences are wider today than in the past." directorical research joins us first thing this morning. thank you for being on the doherty.carrol how often do you do this research and how often is it updated? guest: several go back to 1994. we have seen value in updating them at various times. of howve a portrait attitudes in america have changed over time.
7:03 am
what types of people do you survey and how is the survey conducted? guest: we get a representative sample across the country. and we do it via telephone. done in the same way each time. and so there is the ability to years. over the host: is there an area of the polls i surprised you the most, in terms of the response from the people you survey? guest: i think one of the many interesting findings is how quickly -- we had done a major , and howhis in 2014 much things have changed since then, particularly among democrats. democrats taking a more liberal position on government aid to the needy, racial discrimination, immigration and other issues. and that change has been pretty
7:04 am
striking over the past couple of years. host: one of the surveys and polls that continue to come out from gallup or the associated press is the presidential rating. how the president rates. if you look at your survey, you look at the difference between the approval of trump between democrats and republicans, here is a look at that chart. the approval rating for democrats is 8%. republicans, it 88%. 88% approve of trump although the difference between obama when he was surveyed -- 85% of of democrats, -- rather. a big divide but not as big as you are seeing now with trump. guest: what you have been seeing with the presidential approval ratings with a few exceptions is a steady trend towards greater
7:05 am
polarization. by that i mean lower approval ratings. consistently higher approval ratings. it predates trump and obama. you, how do ask politicians, pollsters, how do they use the information that the pew research center gather? guest: they use this in a variety of way. the big question we get is, how can this divide be bridged? but it is a, get a question because it took many years to get here. i don't think there is any single factor that will change things overnight. host: do you see particular politicians or groups that have responded? ask this morning
7:06 am
is how to bridge that divide. working on specific, targeted areas to do that? guest: it is difficult. there is a powerful incentive because the party bases tell us that we are very far apart. a superficial -- superficial disagreement. these are fundamental differences. host: our viewers can read the poll. doherty was telling us a bit about the survey. inc. you for being with us. we have opened up our phone lines for your thoughts on the issue. how do we bridge the partisan divide on -- divide in the u.s.? we go to robert in baltimore on the democrat line. caller: how are you today?
7:07 am
host: i can hear you fine. caller: the way we can bridge the divide is that everybody needs to get better informed and stop relying on social media for their information. and an example of bridging the divide is this thing with coal versus renewable energy. use the energy we have been using until they perfect the idea of renewable energy. you can implement all that stuff. and energy. and they can learn that stuff and then you can sell it to them. host: how do you say people should get off social media and get better informed? how do you get better informed? guest: i watch msnbc. fox news.
7:08 am
al jones i look at because as crazy as he seems, sometimes he does make sense. and sometimes he is crazy as hell. you know, people need to stop fighting and trying to destroy each other as that is how russia was able to help trump when the election. they might've had a little part of that. country, as long as we are divided, it gives other countries to do what they want to do. host: drive safely. (202) 748-8001, republicans. (202) 748-8000, democrats. (202) 748-8002, all others. we are asking you this morning about the political divide in america. how we resolve that. how we bridge it. in massachusetts, good morning to joshua. caller hell are you? host: doing fine. thank you.
7:09 am
,aller: as anti-trump as i am there is always been in the differenceshe u.s., -- at one point it was southern democrats, way back. even in the 80's and 90's. northeast republicans. i ami mean to say is that a party affiliated person. i have never been more frightened for our country than i am now. and i don't feel it needs -- yes, we need to come together to we need to stick principle. and i don't think most americans, whatever their americans -- most
7:10 am
we need to come together but the parties need to particularly being reformatted. i saw an article, i believe in the new york times yesterday or today, saying that the republicans cannot control themselves. if things were the way they were in my part of the country in the 70's or 80's, i would not be a democrat. i will finally say that this is unprecedented for democrats, republicans and everyone else. and we need to do what we can. host: you mention the word principles. sticking to their principles -- oh, have we lost him? thank you for your call. we go to joseph in texas. good morning. caller: yes.
7:11 am
really badare in a place now. because we have rex tillerson trying to negotiate, trying to get a peaceful solution to this possible nuclear destruction. our presidentve to seems to be undercutting him and i don't understand that. i don't understand how the president is still talking about holding it all. what we really need are around areas getting devastated. this devastation is costing us and our infrastructure. the illegalghing aliens are costing us. illegal aliens are coming over
7:12 am
here, they are working and contributing. what are you going to do about all the people that have been here and were brought here as children and they have been here working. and then they talk about deporting them? of the social security and stuff that they are paid in? are we going to send them social security when they become social security cage in the country they are? host: we appreciate your call. you did mention the hurricanes down in texas. overnight, hurricanes hit the gulf coast. the headline from cnn about that "hurricane neat weakens to a tropical storm after making landfall twice last night. including an biloxi. and heading now for the central and eastern art of the u.s.. we are asking you about the
7:13 am
political divide in the u.s.. we'll hear from tony on the republican line. hello. caller: how's it going? host: fine, thank you. caller: one of the things we need to do is tackle a bar -- faculty bipartisan issues that are truly bipartisan. removing gerrymandering from the district maps. host: how do we do that? well, you have states like arizona that have almost a third party entity that draws the map and if her moose as much political bias as possible. and it is as nonpolitical as possible and it brings it back to the people. if i knew that as a republican, my vote really mattered, i live in one of the most democratic counties in the state of illinois.
7:14 am
and if i knew that my vote truly i would be more inclined to make sure that going outund me were to vote. but there a joke in the state of illinois that if you are not a democrat, you may as well not even vote for president. host: thank you for the call. we have a lot of responses on twitter about how to break -- about how to bridge the political divide. national interests are secondary. if they are even that high. " "part of the country wants traditions that made us great." this 1 -- "deplorables have been bamboozled by the news. " jim, "how can americans bridge
7:15 am
the divide? it means something bad happens, no matter your side." ,ver the weekend, chuck schumer a headline in the washington phil rocker writes that frustrated by republican inaction on health care, trump tweeted on saturday that he had reached out to the senate democratic leader in hopes of breaking a deal for a "great health care bill." some say he talked to chuck schumer to talk about whether they can come to a deal on health care. trump wrote "i called chuck yesterday to see of the democrats want to do a great health care bill. obamacare is badly broken, big premiums. who knows."
7:16 am
chuck schumer responded by saying he was willing to work with trump to "improve the existing health care system" but not to "repeal and replace" the affordable care act. deal on aould make a temporary basis, because obamacare has exploded and it is gone, premiums are through the roof and you do see what is happening. if we can make a temporary deal, ultimately we will hand this back to the states. deal, ide a temporary think it would be a great thing for people but it is up to them. obamacare is a disaster. the numbers are out. it is exploding. a onelly, if we could do year or two year deal as a we headed tosure, the states which is what republicans want and that really is a repeal and replace. host: washington journal on sunday morning asking you how to
7:17 am
bridge the political divide in the u.s. (202) 748-8001, republicans. (202) 748-8000, democrats. , independent2 callers and others. up next, zach in missouri. caller: good morning. livenk that right now we in a fat-free climate. so maybe it isn't so much about how we can make bipartisanship happen, it is up to the individual to be wary of where they get the facts from. aller who talked about listening to msnbc and fox news and out jones are not wary enough. once you have settled on their you stand on an issue, i think
7:18 am
is, the truth of what that it will garner bipartisanship on its own merit. and, i think the leadership, that is where it starts. you know? they have to start getting to find some often kind of segregation and just how much congressman hang out with each other. and things like that. host: we appreciate that. to lillian in columbus, indiana. go ahead. yes, i don't think we'll ever get the democrats and republicans to sit down reach across the aisle together. affairs thatort of they have their heels stuck in.
7:19 am
as soon as trump was elected, pelosi and chuck schumer came out to say they would not work with republicans and they would not sign on with anything that the republicans put forward. that's not a good thing. teddy kennedy reached across the aisles to the republicans. we need to find other republicans who are willing to reach across the aisle together. that is only way we get anything done. host: who is your representative in your area? caller: joe donnelly is the senator. host: do you think he is the kind of person who reaches across the aisle? caller: i think he could be. he was when he was more local now that he is a senator, they are told to fall in line.
7:20 am
new people hope they can change they are now just told they should fall in line. if you go against what the republicans or democrats say, you are shut out and you won't get funding or help. host: yes. i appreciate your call. we are looking at the pew research on partisanship in the u.s. from the survey, they write that across 10 political values, there is now an average of 36% of a gap between leading democrats and republican leaders. much farthergap is than the differences between the opinions of blacks and whites, men and women and other groups in society.
7:21 am
we hear from john. good morning. we sacrificed our founding principles for the indulgences of allegiances and that is it. responsible citizenry. in theabandon that 1840's. until we reclaim our house and realize that we are our government, we will suffer with these politics going back and forth from one side to the other. host: do you think that either party has tried to re-claim the mantle of what you are talking about? caller: the people have to claim the mantle. we abandoned our house. we elect guys to make all the decisions for us. it takes 218 to pool the purse.
7:22 am
in las vegas, when everything happened, everybody wanted to dive into the indulgence of tradition and ceremony but no one wants to solve the problem. if we actually had house representatives that spoke for us than we would solve the problem first. we would indulge in the ceremonies but we will be focused on the and symbols. we need to look at why this guy did this. why was he left alone? people suffer terrible deaths alone. it isn't hard to know the motive. we are responsible for this. host: we go to the democrats line from north carolina. good morning. the first great commandment is to love thy lord and they god with all the heart
7:23 am
and the second is to love thy neighbor. if we don't put god first then we won't make it. i don't care if you're a democrat or republican but you need to put god first. they said the same thing with obama when he was being sworn in. a republican called in from -- look at what happened in vegas. these people came together. put politics aside and look at donald trump. -- this is not how you get along together. come on. look at fox news and rush limbaugh. put the stuff out there so people can see it. but god first. ist: in eden, north carolina
7:24 am
jeff. caller: hello. my comment would be that the to take thepear world benefit as their priority interest. aret of republicans democrats in disguise. but if you get the conservatives and look at the values and america,s that made this is what he wanted come to. so if we abandon our tradition, yes, we are multicultural, but we became great by speaking one language. requiring people to follow the law. special interest towards people here with children is unfair to
7:25 am
citizens here with children. so there will be no bridging the divide. not until people can say the most important place is america or the world. who are we going to place most of our values in our citizen interest? america first or the world first? what obama tried and obama failed in about every way. so america has got to take on the values. solve american problems first. when you sacrifice the people here who are struggling, it is because of the lack of good jobs. there are a lot of hard ways to make money. i have been there.
7:26 am
it will everthink be healed. we are you how we can bridge the political divide. we are discussing the pew research poll that you can read online. (202) 748-8001, republicans. (202) 748-8000, democrats. (202) 748-8002, all others. we also have comments on twitter, as well. "bridging the divide is just political rhetoric. trying to turn progressives into moderates." "omitting news is wrong, also." "can media organizations flip the script to seek areas of agreement?"
7:27 am
jan writes "after 60 votes on repeal and replace, it hasn't happened. trump think it will now?" the headline -- "partisan division isn't news but a leftward shift, is. " "one cause of the -- sayingpartisanship it is noticeable and has implications as the party looks towards 2020." read more online. next, welcome. caller: let's talk about where there is no political divide. case,am talking, in this about congress and the entire
7:28 am
media. and itt is the funding should be alarming to americans. i am talking about the funding of the military. we spend over $800 billion a year. you don't hear anybody in congress really get up there and complain about this spending of all this money and you don't media,ybody in the whether it is the conservative media or liberal, they are all for the military action. of most americans are aware the number of countries where we have military countries and our military stationed. a few days ago, we lost for men in niger. ideat americans have no that we had american troops stationed in niger.
7:29 am
it is the same picture. you can look hard but you can't find anybody in the media, including c-span or anybody in congress in either party, really going after the military budget. and our military actions around the world. there are number of countries american men stationed in. and we are talking about not billions of dollars, we are talking about trillions of dollars. in myhould alarm, opinion, americans. ont: the pew research poll partisanship in the u.s. does focus on american involvement overseas. one of the questions asked and the response they write is that democrats are more likely to favor an active role for the
7:30 am
u.s. as two years ago, democrats and republicans were it to flee -- were actively equal. worried about the future to be actively global. 38% in 2014. republican views have changed little. and in a new survey, 39% say it is best for the u.s. to be active in the world affairs while 54% say we should pay less attention to the overseas problems. .gain, that is a poll let's go to georgia on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. and you mayparties as well shoot yourself in one foot or the other. it doesn't matter. as there are private organizations that get absolutely no consideration for the american people. initiatives doing
7:31 am
or something where we put the ballots up for ourselves in our local areas, they are never going to put anything up there that has any interest for any of us. they are naming post offices and staff with the world on fire. any actual can't get information on these people through any of our news media. you don't know what these people floated records are. you don't know how long they have been charged with crimes. he don't know nothing about these morons. they are bought and paid for and they have corruption on them. these people aren't in any shape or form going to take care of us. host: one thing you can do is learn about criminal charges and backgrounds is if you go to our
7:32 am
website at under congressional chronicles, you go to that section and there is a listing in their of past votes so there is good background information. maybe not all of the things you are interested in in particular but the congressional chronicle covers debates and past debates that you did mention. let's go to matt in new york on that republican line. caller: good morning. i have a few points and i would like to hear me out. i think a lot of the partisan divide comes over the way the media has changed in the last couple of decades. on rexend days and days tillerson calling trump a more on but rex tillerson and himself .enies that
7:33 am
you had a woman on yesterday who believes that it is nonsense. caught up over the stupid, little stuff. and there are better things that need to be done and reported on. but the media has become very polarized. vietnam, when i had to deal with a change of planes in chicago, i was spit on and called "baby killer" in the chicago airport and i guarantee you there was not one republican spitting on me. host: that is what happened to .ou then, 50 years ago do you think that is a prevailing attitude now? among our military or towards our military? caller: we just heard a guy say
7:34 am
we spend too much money on the military. being involved with the veterans affairs, we hear people say it is a country club and these guys have issues and these people have never worn a uniform. because they are getting benefits that these guys did earn. but that isn't the only thing. me areeople who spit on the people running universities. system,educational teachers unions, they don't favor republicans. teach civicst even anymore. they teach a false thing about social justice. i know that you like to represent all points of view but
7:35 am
the nation is the most ultraleft of organizations in the country with a small following but you guys put them on the other morning. and there was a sports writer distasteed that trumps for the ceremonies was a distraction from his failures. from my point of view, the whole thing about social justice, black lives matter, it's nothing but a distraction from what is really happening in the african-american community. we appreciate that call. he talked about veterans and focusing on veterans. that had been a focus. this week, it a highlight which points giving veterans of choice is at a crossroads. writing that congress is facing a moment of truth on health care for veterans as funding runs out for an increasingly popular
7:36 am
program that provides access to private physicians. it was supposed to be short-term efforts. the looming decision on the future of the veterans choice program has significant implication. expire, theowed to vieques be back to the scandalous situation that made headlines in 2014 when the department failed to meet the needs of former service members while some veterans died while waiting to see a doctor. she writes, on the other hand, if they invest more money in the program, it could open the door to more privatization and raise the future of an agency that has its roots in the constitution. the morning today on. hope you have stayed dry with hurrican nate coming in?
7:37 am
caller: we haven't even gotten any rain. i want to make a comment on the partisan divide. backld say you have to go after the 1960's. the civil rights, and then when theard to 2008 democrats elected obama and then really broke the republicans. they will never forget the democrats for doing that. time,e if you go back in these things are all democrat. do is goou have to back and check the south. the wall south was democrat. now, the whole south is republican. and that is what they are. sons and daughters. and fathers, all democrats.
7:38 am
that is what they are. and it'll never be bridged. host: from the washington post, written a little bit about this from a piece that was red. the front pet of the new york times over where the democratic party may be heading. , liberals to send into tug-of-war. if a challenge from the upstart. the party. restart kenneth will right-sided we scrappy grassroots protest movement. but now, the so-called bigstance is attracting checks from liberal donors. posing an insurgent challenged from those in the institution itself. the jockeying between groups occurred mostly behind the scenes. but it has been acrimonious at times with upstarts complaining that their being blocked out by
7:39 am
a liberal establishment and they say it holds a democratic community that pave the way for the trump presidency. new york times writes that the tug-of-war between supporters of hillary clinton and bernie sanders foreshadowed a once in a generation reorganization of the american left that could dictate the tactics and ideology of the democratic party of years to come. if newcomers prevail, they could pull the party further to the left, leading it to embrace policy positions like those sanders, by bernie including single-payer health care and free tuition at public colleges. the upending of the left comes amid a broader realignment in american politics, with the republican party establishment also contending with a rising pro-trumpdriven by populists. good morning on the democrats line. the divide with the
7:40 am
electoral map is the problem. big cities where large groups of --ple live together, host: live together. host: are you there? caller: sorry about that. the countryside has a whole different type of view of life. they divide up the gerrymandering systems and it has really messed things up to the point where you can't represent the people. why couldn't they just square this off or whatever to get the right divide of people inside. you can't have these people who get elected every time -- 96% of thatime, i believe israel in elections themselves have become a false way of doing it.
7:41 am
there has got to be a better way of doing electoral maps where the cities and the countrysides are blended together a little bit better. then to have these big regards. that is what i have to say on the subject. host: thank you for the thoughts on gerrymandering. i do have a couple of calls about that. and the supreme court came into session last week and one of the first cases they came up was the wisconsin gerrymandering case. was held lastent week. you can watch the world argument online at we go to california. i had quick points. citizen andalized
7:42 am
we can 30 years ago and in the last 10 years, i see a lot of distance and how things are working out with political leaders. number one, i feel that we are saying that we have a bigger political divide with the parties but sometimes that might be a good thing in terms of the fact that all of the other opinions out there, perhaps they were not being heard in the past are now being heard. having said that, i still believe that whatever we need to learn to make those decisions and get along as a community, we learned them in kindergarten. we would,e ability if and i'm speaking from experience views, not political agreeing with my friends around me or family members, sometimes but through all of the arguments and discussions, we can sell respect each other. viewpoints,vergent
7:43 am
there is something underlying that. come youe not just know, doing whatever the opposite of the other side. ; yet bipartisan, why can't it be nonpartisan? so if we, as citizens, remember that and remember that we are part of the same team and we should look out for the issues. maybe we should look into the underlying reasons. even if some are ill-informed or if we don't have the best information available at the time. but the attitudinal change might
7:44 am
help us all get to the end game. leaders are accountable from every party. day,se at the end of the we are citizens. and in a democracy, we should be looking out for us. host: is it hard for you to operate as an independent in terms of a voter or getting your voice heard by politicians and the state? caller: absolutely. used to be a registered democrat. not get burnedo over and over again so i registered as an independent. i hold everybody accountable. i've vote for the issues. host: thank you for your call. to take15 more minutes
7:45 am
your calls. , republicans. (202) 748-8000, democrats. (202) 748-8002, all others. here is a piece from this past week on the associated press anding about joe biden kasich about teaming up to conduct a moderate discussion on bridging partisan divide. is part of then university of delaware's national agenda theory will take place october 17 at the school in newark, delaware. barack obama but stepped out of contention with a plate to washington to end partisan politics that he described as petty and mean-spirited. that is the discussion october delaware.n
7:46 am
c-span will be covering that so look for that to air in the new future on the c-span network. here is allen in tennessee. go ahead. caller: thank you, good morning. the biggest problem i see with --iticals divide right now and i have lived in washington, d.c. for 30 years -- republicans and democrats alike, they do not want an outsider like donald trump to come in who has no should i say experience? at all? and fix things? it isn't the way it is supposed to be. the problem with our government is that we don't have a government for the people anymore. the government is all about money. if you look at our congress and
7:47 am
senate, we have the freedom caucus. we have the hispanic caucus. we don't have a government for the people. the government is for everyone else except for the people. representatives do not live in the area where you are representing. so how can they voice the opinions of the people from the area they are representing? next up is pennsylvania, ray, good morning on the independent line. caller: good morning. the gentleman from tennessee, he pressed on something. i'm courage everybody in your listening audience to read a book that a friend of mine gave me. it is called extortion. i will repeat that. "extortion." it explains exactly why the two
7:48 am
sides will never come together. people are calling and telling you that they don't believe they will represent you anymore and it is all about how these politicians down there are nothing more than gangsters who extort money from big corporations and companies where the average american has a that big moneyk controls the congress and the senate. it is the extortion of these companies that ring the money in. with the amount of time and congress, all the money they raise for the reelection campaigns, they filter it into the tax and then they use it. because they made a law saying that you can't use this money because it was for the reelection.
7:49 am
if you ask any politician, you get something different. keep -- read that book. it will open your eyes. getting in contact with your congressman and senator. the real power is in the primary. you have to get rid of the old and twoho are connected are extorting. bernie sanders changed. i watched him when he first announced his presidency. to a thing that the democrats used to go to. going after the evil rich. bernie sanders did a sidestep. because he is rich under any standard.
7:50 am
he went to the billionaire class. it's not the rich. it is the billionaire class. i watched bernie sanders. he pivoted. how do you think they get the millions of dollars? extortion. get the book and read it. it is a good book. that, ray.preciate a couple of comments on twitter. this one says in terms of the political divide "urging the political gap, removing dj t from office. gerrymander fix -- rectangles." "if the world were run by liberals, the economy will be booming, there would be no wars or poverty."
7:51 am
"audience is pretty small. and not representative of the general population." onm michigan, welcome to pat the democrat line. caller: thank you for c-span. i listen most mornings and i'm fascinated with the opinions of my fellow citizens. first of all, if we want to bridge the gap, i would like to see republicans call us the democratic party and not the immigrant -- and not the democrats. irk most does that democrats? caller: because we labeled ourselves as the democratic party. we don't call the republicans the republican party. we put the ending on there. that is neither here nor there. what i'm calling about is the
7:52 am
fact that i feel that both parties are representing the toremes in part due gerrymandering. withparties are flush money. and they don't listen to the fact that the people in this latest gun episode -- most people, even people belonging to legion ashe american we do, those whose families have been involved in the military in every one of the wars -- we feel that common sense rules about or healthmigration care are things that most people in our country agree on. how to implement those ideas is part of the discussion. and we are left with people on both sides that pull us apart.
7:53 am
and they are supposedly our representatives. host: we appreciate your call. thank you for listening. next, pennsylvania. mike, good morning. caller: all of these people seem to have forgotten the tea party. all of the tea partiers were voted into office, yelling and screaming about not compromising their ultraconservative points of view. they will not compromise if they're not willing to listen to anyone's point of view which means there is no governing. because governing has to do with compromise and coming to some place in the middle. and they were elected swearing to voters that they would never compromise their beliefs. that is about it. host: residential politics this
7:54 am
morning on the washington post opinion page, a political strategist for bill clinton's 1994 senior adviser team writes "trump is on track to win reelection." he could win a second term amounttime retaining his of support. we have entered a new era in american politics, he writes. exposed howction economic, social and cultural issues have splintered the country and increasingly divided voters by age, race, education and geography. as isn't going to change. he writes that what has changed by the political fault lines that have driven the change the 1980's. until now, the ideological divides between the parties were
7:55 am
largely differences around social issues, defense spending and trade and tax cuts for the wealthy and corporation. today, the central issue has become populism as voters moved away from the two political parties and increasingly self identified as independents. on the independent line is bill from california. caller: yes. several people have hit on the right way to bridge gap. primaries. you will see all the democrats and republicans get right together to keep that down. to have paper ballots, mail-in ballots. or drop them off and getting a receipt for them. because we don't have receipt and we don't have paper ballots that thether thing is machines can be hacked. if they are going to use them, but a paper trail with them like a receipt.
7:56 am
open primaries would be the start. thank you, very kindly. host: you bet. kevin on the democrat line. go ahead. caller: good morning. basically, we have reached a point with such a divide where you have one side who wants to show the country back 150-200 years and one side that wants to go forward and continue to progress. i'm afraid that we are on the verge of a civil war. one side will end up dominating and coming out on top. itt: to think that is where is headed? towards the civil war? caller: no doubt. on one side you have the gun lobby who will never, ever allow any sort of normal, commonsense howcontrol, regardless of many mass shootings there are. on the other side, you have
7:57 am
people who want to take everybody's guns away. and there is no central point that they could go to. ultimately, just like 160 years one we reach a point where side will end up dominating and their weight will be the way forward. host: we appreciate your call. here is another kind of offshoot but a different kind of pull from cq. the headline on the pole is "no one asked elton john how he felt." saying thatoll trump and kim jong-un exchanged insults last month. up thecans eight rhetoric. that contrasted with the views that democrats and independents had which found the language -- calling kim jong-un "rocket man"
7:58 am
and appropriate for resident. democrats, 30% said it was in a group it. democrats, 13% said it was appropriate. kim jong-un responding, calling rd, and pretty much everyone agreed it was inappropriate for him to call the president a dotard. welcome to james. when kim jong-un dotard, heer 45 a was right. all of the need to go, they do. they like the money. but they forget that hey, where are we? where do we govern? and number 45, whoever never call president, is screwing it
7:59 am
a hellit is going to get of a lot worse. and i feel sorry for when the time comes because it will be black and brown against whites and it won't be pretty. host: the poll we are talking about is the pew research poll. they write that republicans are divided over the issue of economic fairness. republicans with family incomes below $30,000 or more likely than those with incomes of $75,000 or more in regards to economic inequality as a "very big problem." by contrast, majorities of democrats across income categories view economic inequality as a very big problem. thathalf of democrats say most people will get ahead if they're willing to work hard with comparison77% of republica. rick in virginia, independent line. is that theproblem
8:00 am
tea party and such is all owned by the koch brothers. wool overpulling the everybody's eyes, saying we need to get rid of this estate tax. overuth it is anything $5.5 million. they don't tell it like that. they tell it like it is your $50,000 isn't or going to be left to you. budweiser wants the benefits of america, but they don't want to pay the taxes. 500 of the biggest companies haven't pay taxes in how long because of all of the loopholes. it amazes me that people believe what they are being told, and they don't have all the information out there and look up the facts themselves. they take these people such as the tea party, which is the koch
8:01 am
brothers. they only care about aching the biggest buck. what happens when they kill it all? they will not be able to go to mars. it is hard to believe that america has gotten, by listening to these idiots that run everything because this money, money, money. host: more "washington journal" ahead on this sunday morning. we will talk to todd shepherd with "the washington examiner." he will update us on the russia investigation and russia's involvement in the 2016 election. will jointhomas abt us to talk about the fbi's newly released violent crime statistics. i'm newsmakers, we interviewed
8:02 am
representative linda sanchez of california. here she talks about the leadership of the house. [video clip] >> who is the leader of the democratic party now? >> it depends on who you ask. there are the main leaders, leader pelosi in the house and chuck schumer in the senate. each individual member of the congress is a leader in their own district. we have a lot of talent on the bench. we need to develop that talent and give people opportunity. i don't think there is one leader of the democratic party. i think there are many people who try to move the country in the right direction, and it is incumbent upon democrats across the country to be part of making that change happen. >> if democrats win back the house in 2018, will they keep the same leaders? >> i think our leadership doesn't tremendous job, but i ofnk we have this depth
8:03 am
talent within our caucus, and i think it is time to pass the torch to a new generation of leaders. i want to be part of that transition. i want to see it happen. we have too many great numbers here who don't always get the whortunities -- members don't always get the opportunities they deserve. >> with nancy pelosi when a leadership challenge fight now? >> i don't know. there are a lot of members in our caucus. a by saying it is time for generational change from your suggesting win or lose after next year, it is time for her to go. >> i don't want to single or out. clyburn?r five and -- >> it is time to pass the torch. they are all of the same generation. their contributions to the
8:04 am
caucus in the congress or substantial. there comes a time when you need to pass that torch. i think it is time. host: our conversation with representative linda sanchez on newsmakers today at 10:00 a.m. eastern. joining us is todd shepherd, who is the investigative reporter with "the washington examiner," here to talk to us about the various investigations into russia's reported meddling in the 2016 campaign, which was brought more into focus this week by comments from the chairman and ranking democrat on the senate intelligence committee. in termsthings stand of that particular investigation? caller: i -- guest: i think they wanted to do some sort of update because they started this investigation in january. they did a press conference
8:05 am
similar to the one we saw this week in march. elapsed, six months you got a feeling that the ranking members needed to give an update to the press and the american people. that said, a lot of the deliveries we got mainly from reached aurr, we conclusion in this area, but that is not to say we will not someck and do more if piece of evidence should come forth. for example, one of the big items is the comey investigation. it is at an end, but it is not closed. host: the reason why he was fired? is that what you're talking about? guest: a little bit. some of the comey investigation, more having to do with the russia meddling. he was cleared to reporters, if
8:06 am
you are interested in the president's firing of james comey, i would urge you to direct us weapons to the special counsel. as we both know, the special counsel is very tightlipped. we will not get anything there. a lot of what we heard from the chairman, where do things stand, we have reached a conclusion in this area, but we are open to continuing. host: we're talking about the senate intelligence committee, the robert mueller special counsel investigation but there are other investigations going on. guest: there is still the house intelligence committee. the senate intelligence committee has taken a much broader view of the russian meddling. the house intelligence committee has investigated things at a more granular level. you also have the senate judiciary committee, committee
8:07 am
chairman chuck grassley, ranking them a credit number dianne feinstein. -- ranking democratic member dianne feinstein. aside separateet committee goals with separate committee staff. large, it is accurate to say the judiciary committee is doing its own parallel investigation as they continue their oversight of the fbi and doj. host: what is the focus of the robert mueller investigation in particular? guest: from what we know of assembling all the various media sources, so far the focus has down on paulven manafort and a lot of his business dealings with foreign entities like russia and ukraine. obviously, there will be a lot
8:08 am
of investigating and research into michael flynn, his activities, is disclosures, and his foreign contacts with turkey. investigator, folks can read your reporting on do you focus your part of the story? what are you trying to find out? guest: one of the things i have been able to follow in the last six months -- fight is the wrong word, there is a little struggle going on at the secretaries of state level, your top elected officials, and your department of homeland security. two weeks ago we got this eye-opening headline, 21. i would encourage people to dig
8:09 am
deeper into that. there are three states that have really pushed back on the conclusion of dhs. they disagree with the conclusion, california, texas, and wisconsin. au have a deep blue state, deep red state, and a purplse state who disagree with the conclusions. host: we had a caller who pointed out the fact that their 21ertion was that there were states but no evidence that there was any impact on any votes changed in any of those states. guest: that continues to be the line from dhs. that whens believes they say it. secretaries of state have tried to verify their information against what they've been told by dhs, which is why you have
8:10 am
that these three states push back. a lot of what we have heard is that those hacks, you could call them doorknobbing attempts. if you imagine a thief walking up to a home, he is going to shake the doorknob to see if it is locked or unlocked. a lot of those attempts were doorknobbing. no one has provided any evidence that those election systems were penetrated, any votes were changed. host: in those 21 states. fromshepherd is our guest "the washington examiner." (202) 748-8001 for republicans. democrats (202) 748-8000. independents and others (202) 748-8002. i wanted to play the comments from chairman burr, the senate intelligence committee chairman from this past week.
8:11 am
here is a look. [video clip] >> i'm not even going to discuss initial findings because we have not any. we have a tremendous amount of documents to go through. to put it in perspective, we have done over 100 interviews over 250 hours. for thecurrently booked balance of this month 25 additional interviews. that may not be the total, but as of today there are 25 individuals booked to meet with our staff by the end of this month alone pertaining to the russian investigation. we have more work to do as it relates to collusion, but we are developing a clear picture as to what happened. intelligence service is determined, clever, and i recommend every campaign and election official take this very seriously as we move into this november's election and into
8:12 am
preparation for the 2018 election. host: the last comments by senator burr, he seemed to indicate real evidence. what did you hear in that? guest: clearly, the senate intelligence committee has really taken more of a look not just backwards as to what russia did, but this forward look as to how we are going to get our election house in order. how we're going to have dhs communicate with the states. there is also the social media aspect where in the press conference vice chairman warner said there was a 77% increase in political advertising through social media channels from 2012 the 2016. we expect those trends to continue to rise. ande don't take some action cooperate with social media entities, we will just replay
8:13 am
this mess again. we're determined not to have that happen. host: let's hear from anthony in las vegas, democrats line. caller: good morning. how are you doing? host: good. caller: this is an issue that perturbs me, the russia issue. honestly, if the media was honest, this could be put to bed. i am in an online group with elizabeth voss of disobedient media, and she is the first one who actually broke the story mcgovern, carter, ray these retired nsa agents who actually analyzed the guccifer 2.0 metadata, and they came to the conclusion that the files were copied locally in the
8:14 am
eastern time zone. don't cut me off. just entertain here. those were copied in the eastern time zone, the same time zone that the dnc's office is in. here is what is interesting about it. i will give you a little credit, c-span, because in our group we actually circulated an article that you had. you have an article that you could put up for the people right now if you want it. you have an article online that shows ray mcgovern confronting adam schiff about how the media is being dishonest on this. you could pull that article and show the people now. host: we will see what we can do for you, anthony. thanks for the call. todd shepherd. republicans are frustrated with a number of issues about how the russian investigation began. we saw a lot of that one friday,
8:15 am
late in the day, chuck grassley, chairman of the judiciary committee, issued a press release. he is continuing to press the fbi for documents that would judiciarynd the committee exactly how the fbi first laid their hands on the russia dossier. i know that is not exactly the evidence you are bringing in your call, sir. the issue that chairman grassley was bringing up is that christopher steele, the author of the dossier, there were reports that he shared that information to british intelligence services, and then the dossier winds up in the hands of american intelligence services. if the american intelligence services then hear from their british counterparts core operating information covers -- information, it
8:16 am
looks as if it is corroborating, but it is actually the same information from the same source. it is the chamber. if the dossier is what launched the fbi's look into the russia matters, if that is the snowball that got all of the russian investigations going, then rtainly republicans have something to be concerned about. on a numberntiated of numerous unsubstantiated claims. host: that caller mentioned the name guccifer. remind us who and what that is. guest: it is an online persona for the phrase now is hacktivist. it would be similar to a wiki leaks style entity. it is more of a persona then an entity -- than an entity.
8:17 am
guccifer released some emails from dnc and other entities. roger stone made a tweet directly to guccifer 2.0. there are now allegations that roger stone colluded with guccifer 2.0 in the release of emails. host: we go to ohio, republican mine. guest: hello. caller: hello. i have a question. i want to know why "the washington examiner" is not investigating the dnc. guest: what about the dnc in particular? caller: the hacking. the one girl, i forget her name, but she was dealing with the ukrainians.
8:18 am
they were dealing with the ukrainians, and stuff like that, why aren't you investigating the democrats? host: do you know anything about that? guest: i cannot speak to that woman you mentioned. i can tell you that for all media companies, and have worked in radio, nonprofit journalism, ,nd now i work for the examiner resources are very thin. i don't mean that as a criticism. it is just the media reality. not everything can be investigated. some of these things that i know the public is clamoring for investigations on, it would honestly take the resources of two or three people doing investigating for an entire year without publishing anything really. that is a lot of resources for a media company, even the size of
8:19 am
the washington post to be able to invest in a story that may not even cannot in the end. -- pan out in the end. host: what are the sorts of pressures as a journalist that you need more time, how much leeway do you get? guest: they give me as much leeway as the story requires to be journalistically sound. if we need to reach out to more people, we reach out to more people. at the same time, there are daily pressures. i don't have the freedom, and most don't have the freedom of investigating for a month or two months at a time. you still have to go to the press conference, as i did with the viceburr and chairman earlier this week. host: that committee is the senate intelligence committee among other committees looking at the russian influence on the 2016 election.
8:20 am
what they are focusing on is reviewing the intelligence and intelligence community assessment of active measures directed against the u.s. they are invested getting any links between russia and individuals associated with political campaigns. conference, the vice chair, democrat mark warner -- we will show that in a moment. we will go to bakersfield, california. caller: thank you. god bless, c-span. -- hasd to ask you about never really been pursued. during the election, jared kushner was ragging about hiring a team of silicon valley whiz kids. they were looking at the same kind of data you would use if
8:21 am
you wanted to create gerrymander districts. they were looking at specific people to target, people who might be receptive to tainted stories through facebook, twitter, and other mass media. is there any proof yet from robert mueller or any of the other investigative committees that he and his team of whiz kids from silicon valley might have worked with the research group out of st. petersburg, russia? one of the other comments is the fake news story about the gunner from las vegas watching rachel hers, or being a fan of wasn't that also from the internet research group? i will take your answer off the air. host: that was a little off-topic. guest: with regards to has the special counsel make any
8:22 am
comments about this jared kushner and the group of technology whiz kids, keep in mind the special counsel is such a rare prosecutorial process and american politics that they are going to be as tightlipped as they can possibly be. gumhey got a free stick of with their cup of coffee in the morning, they are not going to say as much as that. they're not going to comment on much at all, honestly. as to the other investigations, have they looked at this? i will confess my ignorance that i have not heard this story at all. i am sorry you dropped off the air because i was about to ask if you could cite where you first heard that. i am not aware of this attempt by jared kushner to do this. keep in mind can this kind of
8:23 am
analytic data mining has been 100 years as people try to determine republicans and democrats by zip code, by mailing areas. this is just a newer more sophisticated derivative of that. from the basics of what you're saying, it doesn't sound like what jared kushner might have been doing, if he was doing it at all, would have been illegal. we know barack obama was able to target americans through the use of data in an expert way, in ways we had never seen in the 2008 and 2012 elections. all that was legal, and just brilliant campaign. host: the washington journal wrote that facebook cut references to russia about manipulation of its platform
8:24 am
concerning the 2016 election about the same time the intelligence committee announced they will hear from officials with facebook and twitter, set to testify for congress in the coming weeks. what do they want to know from these social media platforms/ guest: i think they want to know a lot more about the safeguards that they hope the social media companies will voluntarily implement on a going forward basis. rather than looking back. let me give you an example. right now, google is able to fasteru outbreaks much than the centers for disease control in america. the reason why is google can see where there is a spike in searches about the flu. if they see that spike in searches in augusta, georgia, they say we must have a flu
8:25 am
outbreak there. i think a lot of what the senate intelligence committee would like to hear is if social media companies and search companies have enough sophistication to be able to predict flu outbreaks before the cdc can, why don't we have the sophistication to determine when there are these untoward activities from actors outside of the united states? host: we hear from christine next in richmond on the independent line. caller: good morning. our elections will be coming up next month. my theory is, i don't know whether you can confirm this, is the hacking is ongoing, and i think they are trying to manipulate the registrations. guest: are you speaking about virginia specifically? caller: yes, sir. each county has its own equipment.
8:26 am
i have been told they had been moving away from the touchscreens. my thinking is maybe they were trying to manipulate the voter registration. do you have any evidence of that? guest: i don't. i can tell you that while these were not the clips that made the nightly news or widely circulated in whatever newsfeeds you subscribe to. on a couple of occasions, the chairman and vice chairman talked about the 2018 election cycle, but especially, as you can imagine, vice chairman warner said i am very concerned with have an election that is just before days away in my home state of virginia. he did not say that there were ongoing attempts or that he has seen any evidence voter registration files have been compromised in any way. you mentioned the counting
8:27 am
process. this has been the argument by the secretaries of state over this whole year. it is actually the decentralization process of the election system that keeps it safe. i think a lot of states -- i cannot speak to virginia specifically. a lot of states keep their registrations offline so there is no internet connection such that they might even be hacked. i don't have any evidence of what you are asking about. clearly, officials are at the highest level of awareness at that, and not just officials in virginia, but officials with the department of homeland security as well. host: our guest todd shepherd covered the news conference this week with the chairman and vice ,hairman from virginia senator mark warner.
8:28 am
here is what he had to say. [video clip] into political files, released those files in an effort to influence the election. tried tothey actively at least test the state'silities of 21 electoral systems, and we feel they used social media firms both in terms of paid advertising and what i think is , they createdic false accounts and others that would drive interest towards stories or groups, and generally those stories or groups were to sow chaos and drive division in our country. host: todd shepherd, the headline of your piece earlier,
8:29 am
portion of this investigation is likely over if not closed completely. hearing from the the social media companies obviously. guest: we know there is still an open hearing they will have with the longtime friend and lawyer for president trump. why does his name escape me now? cohen.michael that is slated for october 25. burr than that, chairman said we completed maybe 100 interviews. they have about 25 more booked now. you get the sense that a lot of this is starting to wind down. he said we interviewed all seven actors that were involved in the mayflower hotel meeting, a meeting where some members of
8:30 am
the trump campaign were in a room, and surrogate his land was also in that -- sergey kislyak was also in that room. he said every member of the trump campaign we have wanted to interview, we have been able to interview. you get the sense that they are at the end. those things that might still be lingering, you get the sense it might be from recent raking reports. it was only about a month ago we learned jared kushner had kept this off-line, nongovernmental in all account -- email account that he had used. quickly after that report, the senate intelligence committee said they would be interested in learning about that. you get the sense they are wrapping up loose threads. host: republican line. caller: hello.
8:31 am
guest: good morning. caller: good morning. i used to be a democrat. i was so happy i did not vote at of during the second term obama because it had been newspersonrough a that in fact obama is so good of an actor he fooled a lot of people come and the greenwashing is still going on. the fact that comey did not handle the hillary matters, that was real important to us, and now i believe the republicans are being crucified by that, not only the news media and the stars, but all the attorneys up, they arespoken part of the problem. we have some money attorneys.
8:32 am
goal when they go into politics is to continue to get their greedy money. i have met many attorneys. in the state of south carolina, it is true that they are absolutely outrageous. there are not many republicans ever on tv. some of them are on cable news, on cnn, all over the place, and their goal is to get that greedy money. i think a lot of people ought to but this russia matter is all about hillary losing the election. it is so sad because we are being targeted. i am white, but i go to church that is all callers. i love everybody. -- all colors. i love everybody. host: janet, we will let you go in south carolina.
8:33 am
what do we know about where the house intelligence committee is and their focus? caller: it would be nice to have that guest: it would be nice to have a similar sort of press conference. devin nunes doesn't say he has recused himself, but since he has stepped aside from leading the house intelligence investigation, but he still is chairman. has stayed out of the media nearly as much as robert mueller has. keep in mind, the one thing that the house intelligence committee seems to be looking into that the senate intelligence committee is not are these issues of unmasking, specifically as it relates to obama era officials like susan rice. host: what does that term mean?
8:34 am
guest: it is a little bit of a complicated term. the u.s. government conducts foreign surveillance. occasionally, if a foreign person is having a conversation with someone in america, and that is a surveilled conversation, intelligence agency is supposed to redact or subtract the name of the american so that when the intelligence agency officials are going through the product, they are not researching about you or me, they are only researching the foreign entities. in some occasions, they can take the redaction off and see who the american was. that is called an unmasked report. you think that is part of the house intelligence investigation. guest: it clearly is.
8:35 am
host: you can read more from todd shepherd at the washington examiner. thank you for joining us. guest: my pleasure. abt, coming up, thomas focusing on the fbi's violent crime to sticks. -- statistics. later on, frank mora joins us to talk about tensions between the u.s. and cuba after the u.s. --diplomats. booktv in american history tv travel to south dakota. coming up today on american history tv, all of our programs from the city will air in one-time block. the architecture and design of the city.
8:36 am
[video clip] >> here is a pretty small town as state capitals go, 12,000 or 14,000 people. fort pierre is another 2500 people. between the two is maybe 15,000 people. not only is a small, it is remote. capitalelected as state because it is in the middle of the state. it is a 2 hour drive to any other sizable town in the state. that present some challenges in operating the state government that people have to drive in from some distance to come here to participate in meetings. it can also be a challenge toracting people to the city work for the state government. the state is by far the largest employer and really dominates the economy here. todaymake sure to tune in , booktv in american history tv
8:37 am
traveling to pierre, south dakota. watch all of the cities we have tour onin the cities abt, ajoined by thomas senior research fellow with the harvard kennedy government school. in particular, we wanted you on this morning, following up on your opinion piece from the new york times on crime statistics, which was headlined, "how not to respond to the rising murder rate." tell us about the murder rate in the u.s. and where it has gone into the fbi report. guest: sure. it is a pleasure to be on. thank you for having me. the first thing to understand is surge in recent
8:38 am
homicides in the u.s. is cause for concern but not panic. of a bit of context, rates violent crimes and all crimes has been falling fairly consistently since the early 1990's. it is only in 2014 -- 2015 and 2016 that we have seen this pronounced spike in homicides. it is about an increase of 12% 2014 to to 2014 -- 2015.we have had an increase of about 22% in the last two years. that increase is the largest we have seen in about 25 years. t to minimizent no this, but also to keep it in perspective. there is no crime wave, but there is a serious spike in homicide.
8:39 am
host: reflecting some of that, your comments in the piece, you write, what to make of this to your spike in death and violence -- two-year spike in death and violence is unclear, but partisans on all sides will seek to spin it to their advantage. what are the developing narratives that come out of these statistics when they are released? guest: i think you are saying a trend over the past few years with the crime numbers. partisans from all sides try to bring them in the narrative around them that suits their other political positions. tend toives typically minimize or downplay these numbers, suggesting they are highly localized, suggesting there is no trend here. that is a fair question.
8:40 am
we don't know that there is a trend. also suggesting there are root causes at play. the broader concern is that fear of rising crime might slow the momentum for criminal justice reform. that is where their interest lies. on the other side, you have a very serious issue with some conservatives demagogueing the issue. politicians like president trump and attorney general sessions using these numbers to spread fear and sow divisions among americans and spreading some misinformation, saying these hikes in crime are related to immigration or drugs, basically trying to connect it to a larger cultural argument they have been making. unfortunately, on both sides politics is at play. the issue is the more the volume is turned up, the hotter the
8:41 am
issue gets, the harder it is to do sober, common sense problem-solving. host: we are focusing on at the i crime statistics. -- fbi crime statistics. we want to hear your comments. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. independents and others (202) 748-8002. we welcome your tweets. abt, your piece lays out some solutions. you write about a proven approach that deserves more support, mr. kennedy's national network for safe communities to minimize incarceration and improve police relationships. killing must end now.
8:42 am
if you let us, we will help you. if you make us, we will stop you. those turned away from violence are offered support. thistemic review found strategy reduce crime and violence in nine out of 10 studies with homicide reductions of 34% to 63%. areas thisut those program has been put into place. guest: this intervention, which is known by a number of different names, sometimes called the group violence intervention, also called focused deterrence. its original name was operation cease-fire. whatever you call it, this began in boston in the early 1990's and is responsible for a dramatic drop in homicides, specifically youth homicides. it has been tried in a number of
8:43 am
other cities. it does not always work. that is just the reality of policymaking. nothing works 100% of the time. focused deterrence has a fairly isong track record, and it stronger than any other violence prevention. caroline,n done in a oakland, california, in cincinnati, ohio. in many of these places it does good results. it is important to say that there is no one solution. viewingo caution your public, even with cognitive behavioral there be, smart policing, any of these other policies, there is no one thing that can reduce violence.
8:44 am
you need a set of strategies working together. host: headline from usa today, violent crime increases for second straight year. our guest is here until about 9:00 eastern. we want to hear from you. what do things look like in your area? what is the crime rate in your area? fayetteville, pennsylvania, robert on her democrats line. caller: thank you for letting me join in. i believe the root cause of all of this is the massive influx of illegal aliens, whatever you want to call it, immigration that was pushed across the border the last couple years of the obama administration. i have a friend in pittsburgh and doesn't even admit that there is a problem with ms13, like we should sweep that under the rug, too.
8:45 am
if you want to see what happens to crime numbers, wait until he you go after our second amendment rights, and see what the crime numbers go to. host: how does immigration plan to the statistics if at all? caller'sunderstand the concerns. i have to say every serious examination of the connection between immigration and crime is that immigrants are less likely to commit crime than the average american citizen. there is no connection empirically that we can find between immigration and crime. if anything, immigrants make a community safer. 13, i haves literally walked past bodies on the streets in those neighborhoods. ms 13 is a deadly, serious gang. we have to realize that wall
8:46 am
gang poses a major threat to the states of el salvador and guatemala and honduras, in the united states it is much sparser. i want to caution, ms 13 is not at all on the same scale in the united states as it is in those countries. 13 mayhe issue of ms talking to this next question. -- high into this next question. they want to know on twitter is their original pattern type into -- tied into guns? tell, as far as we can this rise is happening in most of the cities in the united states. it is happening where rates of violence are already far too high, and that is primarily in poor communities of caller. -- color.
8:47 am
the number one victim of gun violence are young, poor men of color. those are the people disproportionately impacted by this rise. some people think this rise is just in a few cities. just chicago, just baltimore. 20% of the rise can be attributed last year to chicago. that leaves 80%. the fact of the matter is that violent crime is up in most cities. that needs to be taken into account. int: let's hear from dee massachusetts. republican line. caller: can you hear me? host: yes, we can. isler: the biggest problem of course criminal justice reform. had 20 years ago, you
8:48 am
summer jobs programs for young people, all types of investments into young people, putting money in their pockets, keeping them around mentors, colleges, universities. nowadays we don't really have leaders, elected officials who really focus on looking after or helping out. looking for that diamond in the rough. politicians are concerned with getting reelected, raising money. back to gun violence, you have got all these young people, 18 years old, 17 years old in boston. a couple of days ago denzel washington is filming in
8:49 am
roxbury, and his security is shot by 218-year-olds carrying carrying-year-olds guns. host: what did you hear about his comments about violence in boston and the murder rate? made threeink you good points and observations. one thing people need to understand about violence is three decades of social science tell us that violence is sticky. that means it concentrates in a small number of places in any given city, around a small number of people, and around a certain set of behaviors. it is highly concentrated. for those most highly at risk, what we call the shooters, tough
8:50 am
enforcement is required. we need to protect the public from those individuals. as the caller notes, we need balance, prevention. we cannot treat everyone in these communities like they are part of the problem. they are part of the solution. tough enforcement measures are needed. comprehensive, preventive measures are also needed. that was a good point. the caller also mentioned criminal justice reform. i think we are making a big mistake when we suggest criminal justice reform and violence reduction are at odds with one another. i think they are highly complementary, and we can do both at the same time. it is important we do both at the same time. if criminal justice reform improves the perception of by the people most impacted by criminal justice,
8:51 am
people in poor communities of color, if trust and confidence increases in those communities in law enforcement, you will see crime go down. with regard to boston, i am not familiar with that particular instance, but i am grateful to say that in boston we have surprisingly -- not surprisingly, we have white low rates of gun violence. the city has done a good job overall. it is not surprising that the boston police department has invested heavily in community policing. in some ways boston is an example of how to do this the right way. tweets,itter, mary getting to know neighbors, what is happening on your street, and refusing to put up with bs are the best crime deterrence. let's go to wyoming, democrats line. caller: hi, partner, our you
8:52 am
doing today? host: good. go ahead, bernie. caller: a few things to cover today. guns, i'mthing about not sure, but i would be willing the problem with these guns are not even registered to these individuals doing it. that is the point with these guns. they don't have to be registered. you can go to the pot shop or -- pawn shop or get a gun in big cities. we don't have that problem in wyoming, our population is so small. coming over from different countries and u.s. we need to stop that. if they want to come over, bring them the proper way. the one thing i will complain about the most, make them speak english. half the time you cannot understand what they are saying
8:53 am
at all. i don't think that is right. host: that is bernie in wyoming. we have addressed the immigration issue somewhat. he talks about unregistered versus registered guns. how much of an impact are the proliferation of guns in some areas on the gun crime in those areas? guest: when you look at the issue of homicide in the united states, there is often a television among advocates -- 10 tatian among advocates -- temp toion among advocates simplify the problem. in reality, it is a complex social problem. with regard to guns, i am in favor of reasonable gun regulations. the caller has a good point, most gun crime is committed with guns that were illegally possessed at the time.
8:54 am
that does not mean we should not pursue reasonable gun restrictions. we absolutely should. there is not one gun violence problem in the united states. there are several. we need different solutions for all of them. for instance, we have an issue with suicides in the united states. reducing suicides by gun requires a certain set of policy measures. reducing urban homicide requires another set of measures. reducing homicides that are related to domestic violence requires a third. finally, in the wake of the las vegas shooting, we need to think about how to address mass shootings. while they only account for less than 1% of all homicides every and clearlyrrific
8:55 am
require a response. int: let's hear from kirk new jersey on the independent line. caller: good morning. thank you so much for letting me speak. i am truly independent. i have been on both sides. i think you touched on the discord in our authority and leadership at the beginning of this segment. i was blessed with ignorance. i'm not smart enough to be a politician or lawyer. i hate guns exec probably would shoot mitel -- because i would probably shoot my tell if i was careful. suicide -- half the population is taking some type of antidepressant that has the side effect of suicide that is not being talked about. the elite that got out of the
8:56 am
verbal neighborhoods that now have security guards and are now making movies about mass shootings. i see everybody being divided. i see the ferguson affect pushing people -- effect of pushing people to guns with no moral fiber. i see it getting worse in many ways. controversial, easy to talk about guns and violence, that there is a commandment thou shall not kill. host: any thoughts? guest: i think the caller said a lot, so i will just mention a few points in relation to his statements. he mentioned glorifying these mass shooters. this is a real issue. we know there are chatrooms
8:57 am
where people discuss these mass shootings and glorify them and exchange notes and information about them. one thing we really have to do is deny these mass shooters the fame that many of them desire. i firmly support a campaign called don't name them, which is the media tells you everything about the mass shooting at hand, but they don't tell you the actual name of the shooter, and they don't show you a photograph. we need to deny these killers that fame if that is what they want. mental health is an issue. can stigmatizeneed there is, those people that are overwhelmingly nonviolent, we need threat assessment and measures to identify people
8:58 am
showing disturbing signs, that they may in fact commit violence. proactively to address them. host: in reporting on the crime statistics, usa today has a chart looking at violent crimes in the u.s. across 20 years, 1997-2016, and crimes in the 1997.ns, 1.6 million in the trend all the way downward until 2015 or 2014, these are crimes including the murder rate, robbery and aggravated assault. you see the dip in the statistics, taking back up in the last couple years. it is a trend or is it too early to tell that the decline has halted for a bit and will return on the downward again? thomas: i think it is too early
8:59 am
to tell. it is important to note that the upward trend, if it is a trend, is limited to the violent crime. property crime is down and crime over all remains down. crimer overall rates of are about what they used to be in the 1960's. so we are still living in thankfully a remarkably peaceful era. the violent crime rates are actually half of what they were from the peak in the early 1990's, so that is a good thing. whether it is a trend is hard to tell. in we had a two-year spike homicide 10 years ago, after which crime continue to fall. you know, this spike is much larger than that one, but on the other hand the spike looks like the rate of change, it appears to be slowing down. the rate of change in 2015 is signsompared to 2015, and
9:00 am
in 2017 that the rate of change, it may continue to slow. so is it a trend? we do not know, but that is not a reason to ignore the issue. the fact is, in 2016 there were 3000 more homicides per year compared to 2014, 3000 lives. this is literally a matter of life and death and we need to treated appropriately. host: we are going to get one more caller, robert in tuscaloosa, alabama. caller: good morning. it is hard to get on. i want to make an observation. you can talk directly to your guests here, rather than 10 seconds later, and i have been watching c-span since 1979, but immigration, the immigration started when the europeans started coming to the western hemisphere and the people who are the most violent are the europeans. in other words, those that are well-suited and doing well in
9:01 am
some weretry, they -- run out, some are exiled to this country and to the europeans are europeans- adnd the are the ones that started the violence. they came to africa and got out people. and another country, are country has violence going all over the world with our soldiers. they have soldiers all over the world committing violence in every country. host: robert, we will you go. one more call my jeff on the republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i wanted to know how effective stop and search was, and also these cities where most of the crime takes place, i would like to know what party is in charge of those -- is it republican, independent, democrat? i think we might find interesting answers with that. how much does hollywood play in this?
9:02 am
host: let's go to the stop and search question. are they tied into the statistics at all? thomas: let me take those in rivers. as for hollywood, there is no connection in movies and television and video games and violence, it has been studied extensively and at best we can say the research is mixed. so hard to blame any of this on hollywood. second, as to the question or the point about who is an political control, overwhelmingly cities under democratic control run by democratic mayors, however if we are talking about politics much of the south has a much higher rate of a violence. inn in the north or california on the coast. around, is blame to go politically, if that is what you want to do. lastly, to your specific question, really a question that can be answered by evidence,
9:03 am
stop and frisk has been evaluated extensively. and the short answer on what the research tells us is that when it is done right it can be effective, but when it is done wrong it can be ineffective and really hurt the communities it is seeking to protect. when it is done right, stop and frisk is done in a highly targeted manner. in consultation with the community, limited to very specific places. when stopped and frisk goes wrong is when it is done blanketing an entire community without regard for who the specific people and where the specific places are better triggering most of the violence. and so, stop and frisk has really been demonized by one side, for celebrated -- or celebrated by the other, when it is a question about implementation. it is what you do with it that matters. host: thomas abt, you can read
9:04 am
some of his findings on this and other issues. he is on twitter. thank you for being with us. thomas: pleasure to be with you. host: we will be joined next by florida international frank mora, looking at the tensions with cuba after the expelling of diplomats in havana, as washington journal continues. ♪ >> it became clear that my impression of breitbart was having an out font -- outside influence on the election, was an understatement. it had been extreme. in fact, including to research breitbart was the driving force on the right side of the
9:05 am
political spectrum. announcer: tonight, new york times magazine conjured a writer will health and talks about his future story, down the breitbart will. >> i think this is really what gets to the disparity between the way that i have always heard people talk about breitbart, as a sort of hysterical, shouty machine for creating a fence -- offense, in a much more reality of the news organization as it functions on a daily basis. announcer: tonight on c-span's "q & a." announcer: c-span, where history unfolds daily. in 1979, c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies. and is brought to you today by your cable or satellite provider. washington journal
9:06 am
continues. host: from miami, we are joined by frank mora, who is the senate director at the foot international university, here to focus on u.s. and cuba relations, in particular the expelling a 15 cuban diplomats in what the new york times termed as the sign that ties could be ended. what is going on between the u.s. and cuba that has caused this expelling of the 15 diplomats and a similar move by cubans in havana? frank: it all started when a number of u.s., by the way, canadian diplomats suffered strangest symptoms. it seems some neurological symptoms, there was brain damage and we really do not know all the details. the u.s. government has not told us some of the specifics of some of the irreversible injuries the american diplomats suffered, starting late last year and as i
9:07 am
understand the last attack was august of this year. the u.s. and cuba started talking and the u.s. government has claimed the cubans do not believe -- they do not believe the cubans are responsible, in fact they received fbi agents that were down in cuba trying to investigate what happened. the media and others have been claiming it was some kind of -- [indiscernible] they decided because we cannot protect the diplomats and we cannot identify the source of the problem, the state department decided to pull 60% of the diplomats from cuba. then suddenly, and quite surprisingly i should say, a week or so later the u.s. government also then decided to expel cuban diplomats in washington, without suggesting or explaining why they were
9:08 am
taking a political decision to do that. so we are here, but i should say there is very little that we know. the u.s. government and the cuban government has not come forth with much information, but that is where we stand. host: backup up to the beginning of the trump administration and the end of the obama administration, how had things changed in the last year or so of the obama administration? and what in general has been the approach of the trump administration in terms of the u.s. approach to cuba? frank: in december of 2014, president obama announced a policy change that was going to rather to magically change what dramaticallyather change what had been an punitive action against cuba. president obama announced essentially a new chapter between the americans and cuban people and it proceeded to allow
9:09 am
for some space for engagement, particularly people to people engagement between the united states and cuba. during the campaign, donald itmp evolved from suggesting was ok to do that, too in the end, closer to the election saying he would cancel or reverse everything president obama had done regarding cuba. then earlier this year, i believe it was june, he came to miami and he announced in a speech that he was canceling everything president obama had done, when in fact in substantive ways you look at what has changed since the speech, actually nothing has changed, or very little in terms of reversing much or what if anything obama had done. in the context of this bilateral relationship, at least the rhetorical change, this incident
9:10 am
or situation of the attack on our diplomats emerges and it sort of creates additional tension that apparently the ministration feels it -- the administrator feels it means to act upon by taking punitive action against cuba and explain the diplomats. host: we are talking about the state of u.s. and cuba relations in the wake of expelling 15 cuban diplomats from the united states. you can join the conversation by calling (202) 748-8001 for republicans, democrats at (202) 748-8000, and independence at (202) 748-8002, and cuban americans can call at (202) 748-8003. when the announcement came on the expelling of the diplomats committee spokesperson at the state department was asked about the status of the investigation into the alleged attacks and potential attacks in havana. when we and foremost,
9:11 am
are engaged in an investigation, we as americans need to keep a tight hold on a lot of information. we do not want it to leak. you all know about leaks, that information could potentially leak to other parties involved who may or may not be involved. so providing information on the investigation could tip off the bad guys who are responsible. we do not know who or what is responsible, so we do not want to tip off the bad guys to any information we have, and again i am not calling the cubans, or saying that about the cubans in general, but we do not want information to leak. the investigation, secondly, is ongoing. it has not been resolved. there is limited information we can provide. you arenk they say asking them to solve the crime and prevent it -- >> we are not asking them to solve the crime, we are down
9:12 am
there with our investigators who are looking into it as well. if the cubans have information to provide us, we welcome that. host: since the briefing, the chicago tribune reporting that visitors from cuba are reporting symptoms. and the cuban government, what are they saying about their potential involvement in the attack? frank: they claim that they are not involved, that they are concerned. and that they want to be helpful and collaborate in the investigation. they have allowed the fbi to come to cuba, which is rather unprecedented, to investigate the matter. the u.s. government, as you heard the spokesperson say, they do not believe the cubans are involved, but they cannot be sure. that the cubans are relatively collaborated on this issue. but i go back to the sort of
9:13 am
unexplained decision by the u.s. government to expel cuban diplomats. so the first step of taking our workers or diplomats from cuba is understandable. and i would have recommended doing that, if the cubans cannot protect our diplomats. but the decision to expel the cuban diplomats seems more political to me, especially if as the state department claims, they do not believe the cuban government was involved. there has been no explanation that i know of as to why the u.s. government decided to expel the cuban diplomats. host: let's hear from marianne on the line from new york, independent color. caller: -- independent caller. caller: hi, i guess the things i am thinking about is first, i have to trust the secret service and there are things we just cannot know. the second is, if cuba participated in hurting our
9:14 am
workers, some kind of punishment for us reopening the relationships, then they need to be thrown off of the big -- and given a consequence. my question is, do we have any sense as to whether russia and efforts - in efforts to destabilize our democracy, participated in these events? frank: we do not know. perhaps. again, there is a lot of mystery and gaps in information that we have about this aggression against our diplomats. and again, the state department and u.s. government has yet to say whether the cuban government was involved, they do not want to go there. they seem to indicate or suggest the cubans were not involved, which is not to say they could not or were not capable of being involved, but in this incident it does not appear like they were involved. again, they are investigating. we have no answers, there are a
9:15 am
number of scenarios in which one could imagine why or who could have done this to our diplomats, but it would be speculating. anything from elements within the cuban government who may have acted to further derail relationships with cuba, or even an external power in cuba, such as the russians or others, trying to create a greater wedge between the u.s. and cuba. we do not know and we are sort of speculating. host: we have a columnist speculating himself in an opinion piece with the headline, "who is behind cuba's attacks on our diplomats?" he says vladimir putin wants cuba as close as a caribbean nest to the shores as the chinese president, he writes, will play a longer game from the panama canal. it is an ugly affair and there are dark forces behind the dark
9:16 am
forces. next call from baltimore, on the independent line. go ahead. caller: hi, i would like to address the problem. years ago i did a frequency study on the human body and its reaction. we found the natural frequency of the body is eight cycles, which is below the threshold of hearing, about 15 cycles. us at eightess for s cycles, you will make the person feel sick, either seasick or almost -- like natural, and if you keep it up you will damage the organs. i thought that might be a course of investigation. host: do you know if that has forcesed by national before? has it been used as a weapon?
9:17 am
caller: no, i do not know if we have ever found that to happen. but we published on the item. effective crowd this a blueprint i once disabler.d -- crowd i once recommended it as a discourage her -- discourager of illegal gatherings. if you admit 8 cycles, the whole body rebelled against everything. host: is this the type of thing, has this incident happened in havana before, to your knowledge? frank: it has not. i sort of deferred to the caller, but i am not an expert, by have been reading from those who know about this kind of capacity and i think if you, if you do it in a sort of broad way
9:18 am
to capture a large crowd for example, i think that could be capable. but when it is targeted to an individual, when it is so high-frequency my understanding is that is not possible and it certainly we have not seen that before. but again, there is a lot of question marks here in terms of technology, as well as the delivery of that capacity to target families or single individuals in a home or office. host: marco rubio tweeted among the tweets about the incident, saying the idea that over 20 american embassy personnel could be injured in cuba and the government not know about it, is ridiculous. go we have a caller, ray -- ahead. caller: how are you doing? host: doing fine. mute your television and go ahead. caller: ok.
9:19 am
i have to turn it off? host: mute the television and go ahead with your comment. caller: my comment. host: i will let you go. we are having trouble hearing you. fairfax, virginia on the independent line. caller: yes, i'm: because right -- i'm calling because right now the united states does not n need to sever ties with cuba, because cuba is right close to the united states if we have any kind of war. we need to be as close to cubans as possible. host: frank, what do you see as the future, at least in the coming years as where the relations will go between the u.s. and cuba? frank: as i said, the relationship had been improving significantly from the time that president obama announced the
9:20 am
policy change and till perhaps -- until perhaps the president's, president trump's speech in miami. the relationships have not changed until this moment, until, when as i said the sort of removal of cuban diplomats or expulsion of the diplomats from the embassy. the cubans have kept a sort of moderated, they have not overreacted, they have wanted to avoid confrontation, which is by the way not in their style of doing things. so we will have to see the next step in how the investigation continues, and whether there will be a tit-for-tat, but for now it does not seem the cuban government -- sort of on issidentl --unprecedentedly, reacting to the trump administration. we will have to see, in september and october we expect
9:21 am
regulation changes consistent with the president's decision to change elements of the policy toward cuba. those regulations have yet to be announced. so we may be seeing them in the new creature -- near future and it could change the relationship. for now, there has been more continuity than change in the bilateral relationship. host: october is national hispanic heritage month and on friday the president and first lady spoke to a gathering and the president made comments about cuba. >> as i announce before a wonderful crowd in little havana earlier this year, we will not lift sanctions on the cuban regime until it delivers full political freedom for the cuban people. [applause] the same failed communist ideology that has brought depression to cuba has brought
9:22 am
nothing but suffering and misery everywhere and every place it has been, anywhere in the world. communism is the past, freedom is the future. [applause] host: president trump from friday at the white house. frank mora in florida. we are going to ready on the democrats line -- reggie on the democrats line. caller: what advantages of improving our relationship with cuba, and what are the perceived disadvantages as well? frank: the theory of the case for engaging cuba is that it will create the sort of spaces within the area, lower the conflict, lower the attention that we have been having, or that we have had for 55 years and did not result in a desired objective or goal that we had of bringing freedom to cuba.
9:23 am
and the obama administration sought to change the dynamic, remove the united states from being the sort of scapegoat, or whipping boy of cuban politics, and try to change the relationship so that there would be more exchange and people to people as a means of not just trying to understand each other better, but really looking at that exchange as a way of seeking change in the island. giving or empowering the cuban people by providing more opportunities and more economic spaces, if you will, that allows them to free themselves from the state. the disadvantages of more normalization is if we think that is going to have an immediate impact on change on the island, that i think is naive. it is a process that will take time, and i think what is
9:24 am
unfortunate about the trump administration's policy is that it seems, that we are going back to a time of confrontation and taking punitive action against cuba. after all, the cuban dictatorship is a brutal dictatorship. it makes us feel good we are punishing a dictatorship, but it has been counterproductive on the kind of impact and desired effect host: we would like to have. host:host: bloomberg businessweek -- on the island. host: bloomberg businessweek reported in the summer that russia and china are working to win over smaller poorer countries, promising aid and investment. even as donald trump scales back. with a picture of the russian foreign minister touring cuban defense sites. how concerned are you about the presence, the bigger presence of russia or china in cuba? frank: i think russia is sort of
9:25 am
event on poking -- bent on poking us in the eye when it comes to latin america and the caribbean. they feel if we are going to try to influence and play in the ukraine, for example, and sanction russia over there aggressions in the ukraine, they feel like they should be doing the same thing in the caribbean or in latin america. but they really do not have the capacity to project and influence events for politics in the regime, like perhaps they did during the cold war. i would not be too concerned, but certainly worth monitoring. in terms of china, their presence in latin america is much more important and it is larger, but it is more of an economic realm. they are looking for trade opportunities, investment opportunities, and without a doubt the economic presence has expanded exponentially over the
9:26 am
last 10-15 years. they are looking in a sense for market, for economic partners in the region to feed and fuel their massive growth they have had over those 10 years. they are not looking to establish a sphere of influence, but certainly seeking economic partners. host: a couple more minutes with frank mora from florida international university. we have a line for cuban-americans, (202) 748-8003. we will go to st. petersburg, florida. caller: it is eric occurring. the cuban -- green. the cuban situation is confusing to the local politicians. our local yacht club, a nonprofit, has an annual regatta from st. petersburg to his van and recently i have gotten published in the tampa bay times and i spoke with our
9:27 am
representative's office and with the general manager, saying i do not think it is appropriate the best and brightest and the movers from our city of st. petersburg sail to cuba to celebrate whatever they are celebrating in the regatta. they were confused by the issue. dry,, the issue is cut and i question how safe it is for americans. i do not think we should be taking that relationship and parading it like it is a healthy relationship. i think the relationship is damaged and i think some groups should reevaluate, do they really want to send a contingent from st. petersburg, florida to havana to celebrate a sailing race? host: thank you. we will get a response. frank: eric, i agree. i think cuba tends to be a divisive issue, but really in
9:28 am
other areas of the united states. but increasingly, and i should add even in the cuban-american community, the number of people who believe engagement with cuba is preferable to isolating cuba, the poll numbers are clear, it is overwhelming support for that position. and i would not say overwhelming support in the cuban-american community, but it has changed. it is the majority of cuban-americans that believe engagement with cuba is important. so, i understand it is a dictatorship. no question, it is a brutal dictatorship where human rights are violated systematically, but i think as we do with other parts of the world there is a view, a view i share that by isolating or taking punitive action, it may make us feel better but it does not lead to the kind of goals or objectives we want for the people on the island.
9:29 am
and so we will, the issue will play out, but the poll numbers i think are pretty clear. host: we want to hear from dam ien on the independent line. caller: yes, i am from california and my question is, were there any cuban citizens affected by the so-called sonic attacks, or basically where they just aimed our diplomats? -- at our diplomats? as far as china and russia in our backyard, if we do not have any -- i think it is more a military strategic point of view, rather than economic, as far as cuba in 1963 kennedy stopped it. and for puerto rico, if we do not help that country and maintain it as part of our sovereignty, then western china will. host: about his point, where the
9:30 am
cuban citizens affected by the sonic attack? frank: that is a good question. i'm afraid i do not have an answer. there is a lot of mystery around the issue. and i do not know of any cuban citizens on the island that were affected by this, but we really do not know. so far what we know is american diplomats, american workers, and by the way canadians also, have been affected by this. but other than that, i just have not heard. we have seen no reports that anybody else has been affected. but again, we do not know for sure. host: one view on twitter -- viewer said, i suspect the cuban right is behind the attack. we want to hear from susan on the independent line. caller: yes, i have spent some time in havana. and i am aware that at the time of the trial for the socialist
9:31 am
-- it was decided that havana should be allowed to pretty much slide, while the rest of the underdeveloped country was being developed. havana, the of deteriorating buildings i think it is, there is a possibility that there has been some toxicity caused by lack of building and inspections and so forth, and this could be conceivably what has been bothering but the diplomats -- both the diplomats and natives of havana. host: we will let you go there. and we will finish with frank mora, your impressions from the caller's point of view, but more importantly, what were your impressions while you were there? frank: last time i visited was
9:32 am
the 1990's and certainly one gets the impression that the deteriorationhe of the infrastructure in cuba before and since my visit has been significant. the buildings simply collapsing, they are uninhabitable. and there was an incident a few years ago where there were cubans who became sick with eye problems and other issues related to water and other things that had to do with the inability or unwillingness of the government to address these issues. [indiscernible] frank: they did not get much attention and havana today, it is very different from 40 or 50 years ago. it is an issue of the cuban government's inability to invest in areas of importance. they started to do it over the last few years, but it is more
9:33 am
focused on tourism. host: frank mora is our guest, he is the director of the latin and caribbean center at florida international university. you can find out more at fiu.ed u. thank you so much. frank: thank you. host: more ahead on washington journal, we will open our phone lines for any topic you want to talk about in our public policy realm. here are the phone lines. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. for democrats. (202) 748-8002 for independence. and we will get to your calls in just a moment. ♪ announcer: monday, from the black hat conference in las vegas, a discussion with cyber security professionals on attacks by criminals, foreign
9:34 am
adversaries and terrorists. billy rios, white scope founder. >> the device controlling the amount of drugs a patient is getting when they are in the hospital, literally it had no password. you could connect however you wanted. you could do whatever you want to come including administering drugs, so we were able to demonstrate to folks like the fda, and they were appalled. founderer: robert lee -- of car hacking village. >> as long as the systems use proper encryption, they can secure it correctly. not every manufacturer does this correctly, so we are helping and we are working with the manufacturers to help them make the systems a little more secure. specialr: aaron ralph, agent in charge of the las vegas division. >> we want to make sure the fbi
9:35 am
is seen as a partner with industry, with protecting people and we want to understand what is important to them and see how we can plug and play. announcer: watch on monday night, at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span2. washington journal continues. host: open phones for the next one in five minutes, for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8002. hurricane nate making its way through the south and up to the east coast of the u.s. the headline of the clarion ledger in mississippi, mississippi's information source, "nate arrives early, it is a mile-per-hour winds. and has been since downgraded to a tropical storm."
9:36 am
we are going to the gulf coast to hear from mercie in the louisiana on the democrat line. good morning. caller: good morning. host: do us a favor and make sure you mute the television. though ahead. caller: -- go ahead. caller: ok. my comment is everybody is talking about this -- that happened. i think it is just terrorists. aroundime somebody goes calling shooters terrorists, why couldn't they call these people terrorists? i think they are using the wrong word for this dramatic thing that happened in the united states. host: ok, maria is in atlanta on the independent line. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i wanted to mention something about cuba.
9:37 am
if anyone understands the technology around creating a sonic weapon or having an incident reflecting a sonic weapon, which we do not even know, it is easy to get that past the cuban government. they are not very technologically savvy. and frankly we would not be able to trace it easily here. forthey have no motivation wanting us out of cuba. in fact, they have the opposite. i think we hear a lot from the cuban-american community's, which happened to be the families of the wealthy who escaped from cuba during the coup. and so the have always been a very, very vocal and politically savvy at having the u.s. look at badly upon cuba. so those are my comments. host: thank you for calling on the issue of the attack on the u.s. diplomats and the expelling of the 15 diplomats from the
9:38 am
u.s. and the u.s. times wayne in -- sayingg in on friday, the mystery of the sonic weapon, until there is concrete evidence about the source of the attacks the trump administration is wrong to expel cuban diplomats from washington as it did on tuesday. secretary rex tillerson's explanation that cuba should be punished for failing to protect american diplomats regimes cuba was at least aware of the attack, which the united states has neither demonstrated or claimed. so far, having a has denied awareness of a sonic weapon and has actively assisted the american investigators. other parties, most notably russia, must also figure in as a suspect. president putin would likely will come a setback to american cuban relations. so against the expelling of those diplomats in washington dc this week. asheville, north carolina, we are hearing from millie.
9:39 am
caller: yescaller:, i wanted to call about the partisan divide. i think a solution is term limits. you know, these people get in and they hold too much power and i think if more people were able new, the that our partisan -- are new, the partisan divide would not be so bad. wei: millie wayne in on -- ghing in on the partisan divide. you can read more at pewre gary on the democrats line. caller: i want to make a comment. i am 66. gun control became a hot issue when i was in junior high, about 50 years ago.
9:40 am
gunsow that there are more in the country then there are if they arebody, taking the guns away from the people, it would be very little progress. that is my comment. host: flint, michigan. democrats line. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you? host: fine, thank you. caller: if you get rid of the hate on this planet, it starts -- it is not the politicians, it is about you have to and -- to end thee have got to hate and racism. when you put people who do not like it person because of the color of their skin, or especially the color of their skin, you put them in a position of power and they set up their making laws -- sit up there making laws for certain people,
9:41 am
and you make them live by it, they want to single out a certain group or certain race. and i mean, starting at the top of the government, the government must end racism and white supremacy. then you will see peace come to america. - you will never see peace in a matter how many guns you get rid of, no matter how many people you put into prison, or hide them away because you do not like them, it will have to end with the racism and the hate. how can you let somebody walk down the streets of america and carry torches and is saying hail hitler's, then you have a person kneeling for peace and processing for our liberty, it is because we do not want to be discriminated against in to turn it into a political thing, like it is not patriotic. we need to get rid of the hate
9:42 am
and a double standard. racism has to go. host: richard on the independent line. caller: good morning. i want to make a comment about cuba and american policy. the foreign policy. we have been in invader. when batista was in cuba there was no problem, when castro came in and improved housing and bootine, and we had our heel on the neck, strangling them. it is a disgrace, because international law breaks at will and when we find a convenient, we use it. people should learn history, because the u.s. is the biggest cause of the problems in the world beard perpetuated by -- wo rld. perpetuated by a military complex and people should try to
9:43 am
inform themselves more. i listen to the mainstream media and it is all collusion and we are becoming a fascist country. host: we welcome your topics -- your comments on any topic. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. and all others, (202) 748-8002. this is front-page reporting in the washington post, the headline "retreat from dogma, republicans dropped the mantra of cutting the budget." "the republican party has abandoned fiscal restraint, in a way that could add trillions in federal debt over the next decade. cutting spending to balance the budget was almost religion to the party for much of the last eight years, but all year long despite the control of the white house they have not taken steps to balance the budget or overhaul entitlement programs like medicaid and medicare, or
9:44 am
to arrest the growth of the $20 trillion debt." from the washington post. and the continuation of the story, part of it will be coming up next week in the house in terms of a request for additional funding for hurricane relief, this piece continues "once the norm, not empty nests in the new gop." the three devastating hurricanes in august and september ravaged texas and puerto rico, now seeking $40 billion in new spending. and a storm this weekend could create spending pressure. in the past, the republicans have tried to offset the disaster relief spending, but no demand this time. now we will hear from fort lauderdale, florida. howard? caller: good morning. not the most intelligent person in the world,
9:45 am
ok? but i did have some comments. and common sense is an important word, because i listen to democrats on how we need more commonsense laws on guns and we need stricter gun laws so we can stop the crazy people and criminals from getting the guns. guess what? let me explain this. if i am a criminal, i am not going to go to walmart and fill out the paperwork and wait three days for a gun to rob a bank. i will not do anything legally, so anything you do, any changes you make to our god-given right to bear arms, to protect the government, you're only hurting the law-abiding citizens. i do not understand why these people claim that more gun laws and common sense gun laws is going to help anything, it will only hurt us. it will not be helping to stop
9:46 am
crazy people and criminals from getting weapons to do what they want to do good you have to -- do. you have to search, do your job, search the people and fix the problem can't because when you mess around with our projections to protect ourselves, then we might as well throw our hands up and give up. thomas abt the las vegas -- host: the las vegas sun continuing reporting on the mass shooting last sunday, and the headline "teen looking for the samaritan who carried him to safety." "he called his dad, he said he got shot. then i heard the commotion and the screaming and i told him, stay on the line. he hung up and he texted that it hurt too much to talk. the 16-year-old is one of nearly 500 people injured at a country music festival at the las vegas strip. the gunmen opened fire from
9:47 am
mandalay bay, showering the crowd with bullets and killing 58 people, one of those bullets going to the shoulder of nick. right its to the would've hit his girlfriend, with him he would have attended all three days of route 91. i feel extremely lucky, i really do." athens, georgia. jimmy, good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i would like to say that i was going to start an anti-hate group, but everybody who wanted to join hated donald trump, so i had to kick amount -- kick him out. if you find yourselves hating a politician coming should try to pretend like you only disagree with them, because hate is not helping.
9:48 am
hate the politics, but love the politician. thank you. host: you bet. mark, good morning. on the independent line. on the democratic line. caller: a lot of your callers touched on this with an earlier guest. what part of the problem is every time there is a mass shooting by a white male, the conversation always centers around mental illness, proliferation of guns, but the problem is the white male. if you look at fbi statistics, the profile of a mass shooter is the white male. this psychotic obsession with explosives,ms, and plus a propensity for mass murder. look at the history of the white man in america, violence and murder. his day isumbus, coming up, he was the first white male mass murderer in this hemisphere, murdering most of
9:49 am
the indians in the caribbean. black men are thugs, muslims are terrorists and white men have mental illness, that is nonsense. have the correct discussion, you're confusing a random mass murder with violence in the intercity. we know that is predictable. mass murder in suburbia is not predictable, it is dangerous. that is my comments. host: mark talked about columbus day. and in pj media they are saying that anti-fascist groups are planning action for monday. violent left-wingers have announced a nationwide campaign to deface christopher columbus statues on monday. five of them have already been vandalized in recent weeks. and in one case last month, they defaced a statue of columbus in central park, leaving paint on
9:50 am
his hands and is crawling "it was not be tolerated." and "something is coming." and a caller on her independent line. caller: the last fellow's comments struck me. he left out the indigenous people who used to hate each other. eat each other after they committed mass murder. referring to the assets and others. -- aztecs and others. now slavery has existed since the beginning of time, the egyptians had slaves, the romans had slaves, the moors had a slaves, you go all through europe and slavery existed. the problem i see with the black population, not the black population i will correct that,
9:51 am
the african-american population. first of all, i do not know -- whether it is with africa or america. the problem is they will use slavery -- host: you said you do not know whether allegiance lies -- where their allegiance lies? would you say the same thing to somebody who is irish-american or indian-american? caller: you got it. i'm an american. host: when you say allegiance, you are questioning the allegiance of an african-american to america? caller: what did you say? host: the allegiance of an african-american to america? caller: you got it. i do not know how else to spell it out. they will use the slavery issue for ions. they will use it as a crutch for the next 1000 years. out.-- they have worn me
9:52 am
i would like to see them leave. host: huntsville, alabama. chris on the republican line. good morning. ok. we will go to north carolina, see if we can hear from kathy. go ahead. caller: i do not have a gun, i do not own a gun. it may come a time i need to the way that things are. but you cannot blame it on the gun. a gun does not shoot by itself. you have got to look at the mental state of these people. you know, i have fibromyalgia and i am on depression pills, not because i am depressed but because it helps with the type of disease i have. but you have got to monitor these people when you go indie put them on these, these uh --
9:53 am
i, thes narcoticse -- these narcotics. i could go back right now and go to my doctor and say, i am depressed even more. he will put me on something that will, that is supposed to help, but in the long run it can cause -- ou read -- you read in the papers that the reaction is suicidal thoughts and all this. there is more to look at than just gun laws. host: thank you for your call. we are open for the next couple minutes. looking ahead to the week in congress, the house is in next week. and writing about legislative action, but more writing about the progress of the ministration on regulations and rules. t" is the title.
9:54 am
i will read it quickly. "first few months of 2017, the republicans used the congressional review act that allows congress to roll back 14 of president barack obama's regulations raging from that region from nepa role to a central security administrative directive looking at making it more difficult for the mentally impaired to buy guns. his use of the review act makes up only a small part of the record as a regulation buster. indeed, it is fair to say that no prior president has systematically gone after his predecessors regulatory legacy." that was from cq. we will hear from the democrats line. caller: good morning. i am for equal opportunity of all people, but i do not think the nfl is a good place to express your political views, because people just get tired of
9:55 am
push, push, push. you have to think in a relationship or a parent and child, you do not keep going after them to get them to listen. i am a christian, but i do not always espouse my christian beliefs to people who i do not think are ready to listen. you have to think about how you do not want to push people, then you get the divide. host: do you feel like now, because we started the program talking about the divide as pew research center talks about between people's ideologies, do you feel the divide between your views and people who have opposite views is wider than ever? that, but feels like i watch a lot of political shows. i think with the internet and everything like that it is just, people are talking about it so much more that it just feeds
9:56 am
itself. i think the political divide is more and part of it is people are just not, people are not interacting with people of different beliefs. they are not listening. host: thank you for joining the conversation about it. line in, republican little rock, arkansas. caller: yes. my comment is i want to point out the fact the problem in the callersis the last two that were absolute racists. thank you for giving them the opportunity of freedom of speech, but with that said the one guy that said the problem is white people, and the other guy saying he does not know were african-american allegiances lie, a kind of blew my mind. it did not stigmatize me, but the fact they are still out
9:57 am
there in 2017 and are hard-core about it, when will it end? host: thank you. we will go to los angeles and we will hear from everett. independent line. caller: how are you doing? host: fine, thank you. caller: i want to make a statement. there are two places in the world that i know where they have jones that go around -- drones violently killing people in the world, nevada and stuttgart, germany. host: ok. dorothy on the democrat line. caller: good morning. i wanted to express something good is sometimes we miss -- somtething. sometimes we misunderstand each other. the woman that called to not understand what they are kneeling for, they are kneeling
9:58 am
for family members of theirs who have been killed. their lives have been taken. that is from the brutality of police officers, not all of them, but that is not what they are talking about. we have to reverse this. think about if it was one of your children that they loved dearly who were being killed, not just arrested, but actually their life taken. that is where the divide comes from god because a lot of citizens -- from, because a lot of citizens, they do not feel the same way because it is not happening to them. they put it as a divide, protesting the flag, but they are not protesting the flag, they are protesting the taking of a human life. that and it was a week ago at the route 91 event in las 20,000in front of plus people on the strip, a
9:59 am
gunman opened fire from the mandalay bay, killing 58 and wounding 500 people. jason all been opened saturday live last night and here is what you had to say, and he also paid tribute to tom petty. >> so many people are hurting. there are children, parents, brothers, sisters, friends, they are all part of our family. so i want to say to them, we hurt for you. and we hurt with you. you can be sure that we are going to walk through these tough times together, every step of the way. because when america is at its best, our bond and our spirit is unbreakable. [applause] ♪ back down"] "won't
10:00 am
♪ [singing] that was jason aldean on saturday night live. we thank you for being part of washington journal. looking ahead to tomorrow as we celebrate 20 years of c-span radio, the program tomorrow coming from the studios of c-span radio. we will be joined in part by jeff mason, the white house correspondent for reuters. we will also hear from radio hosts across the country, including bill cress and more. all of it happening tomorrow on c-span and c-span radio, washington journal live begin at 7:00 a.m. eastern. help the rest of your weekend -- hope the rest of your weekend is great. ♪ [captioning performed by the national captioning instut


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on