tv Washington Journal 09282019 CSPAN September 28, 2019 7:00am-10:01am EDT
discuss oversight on generic drugs. host: good morning and welcome to washington journal. democrats are moving quickly with an impeachment inquiry. they are demanding records from mike pompeo if the president improperly pressured the ukraine investigate his political rivals. what do you think? is the idea of a president a bridge too far?
oppose anu support or impeachment inquiry into president donald trump. we will keep it simple. if you support the inquiry, we want to hear from you at (202) 748-8000. tell us why. if you oppose an impeachment inquiry, we want to hear from you at (202) 784-8001. we want to hear your reasoning. you can always text us your (202) 748-8003. once again, things are moving quickly in washington when it comes to this impeachment inquiry that democrats have opened into president donald trump. this is a look at the new york times on what is going on in washington. democrats moving quickly to
washington. the caller imposes -- opposes the inquiry. why do you oppose an impeachment inquiry? caller: i'm actually in california. i oppose it because i don't understand biden is on film saying what he did it. how he helped his son, how he was able to get involved with the russian oligarchs. -- the ukrainian oligarchs. trump, we elected him in 2016. it was a great speech he did on stopping the deep state. i can't see what the problem is. he has to investigate biden. saying anare
investigation needs to be done of joe biden. isn't that the responsibility of the justice department and not pushing a foreign leader to do that? caller: holder did everything barack wanted him to do. he didn't have a problem with it. you didn't have a problem jumping off cash. a lot of things. they have to work for the president. protect his he office? how can he keep the democrats at bay who just to keeping -- attacking him? host: say a democratic president asked a foreign country to investigate one of the republicans running against him. would that be ok? i'm for president trump investigating republicans as well. i'm for him stopping the state corruption.
host: let's go to and calling from new york. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. support. much in i think trump has gone over the line. , talkingith a foreign to a foreign leader about biden and his family. i think he needs to go. i really do. host: the first caller said this is simply an investigation into government corruption. do you think this is something that president trump should have done, pushing for an investigation of possible corruption? caller: it has been declared this was all cleared. this was all cleared up. republican --en a a democrat doing this,
republicans would have been up in arms. they would have been carrying on for months and months. he needs to go. he should have been gone a long time ago. from the beginning. there is always a political part two everything in washington. how will this affect the election? caller: i think it will affect. i hope the democrats can keep it together. democrats cany get out and vote and get him out of office. that's all i want is for him to be gone and leave new york as well. host: a republican member of the house oversight committee talked about these charges and what's going on with the president. this is what he had to say. hadn't criedocrats
wolf so many times with respect thisesident trump, i think might have more credibility with me. until i see something that strikes me as impeachable, i'm going to consider this another political stunt, especially the way it was handled. impeachment on the ,ueller report or the campaign nothing pertaining to his taxes. this is a new thing that just popped up. by usa question asked today, if the ukraine call was perfect as the president said, why try to bury it? >> that's a good question. i think that something the
judiciary committee should ask. i think that's fair game. old blownrn a impeachment inquiry? i don't think so. people are already chiming in on social media. i totallye that says support impeachment. when you break the law, you go to jail. says ianother one that support and inquiry. after i hear the evidence, i decide if i support impeachment. illegaling something doesn't clear biden, nor vice versa. we are asking the question of the day, do you support or oppose an impeachment inquiry into president donald trump. let's talk to can calling from texas. he opposes the impeachment
inquiry. caller: good morning. i think this is doing a disservice to the country. you have to stop and think about this. when trump was coming down the escalator, they were talking about plans to impeach. accept said if you don't the results of the election, you are against the united states. it's amazing to watch this. right after trump went into articles ofhad impeachment. this is been a game plan all along. as you see all this scurrying around, they have no idea.
what do you expect? they have no issues. they don't care about the security of this country. they can destroy anything. host: let me ask you this question. flip the parties. president asked a government to investigate a republican family. caller: if you stop and think about it, it's not about party. it's about crime. biden, he brags on tv about strong-arming the government. those are his own words. host: you are saying if a democratic president asking the
ukraine to investigate a republican family, that would be ok. instance, obama was looking to find russian interference. you can't take this as one isolated point. you have to look at the totality of what has happened historically. without a doubt, one of the things that's happening is getting right back into what biden did and what wound up in obama's pockets. go to ni calling from hawaii. ck caller: it's shocking to listen to people who oppose this. i want to say is
i'm not a democrat or a republican. i am active with a third party. i'm not a democrat, i'm not defending the activity. ats just obvious if you look what the charges are, there is no guarantee that he's guilty. except there is so much information. it's like talking about a smoking gun. there is so much information, there is so much possibility. yes this president has done things from day one that if it were anybody else, you think about clinton who is impeached for a sexual peccadillo. here is the president. i think the people that are calling in opposition, i don't mean to judge mental, are ignorant of the country.
the president is using the power of our system to further his own personal fortune. at rudy giuliani or the attorney general and you look at what they said, they really are scared of their shadow. i really appreciate your questions about what if this was a democrat who did it? watched enough to have the next and impeachment. of course he resigned. i've seen accusations of other presidents. this is over the top. we've never seen such an incompetent person. you can take his comments against immigrants. there are so many things he has done. threatened a foreign power,
holding up half $1 billion and it does not have to be a quid pro quo. this is an inquiry. it could clear him. it could be possible that everything that supported are inaccurate. a free country to look at the activities of this president. from let's go to robert pennsylvania. robert opposes the impeachment inquiry. caller: thanks for having me on today. i'm a democrat. i voted for trump. i don't want my vote to be crackpots a bunch of in the studios of cnn. that's where this is being driven.
i voted for trump. i don't want to be negated. i will vote for him again if he makes it to the election. i don't want my vote to be negated. then't listen to anything other networks say about him. any truthlace to get about what's going on is the fox network unfortunately. trump is more of a conservative democrat then he is a republican i believe. the way of conservative democrats more than he does republicans. that's my thoughts on it.
i just want my vote to count. the days before he was inaugurated, they were screaming for impeachment. let's go to fran from jacksonville. fran supports the impeachment inquiry. caller: good morning. i try to place the focus on holding up the aid to ukraine. i consider that a national security issue. it's a security issue for ukraine and the united states. are goingn countries to try to do their best to keep russia from taking over. our president is holding back aid. he did say he needed a favor from this new president.
i guess that's the reason. also, somebody called up and said that nancy pelosi was a pathological liar. everybody knows who the pathological liar is. i haven't seen one person say donald trump is not a liar. they just want to excuse him. this last person was talking democrats,chool old-style. democrats, he's talking about dixiecrat's. they are now republicans. that's why he likes them. it's a confirmation bias. said the caller also
democrats have been talking about impeachment of president trump for a very long time. this was something democrats have wanted the entire time. what is your response to that? caller: my response is we don't know what he's doing. taxes,t know about his we know he's got his children weolved in the government see jared kushner making deals. he did not disclose his taxes. it's getting worse by the day. yesterday, george will discuss his thoughts on the
impeachment inquiry. >> the rule is not every impeachable offense should be grounds for impeachment proceeding. nancy pelosi announced this inquiry 406 days before the presidential election. better presidential election. there are 47 members of the caucus with the democrats. in order to remove him from office, they would need 20 republican senators. tweet trump today were to that nine is a prime number, the sun revolves around the earth, there aren't three republican senators who would disagree with them. he's going to finish his term.
as a prudential matter makes you wonder what this is about. they can send this to the senate. it would be terrific fun to watch the republicans squirm when it got there. there are public goods that would come from impeachment. is hisof the articles refusal to comply with thisessional oversight, would represent the beginning of the refluxing of congressional muscles that have atrophied over the years. this would be another benefit. primaryelieve that the aim should be to make sure the 45th president is succeeded by
in 2021, you have to consider. theink it distracts democrats from caulking about it. let's go back to our social media followers. inyou support or oppose and peach mint inquiry. margaret says she is in favor. what do his supporters not get. thinksn't matter if you biden is a crook. we have laws. this is from florida. only if the evidence is irrefutable. i believe most republicans would agree with me. too many accusations of proven to be false.
absolutely support the inquiry. trump has done more than enough to warn to it. his latest move is beyond the pale. do you support or oppose the impeachment inquiry. or textalways call in us or hit us up on social media. let's go back to our phone lines. opposes the inquiry. good morning. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. caller: i've been interested in the fact that president trump said that his conversation was perfect. honesthe's been pretty with the things he says. perfect,hought it was why? i've been researching that quite
a bit. in 1998,ut that clinton presented the ukraine with a treaty that he wanted ratified, that the ukraine and the united states would have a mutual agreement when there were criminal matters. they would legally assist each other. this treaty was ratified in 2000. you can look it up. trump hado me that concern about corruption going on in ukraine. some of the people surrounding stillew president were questionable. our tax money to a
country, we would like to know it's spent correctly and on uncorrupt activities. interested that he that hadp this server to do with the election. i got the impression from the that the two of them were in agreement. they are supposed to cooperate on criminal matters and let each other know what's going on. upwas important to bring this server. whoave someone in ukraine is serious about stopping corruption. the biden thing came up.
they are supposed to be discussed between the countries. legally, they are supposed to assist each other. that's why trump thought this was a perfect call. host: we are going to have an expert on ukraine relations later on the show. is that the type of conversation that should be done not a law enforcement level. they are talking about what could be an investigation. should that be done at a much lower level? a lower level would be something like giuliani. him, he was asked by the state department to go over there. there is a lot of low level discussion. there is a brand-new president
now in the ukraine. it was an opportunity for trump. to remind him of these criminal issues that are still under investigation. ask you theing to question, flip the script. say a democratic president was talking about corruption into a republican contender for his job, would that be ok? caller: absolutely. this has to do with criminal investigations. because there was something criminal going on with biden, unless he is convicted, he is still a candidate. host: let's go to darrell in los angeles. he supports the impeachment inquiry. good morning.
thank you for taking my call. the inquiry because donald trump has done so much corrupt stuff. president, hee was corrupt before he was voted in. he is a mafioso type man. the republican senate by the home use. he is just an embarrassment to america. can vote him out, the better the entire world will
be. he is divisive and corrupt. that, unless see you live under a rock. host: during the texas tribune was askedsusan rice about former vice president biden in ukraine. this is what she had to say. >> to the white house have concerns about the vice president in ukraine? president trump has raised this as an issue. was this ever a serious concern? >> let me explain why. complete distraction going on here. to try to conflate what vice president biden did at president for foreignst
policy objectives within a country where the united states was providing millions of dollars. they were trying to bolster their democracy. vice president biden made phone calls and took trips in support of that policy area he was transparent. westernacked by our partners in the imf. there was no secrecy about it. there was no hiding the transcripts. it was the basic work of diplomacy. that there is some equivalence between the president of the united states, this president trump extorting a foreign leader to advance his partisan personal interest and the vice president pursuing a
policy that was open and transparent and backed by congress, it's completely out of the norms. host: let's go to tennessee. she opposes the impeachment inquiry. good morning. caller: i do oppose. the democrats are challenging the rule of law. eyewitness.an there is no evidence, it's based on hearsay. what he did as a matter of truth.
this is turning the rule of law on it said. an impeachment inquiry would not be a courtroom trial. they would not have to follow the same rules as a courtroom case. caller: until recently, the whistleblower law, you had to be an eyewitness. that has been changed. the same courtroom rules to an impeachment inquiry. we are undertaking an election. applying au think stricter standard would mean the inquiry wouldn't go forward? caller: i don't know. rules that the same
people understand. secondhandave evidence. what do you think should be done at this point? should they stop and wait until they get more evidence? or not investigated all? caller: if they had more evidence, how much did we spend on mueller. they did not find anything. determined.nd and i hate this. i think everybody hates this. this is not good for anybody. host: let's go to florida. i am pretty sure i got your name wrong. i did get it correct.
thank you so much. you support the inquiry. believe the declaration of independence and all the past presidents got together to make this country great again. unfortunately, the last few the country is being divided. is whenon't understand president trump was running for he had a prostitute and hookers. he got away with that. he is done so much wrong for this country.
just trying to send out a democrat or republican. i would like for someone to get an office that's going to care about the country. democrats and republicans fighting against each other. they expect to run the country. we should be number one. host: let's go to paul calling from west palm beach. he opposes the impeachment
inquiry. caller: thank you for taking my call. a little upset as the white c-span has been doing this. why not discuss that? i am a 68 euros man. ---year-old man. god for the new day i've got. , iray for this president used to be a democrat in the 80's and 90's. flake and these people who are saying 35 republicans are going to impeach the president. i would like to find out who these people are.
marco rubio has been silent. they are not coming out to support this president. not let these people who were not supporting the president voted out in the primary. host: let's go to some of our social media followers. this is one tweet that says the president has the power to do what he is doing. he is the president. he has the power and democrats are trying to delegitimize him. this is another tweet that says no impeachable crimes here. they hate the man. things must change. if we investigate every phone call we will find many similar
conversations. if he didn't do anything wrong, why did they try to hide the complaint. we will look at one last one. is not inevitable. there are signs of violating campaign ethics. the word impeachment is mentioned because of the series of misbehaviors leading to it. let's go back to the phone lines. jeremy is calling from ohio. good morning. caller: good morning. i think the impeachment inquiry is warranted. the emphasis is on inquiry. they need to hurry up and get this done before november.
if we find no wrongdoing, then focus on the election. in regards to this phone call, where joe biden was brought up, if you look at the transcript contextually, i don't necessarily think there was any wrongdoing. the cover-up is a concern for me. if -- ifed to act as you've got your head on the table in your eyes closed, people will think you are sleeping. you may not be sleeping, people will think that way. way,u are acting a certain it is congress is job to look into this. jack in iowa. to
the impeachment inquiry. caller: good morning. the trivialization of the impeachment clause. impeached, it was for a low crime. now, the democrats want to impeach before there is even a crime. like both parties trivializing the provision. what with the end result be? they are going to knock out joe biden. elizabeth warren becomes the candidate for president. donald trump easily beats a list of the foreign, who wants to
throw senior citizens under the bus by eliminating medicare. warren think elizabeth is going to deserve or beat donald trump. atlanta.'s go to good morning. caller: good morning. how are you today? i'm calling because i oppose it. i have a couple of things. i'll oppose it because it seems they have done nothing except try to catch them since day one. if they looked at the amount of stations,t by tv stations, onnew trying to get him in trouble, it
is a horrible amount of money. biden, he mustut be toting something wrong or it wouldn't be brought up. this is just another undercut to attack the president. he was put in there by us. other presidents that were immoral. most politicians are corrupt. i think he's doing quite a fine job. we haven't changed who he is. yesterday at an awards ceremony, the hillary clinton talked about the impeachment inquiry and the whistleblower complaint. this is what she had to say. that they just opened an impeachment inquiry into the present. on the basis of evidence that he betrayed his oath of office to
uphold the constitution and defend our country. he has turned diplomacy into a cheap extortion racket. the foreignrated officers who served selflessly, no matter the politics of the administration. , they are caught in the crossfire. i was proud to serve with foreign service officers at the state department. they deserve the support and gratitude of all americans. [inaudible] [applause] sadly, we've known who donald trump is for some time now. we knew he was a corrupt is this man who cheated people.
we knew he and his campaign invited foreign & just to tamper with our elections. now we know that in the course of his duties as president, he endangered us all by putting his personal and political interests ahead of the interests of the american people. this is ultimately about much more than donald trump. it's about us. it's about who we are as a nation. history is being written. our children are watching. host: let's talk to houston, texas. she supports the impeachment inquiry. caller: good morning. i'm glad you took my call. i've been hearing this. rich, like trump, if you are rich, you do everything
to make sure you stay in there. this is not right. clintoned to impeach for a personal thing. about the foreign country. his son-in-law met with a foreign country. he had business with that. he had a lot of business over there. wanted -- the young lady was talking about we picked him. the electoral college did. clinton had over 3 million more votes. it's not right for this man. tax, he doesn't
do anything. for these people to say he won, he did not win the popular vote. the electoral college really shouldn't be. he should not be president right now. he's not qualified. he has degraded our country. this is not right. i don't care if you are republican or democrat. thank you. host: let's go to ursula in california. priscilla opposes the inquiry. caller: good morning. how are you? i'm calling because i really oppose this impeachment. i think he's trying to do everything. he works so hard trying to do everything to fix our country.
he's not taking a salary. he's getting his money to charity. they wanted it to impeach him from day one. republican that had done the same thing or said the same thing and bragged about it, heoe biden did would've been investigated. we are investigating the russia thing. it started in ukraine. they also gave us information. i really don't think they should impeach him. he's doing good things for our country. he's doing good things, getting
people out of prison. wish we would stop accusing him of doing things. i'm 73 years old. i'm a black woman. in my lifetime, he's the best person i've ever seen trying to help our country. he's not trying to divide it. he's everything for everybody. he's working for everybody. host: the reelection campaign has prepared a commercial that tries to tie joe biden on his ukraine ties. this is the campaign ad. a joe biden promised ukraine billion dollars. if the prosecutor isn't
fired, you're not getting the money. >> the democrats want to impeach him. their media lapdogs fall in line. election, now they want to steal this one. don't let them. host: let's go to mike who is calling from miami. he supports the inquiry. caller: how are you? i support the impeachment inquiry. theill show how foolish democrats are. there is nothing there to impeach. they are trying a smear campaign. it's going to blow up in their face unless the media hype sit up. heights -- hypes it up.
nikita khrushchev talked about economics. infuriating they thought they were attacking us. it was all because of the media. i do think they should impeach 45 congress people, starting with those two loudmouths from california. emily calling to from san francisco. she opposes the inquiry. go ahead. caller: i certainly do. they should be doing some work andead of passing treaties helping businesses. thingse doing so many that are involving president trump area there is nothing being done by the democrats.
they want to let people in from other countries. we have a crime. the lady was right. there is a treaty on mutual resistance. we are not just talking about ukraine. we are talking about china, a $1ng man whose son received billion. he worked in this company. help toupposed to be a get to biden when he was vice president. we have more than one crime. he has a couple of bad reputation.
if more and it gets in, the market will close the next day. people are communists. they do not want our economy. it's a wonderful economy. host: let me make sure i heard you correctly. did you just say that if elizabeth warren wins, the stock market will close down the next day? man calledery famous leon cooperman said this. it will you believe shut itself down voluntarily? caller: i think eventually they will. don't you? these are communists coming in.
this is a new system. host: let's go to dorothy calling from florida. she supports the inquiry. caller: good morning. he hasinly do because gotten away with so many things. i have to quit watching c-span for a long time. hear people talk about how wonderful he is, i'm 78 years old, he is the worst president ever. because he keeps getting caught and they keep covering up his misdeeds, these people that support him, who are these people? do they have no moral compass anymore? is there no right or wrong, especially the bible thumper's that call in?
he goes against everything the bible says. he's been married three times. he was still unfaithful to his wives. who are these people who think he is so wonderful? i can't understand it. they have lost their moral compass. host: alvin is calling from delaware. good morning. caller: good morning. i do oppose the inquiry. it seems like from the moment donald trump announced he was running for office, it was the laughingstock of washington. when he won the republican nomination and the presidency, that's when the democratic machine decided to get revenge on him. like every five weeks, there is some new invention.
the democrats have more in store for him. this is just the beginning. they always have something more damaging to remove him from office. this is the worst i've ever seen my government look. sadly, i don't think it's over. they are well connected. operativeseep state all over the government. the president can't have a conversation without being leaked to the press. that's the most damaging thing. if you can't have a conversation regardless of the topic, it becomes front-page news. that should trouble every american. there are people that hate this president so much they would listen to a conversation and get
it in the news. president trump is doing the best he can. one, they have sent he will not have one day in peace as president. they seem to be continuing with that process. host: let's go to carl from kansas city. carl supports the impeachment inquiry. caller: hello. i'm glad to be in. i'm not that firmly supportive. i am open to the inquiry. support thessarily impeachment. my main focus of the call is i want to make an appeal to americans. things trump is doing and i don't think everything he does is bad, one of the things he's doing is questionable is
attacking the press. they need to go after the story. if the story is flawed like it was with dan rather and former president bush about his military connections, erin out. america depends and the world depends on the press. to hear allo have kinds of criticisms and praise. saying a hear people lot of the information that outs out is totally made up of cloth. one thing i will say, thanks for listening to me, i want to know more about him collecting $6 million for the veterans.
i'm a veteran. i'm 75 years old. i think trump has done some good things. i want to hear more about the state of new york closing down his foundation and how he takes his money and tells his cronies to put it in the foundations of they won't have to pay taxes. host: let's talk to want to calling from tennessee. wanda supports the impeachment inquiry. i just wanted to say president trump and mr. bush you get in because of the electoral that is correlated to corruption. be oneular vote needs to man one vote, not one group of people. want to say.i
the menendez brothers try to claim privilege. privilege might be a disease. accepts it. he's going to disrupt everything and it's all right. i wish they would not go the impeachment way if he would just resign. greg,let's talk to calling from ohio. greg opposes the impeachment inquiry. go ahead. caller: i oppose it. this man was voted into office. he is the top dog. he is creating -- cleaning up the mess. the democrats are crooked.
i don't know why you people can't see it. you are brainwashed if you vote for a democrat. that's all i've got to say. let's talk to kurt calling from new jersey. good morning. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. caller: i support the inquiry. i want people to fall for the shiny objects the trump people are putting out there. there is nothing wrong that happened with biden. watch out for what jared kushner is doing, ivanka. they are in foreign lands making money. this host: we will like to thank all of our callers. a discussion of the public health concerns around e
cigarettes, coming up. later on we'll be joined by the wilson center who will discuss the relationship between the united states and ukraine. we'll be right back. >> the concept of whiteness before the civil war was a barrier of exclusion when states said only white men can vote. whiteness was therefore used to exclude others. but in the civil rights act, whiteness becomes a baseline. if white people enjoy certain legal rights, everybody else has to enjoy those rights also.
>> then the deindustrialization of the united states in the 1970s and 80s. and sunday at 2:00 p.m. eastern the psychological impact of flying on world war one pilots. at 7:00, women in the apolo program and the challenges they faced. >> there were cameras all over the place but they're supposed to be on the room as a whole. this was just on me, i had no idea. i didn't say anything about it. we didn't even know the term sexual harassment or hostile workforce. and there's two different ways to thing about that. one is that it's a little voiristic on the part of the dudes watching you and it is sort of harassing and uncomfortable. but the other way to think of it is so let them look and let them all know, let everybody who is not in this damn room know that there is a woman here, i'm here, get used to it.
>> explore our nation's past on american history tv every weekend on c-span 3. >> "washington journal" continues. >> we're back with gregory colly of the president of the american vaping association and we're going to talk about the recent health concerns related to vaping and e cigarettes. good morning. >> thank you for having me. >> let's start off with who does the american vaping association represent? which company? >> we don't actually represent any company. we're a nonprofit. it comes out of my work. when i was in law scool i quit smoking with vaping, became an advocate for harm reduction. so american vaping association, we advocate for sensible regulation and we receive our funding now that's what small and medium sized businesses as well as consumers. >> when you say small to medium
sized are you talking about people who make e cigarettes? who are we talking about? >> a mix of independent manufacturers, distributors, retailers. >> what is the intended purpose? why do they even exist? guest: vaping products exist baut dr. russell wrote smokers smoke for the nicotine but die from the tar. but until these products came out there really was no way to deliver nicotine in an inhaled form that was pleasurable but that you eliminated the smoke. so the purpose of vaping products, why they were invented 14 years ago was to provide adult smokers, ones who have tried to quit but failed to give them nicotine in a much safer way. and we've succeeded. we've had well over 3 million american smokers make the switch to vaping and everyone virtually all in public health including the f.d.a. and the national academy of sciences agree as long as they make the
complete switch and no longer smoke any cigarettes they are significantly benefiting. >> you said you use e cigarettes yourself to stop smoking. does that do you still use e cigarettes as a pleasure product or something that only to be used for medical use? >> it's not a medical use but it is a replacement. so harm reduction is about meeting people where they are. for me, i use nicotine and i enjoy it. when i previously tried to get off nicotine using the gum, patch, i quickly relapse. that's the last thing i want to happen and the last thing many want to happen to smokers or ex smokers. >> we see a lot of news lately about people being harmed through vaping. what is your response to these public concerns about whether any type of vaping, any type of
e cigarettes can be safe to be used by anyone? the broad college of physicians, they estimated vaping to be at least 95% less harmful but what's been happening over the last 7, 8 weeks is that contaminated cart ridges, ones made and filled and sold by drug dealers, it's not the thc the problem it is the thickeners added or the pest sides that are in the weed plant from the cartels' marina at when heated converts to harmful chemicals. so we have been criticizing the c.d.c.'s slow response even though health departments are saying what's happening in our states is contaminated cart ridges. finally yesterday the c.d.c. came out with evidence showing that overwhelmingly cases are linked to these products and that it is a one particular brand fake brand not a real
rand that's sold in any store. that is a product that in wisconsin and illinois 70% of the patients that got sick reported using a product like that. >> let's back up two steps to make sure we know what we're talking about. thc, marijuana, extract the thc will get you high from the marijuana plants and put it into a cart ridge specifically designed for oil. >> that was my next question. explain what you're talking about with the cart ridge. what is the difference between the cart ridge and e cigarette. >> oil inhaled into your lungs especially with additives. that's bad news. vaping products meanwhile are the main ingreed ynts are not lipids. they don't have oils in them. so that's why a lot of public health people, longtime
advocate at the boston school of health has been trying to get the message out that it is not nicotine vaping products that are causing people to inhail oil into their lungs. >> so is this a battle between the established companies who are making the e cigarettes that are sold in stores and that leg cart ridges people are finding on the streets? >> yes. it's not so much a war. it's just the fact this is a natural consequence of prohibition. once you had them legalize and regulate marijuana they created these products. and if they're sold where they have regulations, by and large if you're an adult there's not much wrong with it. there's not many cases linked to legal products. but once you have a couple states that open up and create this technology, people in
illinois, in new jersey, they want to access and can't buy them legally so who do they turn to? drug dealers. and drug dealers don't abide by any regulations. >> if you want to have a question to ask or if you want to have an opinion, we want you to call and open up the regional lines for you this morning. if you are in the eastern or central time zone you can call the numbers on your screens. one of the things that the government has talked about both state and federal government is removing flavors
from the e cigarette realm. what's your organization's opinion of that? and what is the government include flavors of mint and mentsdzol? those are the ones that the industry is pushing back the most on. why? >> only one particular company juul pushing back but the vape shops across the country, about 10% of their sales on any given day are tobacco mint or mentsdzol. fruit and sweet flavors are the most used product by adults despite the rhetoric saying that flavors exist to target youth flavors were invented because consumers back in 2009-2010 long before the tobacco industry ever even thought e cigarettes are viable they demanded flavors. they started creating their own so the industry responded. in fact users of tobacco flavors, adult users are actually more likely to still be smoking because tobacco flavors are simply a poor
imtation for what a cigarette tastes like and that leads people to continue to smoke. so fruit and sweet flavors, by far the most popular among adults who have switched the most public health benefits. >> what type of regulation does the industry think is appropriate at this point? i think no one is arguing children should not use these products at all. but what type of regulation does the vaping industry think should be in place for? >> vaping advocates have come around on the idea of tobacco 21, we recognize that when you have 18 and 19-year-old high school seniors able to purchase products and then become dealers at their school to freshmen, sophomores, jr.s, that's bad news. so top co21 and for the past six seven years we have been oodsvo kating to set up a standards based system. if there are harmful chemicals
they should set a standard. what we have instead is a prospect of near prohibition because of the sky high seven figure application cost just to ask the f.d.a. permission for one single product to remain on the market you have the prospect of one year from now four companies all of which sell cigarettes as well. they subsidize their science with the sales of products that kill people and all these small businesses are gone. >> let's go to our telephone lines and talk to michael who is calling from mississippi. caller: zpworninge. -- good morning. i don't remember if you remember me you came down and melt with representative thompson's office here in mississippi. i first want to say thank you for the advocacy and what you're doing for the industry. i cannot stress to you how important this industry is to current smokers and former smokers as well, becausive
thousands upon thousands of stories from customers who this has helped. what this has done so much for people that have no other -- hat have tried everything. it's guest: it's in the same drug category as caffeine. no -- if you ask the doctor it is not -- they don't want you to do anything. but if you lay a pack of cigarettes and a vape down in front of your doctor and you tell them i'm going to do one of these, you choose, every one of them will choose the vaporizer over a cigarette because they know they can't prove it because the science -- it hasn't been out long enough to do these lock term studies which we do need. but i f when i see every day people come in and say thank you for this, this has helped me so much, i feel so much
better. food tastes better. i smell better. my family can tell the difference in just the amount of energy i have because i'm not coating my lung with tar any more. host: it sounds like you sell e cigarettes. do you own a store or vaping shop? caller: i own a vape shop and i am a vaper as well. my wife quit using vaping about six years ago and she was a pack and a half a day smoker. guest: what's truly special about him i remember calling in greenville, mississippi one of the poorest areas where probably 20% plus of the adult population still smokes. especially in those areas of the country where certain areas are down to 10% and below those are the areas where tib cotobacco is truly -- big tobacco is killing people host: ann in maryland.
caller: first of all, i want to say that i know i'm talking bout i worked for nih. the chemicals that they put in cigarettes is what's killing everybody and the new gadgets vaping that's what's killing people. people need to roll their own. and another thing people should watch dr guest: don't smoke things in general. caller: hold it. god did not invent tobacco to kill us. as long as you do it moderately , they've been smoking tobacco for thousands of years. it started killing everybody when they started putting all those chemicals in it. secondly, people should watch a program a documentary called a lf in sheep's clothing about
so long ole inski. that's the truth about what's happening in this country. thank god for donald trump. one more thing you had hillary on this morning the show before this one. georgetown university was urchased in a private -- host: we're not exactly on topic there but let me let you respond. she seems to think rolling your own cigarettes would be safer. i think your argument is that no cigarette is safe. guest: certainly added chemicals to cigarette smoke as well as the fact they spike the nicotine in order to keep it consistent in order to get a big puff and makes you smoke more but ultimately inhaling smoke into your lungs many times a day is not a good idea and a t science including people who used to work at nih like the woman who called have stated that vaping is and remains far less harmful than
smoking. host: i have to bring up the fact that jule just announced that its replacing its current ceo with an executive from a tobacco company. if you are saying the two things are not really good, why would an e cigarette company bring in someone from a tobacco company? juul sold off part of their company to -- >> certainly life would be a lot easier if the large tobacco companies didn't get involved. but if you want to transform this industry, if you want to take us from 36 million american smokers down to 25 and in five years from now, you need those companies to be involved. the fact is as juul by their own actions to a certain extent are under attack and the current ceo or former ceo used to run a yogurt company. hi knows how to expand but he
did not know how to navigate the complex regulatory d.c. and the states. so we fear if you have a ceo they will take actions to try to kill small businesses. so not michael bloomberg. it will be the large tobacco companies at some point into the future. to : i want you to listen what h.h.s. secretary said. >> it also shows that the youth are drawn to flavored e cigarettes including mint and mentsdzol. currently, about 8 million adults use e cigarettes but five million children are using e cigarettes. this is exceptionally harmful to our children. an entire generation of children risk becoming addicted
to nicotine because of the attractiveness, appealability, and availability of these vaping products. so with the president's support, the food and drug administration intends to finalize a guidance document that would commence enforcement to require that all flavors other than tobacco flavor would be removed from the market. this would include mint and menthol flavoring as well as candy flavors, bubble gum flavor, fruit flavor, alcohol flavor, you get the drift. so once the f.d.a. would finalize this guidance we would begin enforcement actions to remove all such products from the marketplace. we would allow tobacco flavoring to remain subject to their filing, the manufacturers
of the tobacco flavored e cigarette products filing for pre-market tobacco approval with the food and drug administration. host: is that a fair statement by the h.h.s. secretary? guest: no because the secretary has long been opposed to vaping, never been interested in the topic except trying to ban it. when it comes to flavors yes youth do say that flavors are a driving factor. but the same is true for adults, especially adult smokers who have switched. very few have fully switched because it just reminds them how good an actual cigarette would taste. so what secretary is leaving out is what former commissioner has been talking about on twitter. not necessarily an e cigarette problem. it is a problem with high nicotine device that is can deliver a head high. that's what youth are after. that's why the 2019 survey shows that mint is the most
popular flavor among youth. the problem therein lies is that juul the product that delivers the head high if you misuse it, it is a fantastic product to get heavy adult smokers off cigarettes. what they're doing is saying men thol cigarettes, those aren't our problem. but vaping, we're going to remove 98% plus of the product on the market and we're not even going to do a study to determine how many smokers are going to relapse, how will this impact the number of smokers i want rested in switching to the product? three, when we have all these illnesses from black market cart ridges, all this is going to do is create a multibillion dollar black market and youth, just as they obtain alcohol, they will find products. host: let's go to james from ohio.
caller: good morning. i just want to say thank you for your tireless effort to defend the right to vapers across the united states. secondly, i want to echo what mr. connelly just said about the importance of flavors. in my state of ohio, we know consumers our adult ages 18 and up use flavored products. they do not want to use tobacco. another point, these kids are not using products like juul for the flavor. they're using it for the buzz. so we need to get those two misconceptions out in the open or those two facts out in the open. in ohio, since the talk of a flavor ban has been announced and all this issue with the illicit drug market we have lost over 23 stand alone brick and mortar vape stores owned by small businesses. just think if we take a flavor
bab nationwide. it is going to anileyate ab entire industry. have a huge impact of $24 billion and people will go back to smoking cigarettes. it's absolutely disgusting what we've seen from the c.d.c. in the last two months. guest: i don't think i could say it any better. what you're seeing is partially because of the lung illness scare. hopefully now that the c.d.c. sadse many most 77% plus of the people who have this lung illness admit to using thc base. there are multiple doctors and state heptsdz department representatives have given quote to the national press that many teens are reluctant to admit. but the news media unfortunately, up until hopefully the statement yesterday, will change things. but they've largely just said vaping, e cigarettes.
that's sent the message to the public finding that about twice as many americans 32% say thc vaping has zero to do with lung illnesses when the c.d.c. has been saying they play a role. so there's a misunderstanding and hopefully we can begin to correct it. you have adult smokers. they think if they pick up a juul -- zpwreat for adult smokers but bad for youth. they're not going to pick up a juul because i may go to the hospital. . at's a dangerous message host: i want to make sure i run that number by you. if the flavored e cigarettes are pulled off the market what will be the financial impact that you see on american industry? guest: assuming people do not exploit loopholes, which is kind of the american way, if
the government's saying you need to shut down or exploilt a loophole? civil disobedience is the great way to go. f every abided, you would have 10-14,000 vape shops across the country throws their doors. that's over 100,000 jobs that would be lost like that. so it's more than an economic issue even and more than a public health issue. it's also an election slu because with donald trump president trump he won states like michigan by 10, 15,000 votes. wisconsin. and there's 500,000 plus vapers in those states. as you hear from some callers they're angry. we've been trying to get through the message that this rather than helping is actually going to do great harm and could cost him reelection. host: are you saying that if the government bans flavored e
cigarettes that will cause people to vote against president trump? guest: more so stay at home. it will make people who already are inclined to believe that both parties don't give a damn about the american people, that will underscore that for them. you don't need 50% of adult vapers to be so angry that they decide to stay home or vote for a libertarian or vote for elizabeth warren. all they have to do is stay home. when you have people who switched to the products after years and years of smoking, they're so proud of themselves -- and they should be for getting off of cigarettes finally. then you have the republican president who campaigned on we're going to deregulate, we're going to fight bad regulations, we're not going to be like the obama administration was. you see that well on this issue they're all the same. they will stay home. host: caller from virginia.
good morning. caller: good morning. the traditional cigarettes, the secondhand smoke is harmful. as far as vaping products is the smoke harmful to people around them? guest: no. the vapeer produced by a vaping product, there was a professor, well respected tox colings and he published an extensive review on all the science of secondhand e cigarettes and his conclusion and he has a spernlt in pregnant women, is that the levels of exposure are so tiny in a room that there really is no worry. of course that doesn't mean that people should be rude. they shouldn't just blow clouds wherever they are. but we don't think that vaping bans telling businesses, they can't allow people at a bar on midnight to vape instead of go
outside and wake up neighbors to the bar, we don't think that's good policy. host: caller from florida. good morning. caller: good morning. first, i stopped smoking five years ago. i don't vape. i think any type of smoking is detriment to your health. secondly, only in america can companies make products that can be harmful to hurt or kill people all in the name of capitalism, all in the name of profit. guest: sir cigarettes are available in every country around the world. caller: that's not the issue. guest: the issue is cigarettes are killing people and we have the national academy, the f.d.a., all indicating that adult smokers who switch to the product, the product is not
risk free but far less harmful. and we want to make sure that when you have 50% of smokers on the trajectory until they've caught a disease and can't turn back -- we need to make sure they know that alternatives are not 100% safe but far less harmful. caller: that's not the issue. the issue is doing it. is doing it to our children. evidently you people don't care. guest: we doe care and we want to take measures but to lower youth vaping but when has prohibition ever worked? it didn't work for alcohol, marijuana, and will fail for flavored vaping products. let's do smart regulations like tobacco 12sh rather than prohibition. caller: so it's ok for a company to plo deuce products to hurt people right? guest: no and there's no evidence that they're hurting anyone. they are benefiting public health by helping 3 million plus adult smokers switch away from cigarettes. host: let's go to richard from
alabama. aller: good morning. first thank you for everything you do for the industry. guest: it is for to keep technology around for 36 million american smokers. but thank you. caller: absolutely. i will try to make i will try to make this quick i started smoking when i was 18. i smoked for 18 years. vaping and have been vaping since 2011. i have never felt better because i was smoking since i was eight years old. this is a very helpful product. i cannot say that it is safe
because we cannot say it is completely safe. but it is safer than smoking. guest: thank you for calling. what is truly remarkable is people who have smoked 30, 40, 50 years have scans where you can see the damage done by smoking. vaping, aswitch to long as they don't reach the point when they have copd and showt reverse it, studies there is the same lung harm reversal when you switch to vaping. that is what smokers need to know across this country. host: what is the next thing we should look for in this conversation? multiple governors are trying to ban the sale. there are lawsuits and there
will be more governors targeting these products even those they should be busting down the doors of drug dealers selling contaminated cartridges. host: we would like to thank greg conley of the american vaping association for being here today. next, we will look at the u.s.-ukraine relationship with nina jankowicz. later, we will look at federal oversight of generic drugs, several of which have been found to contain carcinogens. susan berfield will join us. we will be right back. >> sunday night, as the house launches a formal impeachment
inquiry into president trump, hear from the editor of the book, "residential misconduct," and one of the members of the house that worked on the impeachment of richard nixon. thought of the utility of a report like this and turned to woodward tond asked be the kind of commander-in-chief of the project of preparing such report, which was unprecedented. he asked three people to be his field generals. they identified and recruited about 12 historians to write 1, 2, or three sketches on that many presidencies. i was chosen to be one. we had eight weeks to do it.
it was the day before fax, email, digitization, so it was done by phone call and mail. professor woodward submitted it to john doerr, and that is the last we heard of it. six weeks later, the president resigned. >> watch sunday night on c-span's "q and a -- q&a." "washington journal" continues. host: we are back with nina jankowicz, a fellow at the wilson center an expert on central europe. we have heard a lot about ukraine and what is going on with the american government. what exactly is the relationship between the united states and ukraine right now? relationshipk the is one of surrogacy in some ways. the ukrainian government has
gone through tumultuous resolutions -- revolutions over the past 30 years. the recent five years, there was the revolution in 2013-14. for the past 30 years, we have been supporting ukraine on its path to democracy. aid a$500 million for year. on goodupporting them governance, energy reform, energy independence from russia. the trump administration did initiate this military aid package to ukraine as it resists russian aggression. host: what happened 30 years that started this relationship? guest: ukraine was part of the soviet union. soviet union fell in 1991. since then, we have been supporting countries as they
reformtize and try to their governments, anticorruption things, this list of things i have been discussing. ukraine is a really important geopolitical player and occupies a really important space geographically in europe. i would remind everyone that ukraine is fighting a war right now against russia. it is a hot war in europe that has claimed 13,000 lives. and this is a country worth supporting. host: you just brought up that president trump has added military aid to ukraine. what is the united states involved in in ukraine right now? are there soldiers on the ground? what are we talking about? guest: it is basically a program that allows the ukrainian government to buy from the united states things like antitank missiles.
we have military support and training. there are no u.s. troops on the ground. ukraine is not a member of nato. inare supporting ukraine defending its own sovereignty. host: we are talking about this because of the phone conversation between president trump and ukraine president zelinski. why is he important in this conversation? guest: he is a really interesting guy. i was in ukraine covering the election for the wilson center. i got to see it firsthand. he was a comedian before he became a politician. president in his tv show. rantays a guy who puts a on social media. that goes viral about anticorruption in ukraine.
suddenly, he finds himself on the ballot, becomes president, and starts to reform. powery ways, his path to has mimicked that. he has huge support in ukraine, over 70%. he is pursuing a very aggressive anticorruption program so far. host: at the united nations, president zelinski discussed the phone call with president trump and whether he felt pressured. here is what he said. [video clip] >> i am sorry, but i do not want in the elections of usa.
we had a good phone call. we spoke about many things. i think nobody pushed me. president trump: in other words, no pressure. felt no it possible he pressure at all from president trump given all the aid going back-and-forth? guest: i think you are right. luxurious not in a position to choose allies. it was probably looking to establish a relationship. in the call, he expresses thanks for the aid received. i think it is likely they did not feel pressured. i heard from congressional staff that they did not know how to navigate the signals coming from the united states with regard to aid. suddenly, this aid was suspended at the end of august.
ukraine did not know why. host: what are the main issues zelinski has to address in ukraine? what does he have to address immediately? guest: there is a lot. people incted because ukraine were not feeling performs the previous president put into place. people wanted to see tariffs lowered. they wanted pensions increased grade a lot of ukrainians are living on meager salaries and forced to sell potatoes and berries at metro stops. it is a sad situation. he promised to reach out to those people. he wants to end the war in the eastern part of ukraine where russia has been very aggressive over the past five years and taken 13,000 lives. he wants to see the return of crimea. i am not sure we will see that happen.
russia illegally annexed crimea in 2014. getting 24rested in sailors captured by russia returned. there was a large prisoner swap last month. he is on his way. that is not even including the anticorruption package he wants to pursue. he has a lot on his plate even without this plunging of ukraine into the news. host: he was elected two months ago. how long is his term? guest: the election was in april. he was sworn in in may. terms are five years in ukraine. he has an absolute majority in parliament. that gives him more leeway to pursue these packages and more carte blanche than any other ukrainian president has had.
there are questions about people in his inner circle. it is to seem to see whether they will have influence over his anticorruption program. people are optimistic right now. host: if you want to join in our conversation about the relationship between the united states and ukraine, we are going to open our regular lines for democrats, republicans, and independents. remember, we are always reading onyou can text us or hit us social media on twitter and facebook. there has been a lot of talk about democratic nominee joe biden and his son in ukraine.
can you explain to us what the conversation is and the substance behind it? guest: it is a very confusing and murky story, as are most the amount of ukraine. joe biden during the obama administration was kind of our top level envoy to ukraine. issuee was an important for the obama administration said he was sent to send a message of support and talk about things like anticorruption which is important to the united states. the aid package we were sending to ukraine included a $1 billion loan guarantee. there was a prosecutor general in ukraine that was bad news. he was not pursuing anticorruption reform. he was stonewalling. biden said if we give you this guarantee, it is important
you remove this prosecutor and replacing with someone interested in pursuing anticorruption reform. that is all aside from the fact that hunter biden sat on the board of the gas company in ukraine. that company had been investigated by that prosecutors general's office. correct guy who was came in -- corrupt came income of those investigations stopped. by asking the president to fire him, biden was inviting more investigation into his son, not trying to protect him. it is important your viewers understand that was the situation on the ground. anticorruption activists will tell you he was a bad dude and they wanted him removed. he was not an anticorruption crusader. he was doing very little to investigate corruption in ukraine. this was not a quick -- quid pro
quo to protect his son. host: prosecutor general in ukraine is equivalent to the attorney general here? guest: about the same, but particularly concerned with anticorruption. host: let's go to our phone lines. john is calling from virginia on the democratic line. good morning. are you there? john? can you hear us? caller: yes. can you hear me? host: yes. caller: thank you for taking my call. in ukraine, we had one friend, john mccain. i am surprised the president of the united states telling another president i'm going to bring putin and you together to work out a deal. we know putin violated ukraine's sovereignty. we know he destroyed a town and
killed innocent people. man, is to me this young hope he has good advisors, ukraine president, who knows how the system works. being a comedian and being a politician is completely different. fighture ukraine will their right. russia will never give up their sovereignty. i don't care what donald trump says. there is a good history between russia and ukraine. cap base they used to have -- the base they used to have they will never let go. russia will not accept ukraine to join european nato. they will not accept that. that president, when i look at his face, he was a little shy about the question. he was a little confused. investigation
outress is doing to find what the call is about. it is not enough to save the call was good. we need to get to the bottom of this. thank you for taking my call. host: quick response? guest: there's a lot to impact. russia has been very reticent to let ukraine out. made european integration one of its top priorities. i don't think we will see ukraine swaying from that path. certainly, it has support from the international community. it has bipartisan support on capitol hill. their support for ukraine is unwavering which is great to see at a time of political difficulties like this. host: let me correct myself.
earlier, i called vice president candidate.emocratic the primary is still going on so he is the -- a nominee to be the candidate. let's go to jim on the republican line. caller: i hope i have as much time as the former caller. i noticed in my "columbus dispatch" this morning, that the is looking into the hacking of the democratic national committee before the last presidential election. , i am watching this program because i was informed we are going to hear about what the relationship is between the united states government and the ukrainian government as far as
information about corruption. and here i am. i am watching the wilson center whose current director and previous director were nothing or peoplecal hacks not interested in our relationship between the ukrainian government and the u.s. government so far as anding into corruption actually what happened between the biden family and the money exchanged to their advantage. host: quick response? guest: the wilson center is a nonpartisan institution. it is a research-based institution.
i lived in ukraine for over a year and reported on the presidential elections from the ground. that is what informs my understanding of ukraine. it is not motivated by any political biases. run callinggo to from maryland on the democratic line. caller: that is michigan. host: ok, go ahead. caller: i understand there is a force in ukraine that is very and is in the military. from the united states and other countries, white supremacists and fascists have been going to ukraine to serve in that unit and have come home to spread their military training among white supremacists and other terrorist organizations in the united states. we had an unwritten agreement that the united states and nato would never encroach on the
borders of the old soviet union and russia. russia will never stand for the strangulation of their nation. and they never should. ukraine was one of the nations that was supposed to not be part of nato. we are forcing it into nato. russia has every right to defend sot land that they spent much blood and treasure for in world war ii. plain and simple, it is their land and they will hold it. host: quick response? guest: let me start with fascism in ukraine. there are some worrying developments with white supremacy, fascism, and white nazism in ukraine as around the rest of the world, including our own country. in ukraine, they enjoy very little electoral support and do not have anyone in parliament. they were not able to meet the parliamentary threshold. the united states state
department has categorized it as a neo-nazi hate group. we are very clear on what is going on with fascism and nazism. regarding ukraine's sovereignty, it is an independent nation and has been for 30 years. culture,s own history, and traditions. at theans would bristle idea that because they were part of the soviet union and the russian empire that they do not have a right to self-determination, which is the agreement and international law, that all nations have a right to self-determination. if ukraine wants to pursue nato and european union membership, that is entirely up to ukraine and not up to larger governments that would like to sway their decision. host: let's go to john from new mexico on the independent line. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call.
i am a registered democrat book kind of float back-and-forth. i choose by candidates. this young lady is clearly a democrat trade there is no doubt about it. she is an apologist. that is fine. that is her side and i have got mine. we are kind of the same in some ways. i want to know why nothing is about the conversation where crowdstrike comes in. everything goes to mr. trump's telling the guy he wants a favor. why did that conversation have to be taken and parts moved from one place to another to make it look worse?
that is the part that bugs the heck out of me. if she could address crowdstrike and maybe that part of it? guest: thank you so much. i am not motivated by any political leanings. i have studied and lived in ukraine and am hoping to share my knowledge with all of you. that is why i am up at 8:30 on a saturday morning speaking with you. asarding crowdstrike, as far i know, the president is referring to the hacking of the d.n.c. servers. crowdstrike may have a ukrainian ceo. i was unclear why he was referring to this in the phone call. it seems to be the relitigation of the 2016 election. as far as i know, there is no evidence the servers are in ukraine. i have forgotten the second part of the question. host: how did the president's conversation -- what youam not sure
are referring to in terms of parsing it out. we have a partial transcript. this is not a word for word transcript. trump isn president asking president zelensky for a favor is disturbing to some people is because of the relationship between the united states and ukraine. it is one of surrogacy and support. ukraine really depends on the united states for this aid and rhetorical support as well. perspective,to that $400 million in military aid amounts to about 5% of ukraine's military budget. that is a lot on the line for a nation fighting a hot war with russia the last five years and has lost 13,000 citizens as a result. i think that is what is so disturbing to some people. that we would put personal, political favors ahead of the
democratic development and sovereignty of a nation that has been our ally. host: house democrats opened an impeachment inquiry into president trump. is there any way the ukrainian government will participate or provide documents -- were is that beyond the pale for another government to offer documents for an inquiry in the united states? guest: i think ukraine would be very reticent to participate in this at all. from the clip, it is clear president zelensky does not want to be involved. they are walking a thin balance beam. they do not want to upset anyone on either side of the aisle. they enjoyed bipartisan support and do not want to upset that balance. host: eddie is from
massachusetts on the democratic line. caller: i heard that khrushchev gave the disputed land to ukraine in return for allowing atomic missiles to be situated in ukraine. and in the 1990's when they took the missiles out, ukraine never gave the land back. fascism wasscism, created in italy in the 1920's when stalin took over. fascism was there to fight the communists. thank you. guest: you are right about crimea. after thea referendum missiles were removed. .here is a nonaggression pact by encroaching on these territories and deciding to
change international borders unilaterally with force for the first time since world war ii, pressure is violating a trove of .nternational law none of the international organizations recognized the referendum in 2014. you cannot just decide unilaterally as a nation to change international borders that have been long established. host: much influence does russia have over the ukrainian government or military? guest: i think russia has lost a lot of support since 2014-15. previousvictory of the administration, there was a stronger relationship.
that dwindled over the poroshenko relationship. president zelensky has had strong words for president putin since he became president. there is no love lost in that relationship right now. calling on the independent line. good morning. caller: thank you for giving me this opportunity. this is a serious subject dealing with the ukraine and united states relationship. i think it is important we look at everything going on in this particular relationship over the last five or six years. action to look at her while she was under secretary of state and what she did in the ukraine. it would be very difficult to get the truth without and asking hert why the ukraine president went over to the soviet union.
all this has to be taken into consideration. now we are dealing with a real mess. it will take some real truth bearing to deal with this. the wayot deal with it you are dealing with it now because you are not dealing with all of the truth. you should be very careful as you are doing this process. this is very serious relationship between the united states and the soviet union and also the ukraine and the american people. they need to understand the truth. host: go ahead and respond. guest: i think it is a very serious issue. it is serious for 45 million ukrainians who have been doing as much as they can to pursue democracy as well. we need to keep them in mind. it is not just about the united states. it concerns the democratic aspirations of a whole other nation as well. host: we know we will have
conversations about the talks between president trump and president zelensky. question we look for next -- what should we look for next? guest: i think there will be pressure for more to come out about the conversation in april as well as any dealings rudy giuliani had with ukrainian officials in the interim. host: we would like to thank nina jankowicz from the wilson center for coming in with us at 8:30 in the morning to give us information about the u.s. and ukraine relationship. thank you. will joinn berfield us for discussion on the fda oversight of generic pharmaceuticals amidst recent issues with some drugs. we will be right back.
today, c-span has live coverage from the political tent at the texas festival featuring ,ouse freedom caucus members followed by panels on how to fix andican politics, border immigration policy, and the state of agriculture. watch live on c-span, online at c-span.org, or listen live on the free c-span radio app. >> "washington journal" mugs are available at c-span's new online store. check out the "washington journal" mugs and see all of the c-span products. "washington journal" continues. host: we are back.
we are going to be talking with susan berfield of "bloomberg businessweek." we will be talking with susan about genetic pharmaceuticals. good morning. guest: good morning. thanks for having me on. host: what made you look at the issue of generic drugs? 2018, therene of and arecall by the fda few companies of a very popular blood pressure medication. the reason it was being recalled is there were small amounts of a carcinogen in the drug. i wanted to look into that. i worked with a colleague of mine in washington who covers the fda to figure out how a carcinogen ended up in a drug millions of people take. host: what did you find? how did a carcinogen end up in a
generic drug? a lot of people are familiar with feldspar -- valspar, and i am one of them. how did it end up in there? there is aetermined chinese company and they are one of the biggest generic producers in china. they have been making what is ingredient.ctive that is what makes the drug potent. in 2011, they made a change to the way they manufacture the drug. it had the unintended consequence of creating this carcinogen that went undetected until 2018. host: how did it go undetected for that long? is there someone in the united states who should be watching
for this type of thing? that is called our food and drug administration. two kind of step back a little pharmaceuticals that americans take our generic. 80% of the active ingredient in those generic drugs are made overseas, primarily in chinese and indian factories. when anybody gets their prescription, they can see where the drug is finished and the company that sold it. what americans do not know is the factories where the active ingredients are made and where those factories get their supplies. there is a global supply chain that is very opaque and complex. it is designed to provide
americans and other consumers with cheap generic drugs. what we have found, what the fda has also found in the inspections it has done, is some factories take shortcuts. when they decided to change the manufacturing process for valsartan, they filed a patent application. our said this will allow manufacturing to be more efficient. it will assure quality. and later, we discovered the executives of the company were very clear about the main reason they did it. that was to save money. we also found they were able to reduce the price enough that they became the market leader in providing this. storyin takeaway from the
is that the fda system in terms of inspections, anything to do with generics, is largely built on trusting the manufacturers. seemse cases, that trust to have been misplaced. host: i will ask you to clarify the difference between a generic and namebrand drug. is there any difference? should there be any difference? guest: there should not be any difference except for the name. the brand name drugs are new drugs that companies often spend billions to develop. they go through a pretty rigorous approval process with the fda and then they are patented. those patents are not everlasting. they have a time limit. when those patents expire, other
companies are free to create a drug that mimics the effects of the brand-name drug. in the case of the spartan -- valsartan, it was created by a swiss pharmaceutical company. it was a very popular drug from .he beginning when it went off patent, there toe lots of companies ready produce a generic valsartan. the chinese company we looked into was one of them and among the first. host: one of the people you focused on in your article was karen brackman. can you tell us her story? guest: yes. karen lives in tennessee. she is in her early 70's and is
retired. about 16 months ago, she was diagnosed with liver cancer. her doctor said it was pretty rare. it was very aggressive. he was very surprised to see it in her. she was otherwise pretty healthy. she began treatment. attempte was no real for way to determine how she had gotten the cancer. and then, when the valsartan was recalled, she received a notice from walgreens, her pharmacy, that the drug she had been taking every day for the past two years had a carcinogen in it. she began doing some research. obviously, the recall was to start with and has grown bigger since then. she got in touch with a lawyer who is also evaluating the claims of other people who took the drug for years.
if they took it from where it was manufactured from this chinese manufacturer, those drugs have the highest concentration of the carcinogen. the carcinogen is called in dma -- ndma. it increases the risk of cancer. thinks 1% get cancer. karen is undergoing treatment and is one of many people who have lawsuits against the chinese manufacturer and some of the pharmacies. host: you brought up in dma. a direct connection between this carcinogen and what is going on with her health right now?
guest: to answer your second question first, karen and her lawyers believe her taking the valsartan contaminated with ndma led to her developing cancer. they will have to prove that in the courts. ndma is a known carcinogen in humans. that has been well established. incan act more quickly higher doses as a poison. there have been cases of people using it to poison others. where as a case someone with- ndma toed love used poison the family of his ex-girlfriend. a graduate student in canada injected ndma into a rival student's apple pie. it is dangerous.
everyone knows that. the fda understands and accepts that. but linking that specifically to an individual's disease can be a challenge. is beginning to look at the claims. there is no trial date yet. but there is a link between ndma and cancer. it is a probable carcinogen. that is why when the fda learned of it they worked with the manufacturers to begin a recall right away. found in other natural sources, but it is also what is in secondhand smoke, which is why it is dangerous. ndma is also what is in cured meats.
there are warnings about eating too much bacon. that is because it contains ndma. there is a very low level the fda considers to be an acceptable amount. valsartanound in the was 17 times that. published,tory was ndma has also been found in zantac and the generic forms. zantac is the antacid. issued aas not yet recall, but other countries have. we are keeping and i on when the we will be doing that -- will be keeping an eye on when the fda will be doing that. in the eastern and central there is one number for you.
in the mountainous central time zones, there is a number for you. you can also text us or hit us on social media on twitter and facebook. quickly before we get to our calls, what can we do as consumers to try to protect ourselves? is there anything we can do? guest: yeah, that is the big question. in terms of valsartan specifically, check the fda website to make sure the batch you are taking has not been recalled. you should hear from your pharmacy, but you should double check. doctoruld talk to your about trying to get valsartan either manufactured in the u.s. were a place not involved in the recall at all. you can try to be prescribed the brand name version.
so far, it doesn't seem to have any problems at all. that often requires a discussion at the very least because sometimes there is fight with insurance companies over that because they are more expensive. in terms of zantac, other countries, france, italy, several others, have pulled it from their shelves. if you wanted to be very cautious in your taking zantac, there are good alternatives. more generally, it is very difficult for consumers to trace back the origin of their drugs until there is a problem. in washington, congress is beginning to look into this. congress is beginning to look into this and ask the question, have we compromised safety in the pursuit of low-priced drugs? anybody interested in pushing
their representatives to continue to ask that question more forcefully, that might be another way to go. host: let's talk to joe calling from cliffside park, new jersey. caller: good morning. i opened my mail this morning and received a notice from my insurance company on drugs. it seems like each drug is going up by 20% or 30% and they are increasing costs on all the generic drugs across the board. question not related to the first is, when we look at people going to canada and other countries to get drugs, there is no safeguard on the efficacy of these drugs? and why isn't our government overseeing in a more direct manner our own manufacturers for quality control and assurance?
-- much can the oversight how can they oversight more companies? guest: you got to the heart of the matter. there are tens of thousands of manufacturers. possible toly not inspect every one of them or them. regular eye on systemre flaws in the now being exacerbated and brought to light because so much manufacturing is done outside and because of the nature of the industry that has shifted toward generic drugs.
a few people we talked to for the story suggested there be a more rigorous regimen of inspections before the drugs are allowed into the u.s.. right now, fewer than 1% of the drugs imported are tested for potency or contaminants. obviously a very small number. interestpressure and in increasing that. there is pressure and interest in increasing overseas inspections. i guess it is mostly a matter of money. some of matter of will power. when we talked to senior when wees at the fda -- talked to a senior executive at we have toe said rely on the manufacturers to make a quality product. that can be sometimes a scary
thought for a lot of customers. host: let's go to fred: from st. paul, minnesota -- let's go to fred calling from st. paul, minnesota. are you there? we lost fred. calling to fluorine from wisconsin. go ahead. r.n. and oni am an multiple generic drugs. i was wondering about this carcinogenic issue in the generic drugs. drugs i takeeneric , my doctor wrote a prescription directing it to come from the manufacturer because i was
having issues with the generic drug. i just want to know if that is possible. i was getting the generic drug and they don't know where it was being manufactured. drug i was on was not working -- the drug i was on was not like the u.s. company, so she wrote the prescription and said "directly." now i am thinking i could have all of my generic drugs like that. guest: i think that is possible. consumers can advocate for themselves. that is part of our reason for doing this story, to raise awareness about these issues. the best thing is always to talk to your doctor or pharmacist
and how muchncerns you can do and they can do to help you get drugs you feel you can trust. someone for the .tory who runs a pharmacy ,hey seem to be one of the only if not the only, pharmacy that tests the drugs before they sell them to you. they are small. modelthink that is a good and hopefully there will be developed to do the same thing. just to let everybody know, in the testing they have done, they have had to reject 10% of the drugs they have tested for various reasons. carcinogens are obviously the most serious, thankfully the most rare.
more often the case is that the drugs may vary in quality or effectiveness. reason the pharmacy was founded in the first place. one of the cofounders realized some of his drugs seemed to work well and some did not. he found the active ingredient in the drugs varied tremendously. if you can work with them, that is one way to have your drugs tested beyond what the fda can provide right now. host: you preempted my next question, what responsibility do pharmacies have to test those medicines? you pointed out one. is that uncommon for them to test medicines or is that something the industry is moving toward? guest: we did not get any indication the industry is moving in that direction, unfortunately.
it is small and has been in business for about a year. i would hope other people and big companies are looking at it. one thing i hope is clear in the every step along the way in the supply chain, beginning in factories and workshops that create and gather the raw materials and give them to the manufacturers who make the active ingredients who pass it on to another company that would finish it up and bring it to the u.s. and sell it. , forstep along the way sure the manufacturer. it,, the company buying there is a responsibility.
there is an understanding that they are doing some testing. show withle to valsartan the ingredient was potentially tainted for many years. the impurity itself was only identified in 2018. manufacturer either did not look for it or when it saw impurities did not investigate and identify them. also, intermediate customers did not test what they were buying from them. by the time it comes to the pharmacy, it should have been inspected. it has not been. host: let me read from your article where you talk about the
relationship between the fda and the company. relationship is not simple at all. if they want to make their own version of a generic drug and export to the u.s., it needs fda approval. fdae need to step up the inspections and regulations on these drugs coming to the united states? anst: i think that is inescapable conclusion. the problem is how to do that willingness there is to spend money on that. there is so much talk about drug prices.
obviously, that is a huge issue. there are all sorts of reasons u.s. drug prices are higher than almost any other country. that is thatide of cost.t cheap drugs at a what is that cost? it seems now the cost might be safety. effectiveness might be compromised. with everything, it is always a balance and you have to assess the risks. it seems we put too much emphasis on one side of the equation, and now people are realizing we have to look at the consequences of having cheap drugs on the people who take them. host: let's go to susan collins from seminole, florida. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my
call. are you there? host: yes, go ahead. caller: china is the major provider of pharmaceuticals across the globe. the fda is not protecting our drug supply. china is constantly sending, singles -- sending pharmaceuticals contaminated with impurities and carcinogenics. antibiotics.ine, imagine what would happen to millions of americans or other countries if in the future those pharmaceuticals are used as weapons of war. china is exerting its dominance around the globe continually. becomenacceptable to completely dependent on any foreign country for those medications, especially china. i urge the government to produce our own so we will not be held
hostage to any country on the drugs listed above. host: go ahead and respond. guest: for sure. lots of people have raised this as a national security issue. that is what you are saying. there are congressional hearings into this. the military is concerned. you are right. it is a country we don't have easy relations with that we are hugely dependent on. host: one of our social media followers notes we have been talking a lot about china. but the other country we get a lot of generic drugs from is india. don know of any problems -- you know of any problems with companies from india? guest: unfortunately, yes. as i mentioned at the beginning, the recall of valsartan began
with the drugs produced by the chinese company. timescall has expanded 53 at last count. i think the last recall was within the last few weeks. that is because now the fda is requiring manufacturers to begin testing for the carcinogen ndma. manufacturers are able to implement the test and execute it regularly and reliably, more companies are finding their valsartan is also contaminated. there are some indian manufacturers among those, so yes, the problems are not confined to china. it is also true the drugs' ingredients are produced in
china and india almost exclusively these days. inspections of the in the section of the story that you read, that is essentially saying that these companies that do not make the finished products but make the most essential parts of the fdauct are inspected by the as much as the fda can or wants to, but they definitely receive less scrutiny. in the case of the chinese company, they made a change to their manufacturing process. we the fda did not know that. they have to rely on information
the company is giving them and when they do inspections, often times, the fda noticed some problems. not necessarily with valsartan. but problems with the factory. because the factory did not have problems before, they said, we will not reprimand you in anyway and we will not restrict what you can sell in the u.s. but we want you to fix these problems. they did not fix the problem. manufacturers can be butect the -- inspected they have a lot of latitude and leeway and the fda is trusting them to do the right thing. that goes for india, any manufacturer. noted in the story, the inspections the fda can do,
overall, overseas, those inspections have been declining. they had been increasing and now they are declining at the same time we know there is a continued push to get generics onto the market faster. host: we would like to think susan berfield of bloomberg businessweek for being with us today and talking about her article. susan, thank you so much for being with us this morning. guest: thank you for having me on. host: coming up next, we will again. our phone lines support the inquiry into the up each meant -- into the -- you support or oppose the impeachment inquiry? eastern, at 7:45 a.m.
the black books matter but party in washington, d.c. >> at the end of the day, those founding fathers, they never .ealized they never imagined donald trump would be there. i stand on those pillars that our founding fathers put in place. eastern, the father of the student killed in the shooting at marjory stoneman high school offers his thoughts on school safety and guns. >> i was going to find out everything, why and how my daughter got killed, and it was all these leniency programs of these kids.
they had to frisk him before school, he was so dangerous. he was not allowed in with a backpack. that is how dangerous he was. he threatened to shoot the school up and was never arrested. -- on sunday, at 9:00, the challenges and costs of a college education. >> we are still debating about whether a 12 grade education is enough. it is obviously not enough. all the signs from the labor market are that it is not enough. we are fighting about it and turning it into questions of identity and snobbery and
politics and partisanship when clearly, there is a sign that our young people need our support, need our help, need more education, need more skills in order to survive in the current economy. >> watch book tv every weekend on c-span 2. >> washington journal continues. host: we are back in the question to you, do you support or oppose the impeachment inquiry? if you support -- if you oppose -- us.can text and we are reading on social media on twitter at c-spanwj. we will start out by listening to house progressive caucus cochair mark pocan,
who was our guest on this week's newsmakers.
here is what he said about impeachment. >> how confident are you that it will reach the point where articles of impeachment are brought to the house floor and there will be a formal vote on impeachment and you guys do have 218 votes needed to advance that to the senate? >> if i was in vegas, i would bet there will be articles of impeachment given that this is a unique situation. we know another government interfered with our elections and the president denied any interaction with them but the mueller report has at least 10 instances of possible obstruction. because the president did not admit to them, you need to bring witnesses. in this case, he streamlined the process. he admitted he made the call. he has given us the notes of the call where he asked for a favor of
a foreign government to get dirt on a political opponents family.
-- opponent's family. the piston has been brazen in admitting his guilt. -- the president has been brazen in admitting his guilt. there is a likely chance you will have articles of impeachment. host: you can see the full interview on this week's newsmakers sunday at 10:00 a.m. and at 6:00 p.m. on c-span ansi spun. work and c-span -- and c-span.org and c-span radio app. let's talk to constance from virginia. good morning. i support the articles of impeachment as being on the table and not necessarily because of the call. i believe donald trump is in contempt of congress. therefore, he is can -- and contempt of the people of the united states.
not only because he has not allowed any of his people to come when they were subpoenaed. stated that, on tv, immigrants coming into the united states were not people. they were animals. this is a -- the heart of donald trump. host: let's talk to lily who was calling from st. louis, missouri. she also supports the impeachment inquiry. have never had a president -- this man goes to goes to bed thinking people. -- thinking people. -- evil. nothing good has come out of his mouth. he still tries to get dirt.
man, all ofows this these countries were behind him and trump knows this but every time somebody goes against him, he tries to destroy them. not getway -- he will away with joe biden. abdul from talk to parkville, maryland. caller: i do oppose it. gangsteris man is a and don't mess with gangsters. gangsters will pull out all of the stops to get his way. he has the firepower and the resources to tear this nation apart. he would not stop and calling out his supporters to say, this is an overthrow, this is a coup, this is treason. he would use all the necessary words to convince his supporters
that this is an attack against them. it is time to bring out the guns and the other resources to defend him. he would not stop. let him ride his course out or he will not get elected again. call give him a reason to out his gun toting supporters against other american citizens. host: let's go to mark, who was calling from florida. mark supports the impeachment inquiry. caller: good morning. .t is pompano beach i do support his impeachment. the mueller report should be required reading in every school and college in this country. make -- let people make up their own minds. he has destroyed any resemblance
actually, yesterday, house democratic congressman john sarbanes talked about the message that democrats will be focusing on during this two-week recess. here's is what he had to say. >> the basic overarching message is that house democrats are able to both bring a kind of investigations that need to happen and obviously that has been a topic of this week, but at the same time, we will be pursuing that and doing it aggressively. there is a whole legislative agenda and if you look at all of the bills introduced and passed on the house side, equal pay for equal work, raising the minimum wage, addressing gun safety, et cetera, we have sent a very
impressive set of legislative proposals to the united states tenant. -- the united states senate. let's talk to mary who is calling from new york. mary opposes the impeachment inquiry. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. feel it isust causing divisiveness in the country and i do not see a reason for it. it will waste a whole year of the president's time and nothing will get done. it is ridiculous. host: let's talk to joann who was calling from raleigh, north carolina. joanne supports the impeachment inquiry area -- inquiry. caller: my comment is, it is about time to impeach him. you need to consider
who is coming in after the president. how is the vice president going to make a difference? thank you. host: let's talk to jan who was calling from longwood, florida. jan supports the impeachment inquiry. caller: good morning. i just heard the young lady who was saying she is not sure of who would take president trump's place if impeachment went trial, and actually the asked to remove him. it depends upon how many other --ple happen to be in involved in this. i know that vice president tense has been named -- vice president pence has been named in this.
school, incs in high junior high school, so i know who would be the next person. that would be the lady who was asking for impeachment. i am sure she does not want the job but hopefully, this will reach its natural conclusion. the scary thing for me is, this is truly what the director of national intelligence did say. this is unprecedented. based upon that this is president trump's first term and no other president who went to this process ever was in first term, at least in the 20 century , puts a whole other tactic in place. thatully, he will not say he won't -- i cannot think of the word. push everybody off and say i have executive privilege.
i realize that can be included in the articles of impeachment. host: yesterday, republican james coburn, a member of the house oversight committee, was on the show and had something to say about the charges against the president. here is what james coburn had to say good >> if the democrats had not already cried wolf so many times with respect to president trump, i think this complaint might have a little bit more credibility. until i see something that strikes me as impeachable, i will consider this another political stunt, especially the way it was handled. to call for an impeachment inquiry without testimony from , nothing pertaining to his taxes, this is a new thing that popped up and they decided, we will have an impeachment inquiry.
by usaestion asked today's editorial board, if the ukraine's call was perfect, why try to bury it? that in reference to the whistleblower saying what happened to the phone,,? question ia good think that is something the oversight committee or judiciary committee should ask. does it warrant a full-blown impeachment inquiry? i do not think so. host: let's talk to ryan who was calling from tennessee. caller: i strongly oppose impeachment. i have all -- backhanded opponent -- i do not think that was a sincere opponent of impeachment. this is another attempt by the deep state ruling class establishment hacks to over term the 2016 election -- overturn
the 2016 election when we voted for donald trump to give us our country back and to secure our borders. donald trump might be one of the greatest presidents we have ever had. whenever people say things like party, historyve will judge you, those are the slogans of establishment hacks and elites who want to take our power away from us. trump supporters cannot allow that to happen. this whistleblower was working with the democrats and this , theleblower complaint democrats helped this whistleblower. i do not think this is a legitimate whistleblower. hat whoan establishment wants to overturn the election. any republican who dares vote
for impeachment should be kicked out of the republican conference and they should not be allowed to run as republicans again. host: let's go to linden, a caller from detroit. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you? host: go ahead. say, thisl i have to is the united states, a country that we are very proud of. this president is an embarrassment. children toved our see what america is really like. support it andi i hope the republicans see and jump ship. gangsters doto say not turn their partners in as he turned the vice president and say, he was doing it also.
that is cheap and this guy is a real trip here he is an trip.assment -- a real he is an embarrassment to us, our country, our children. thank you. host: politico had a story that says at least one house republican is backing the inquiry but not impeachment. let me read a couple of graphs. he became the first republican to back the house investigation into president donald trump over his interactions with ukraine though the little -- though the nevada lawmaker made clear that he does not support impeachment. the congressman told reporters, i am a big fan of oversight so let the committees get to work and see where it goes.
linesgo back to the phone and talk to henry who was calling from palm springs, california. he opposes the impeachment inquiry. caller: i oppose it because all presidents do things wrong. they are not perfect people. we need to improve the economy and one thing he is doing is improving the economy. host: you think that should be
enough? caller: it is one of the main things that our country needs. if we try to get a perfect person, which there are none, you will not find one. let him finish his term. host: let's go to gloria who was calling from arkansas. she supports the impeachment inquiry. good morning. caller: good morning. watergate and i proceedings and happenedver for what at that time. we need to impeach this president because i have never in my lifetime have seen such corruption. what is so bizarre, the republicans won't say anything.
if they are not going to support the american people, all of them should be ousted and start over. i would say with the younger generations, i think they are a lot smarter than what we have now in office. thank you very much. host: let's talk to carol, who was calling from new york. carol opposes the impeachment inquiry. caller: this has not stopped since before he even became president. this started when he was running for president. clinton withary one dishonesty after another dishonesty. nobody has investigated any of this. the fbi, the cia. i would like to know when we will go back to the american people and let -- who elected the president.
this is destruction of our country. i do not care about donald trump. i care about the destruction of our country and this has become a complete destruction of our country. we are being laughed at by every country in the world. my family thought for this the constitution, the declaration of independence, they would have been hung for treason i'm embarrassed at what the democrats have done. allow the election to go. to go after him after that, fine. i felt the same way when it came to clinton. i do not care about sexual things. i really did not care about those things either. we are america. let's protect america. that is not what we are doing. host: let's go to chuck who was
calling from colorado. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call and thank you for c-span. i recall william safire calling bill barr the cover-up general when he was george eight w bush's attorney general -- george h w bush's attorney general. it was because of him that iran contra was dropped because bush cobol in on those fiascoes. barrhould appear but bill again. break glass in case of fire. this cult of personality is going to keep chugging that kool-aid in support of trump and his sycophantic chimpanzees. he should have been impeached
because of the mueller report but bill barr lied about the mueller report. the media is being played like a fiddle. of one of the networks, les moonves as, said during the campaign, trump was bad for america but he is good for the bottom line. host: let's talk to amy, who is calling from texas. she opposes the impeachment inquiry. good morning. caller: good morning yes, i do oppose it. i watched the hearing the other night and i was listening to the director of national intelligence trying over and over again to explain credible and urgent and he was either cut off, talked over. what he was trying to say was
the witness, the whistleblower, nobody had seen the transcript yet, it had nothing to do with the transcript. the witness was credible. as a credible witness, it means you are probably not lying. if what you say is true, it is urgent. then they look at the evidence. nobody would let him speak. i am so disappointed in the democratic party. they have gotten so immature about things that it would not surprise me a bit to see them bring forth a resolution calling the president a big duty head and we do not want to play with you anymore. indiana. from good morning. caller: good morning. it is my idea that we have
elected a man as president who has not carried it with dignity or respect. he has divided the nation. he has used the power of the president the -- presidency. this is a man who failed with a casino. bankruptcy after bankruptcy and will not even pay his own bills. would you let him run your business in this matter? he wants to take people out and kill them. i hope we will have an opportunity to see this person as as a person and a businessman. it is an embarrassment for the united states of america for him to hold that chair. thank you. host: let's look at a couple of more tweets. here is one that says, how can anyone oppose a constitutionally mandated search for the truth?
all of the evidence is already laid out. unless you are a willfully ignorant fake patriot. just a waste of mine and every other hard-working persons tax dollar. paul who was calling from louisiana. paul opposes the impeachment inquiry. caller: good morning. how are you doing? host: just fine. go ahead. caller: this is the most ridiculous thing -- they have tried to impeach him since he got into office. 10 inquiries for impeachment and every -- it is a joke. the democrats have nothing. if someone -- if one democrat could tell me what they stand for and not against, i would love to hear that. the person who should have been
appeased -- who should have been impeached was obama. the list goes on and on and on. no investigations into him. ofleft how many billions dollars on the iranian runway. we did not even have a congressional inquiry into that. the person that should have been impeached is obama. host: let's go to north carolina. you are marvelous and i thank you for this civics lesson. i want justice to rule. if the house and peaches, it does not mean the president -- and peaches, it does not mean the president will be removed from office. if the senate does not have a trial, the historical record
-- truth has the opportunity to be heard. host: we would like to thank all of our callers for calling in today and we will see you again tomorrow for another addition of washington journal at 7:00 a.m. thank you for watching, everyone. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2019] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> coming up this morning, iranian president delivers remarks at the u.n. general assembly in hoechst city. we take you -- in new york city. we take you live to the texas tribune festival in