good morning it is saturday happy worry there. the u.s. military launched a series of attacks against iranian forces in syria and iraq in response to the killing of three service members. they struck 85 targets including intelligent sites in drone storage sites. they said they would use a multi-day campaign. for republicans (202) 748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000, independents (202) 748-8002 you can sadness text at (202) 748-8003 or on social media at facebook facebook.com/cspan or

at c-span wj. we want to read to redo the statement from presi biden this afternoon the u.ses struck targets in iraq and syria that were used to attack u.s. forces. it will continue at times and places of our ch. we do not seek conflict but let all of those who might seek to do us harm, if you harm americans we will respond. we are joined by a reporter from reuters.

guest: we were looking at the response from iran or iranian groups. we have seen condemnation from iran and estimates they think were killed in the strikes. the iraqi said 16. we happen seen a response so far which is what many military expect after violence in the region. host: howard the targets chosen? guest: after three u.s. troops were killed in jordan they have been working to refine a set of

targets to present president biden. the one that made the most sense was to go after irani in fact proxy groups in iraq and syria. the thought was that if we go after irani and forces outside of iran the chances of things piling out of control are lower. they figured out which facilities existed and stored drones and it came down to the weather and the weather played a

big role. there were conversations about earlier in the week in the u.s. had the ability to carry out strikes in any weather but they thought about it and away so they could see what was happening at the site to make sure civilians weren't there. they wanted to wait until they could see what was happening and they hit 85 targets, and over the course of 30 minutes there were bombers drive being munitions for the attack. host: the president said the responsible continue at times and places of our choosing. how long can this go on? guest: it could go on for days

but part of the calculus is they will not go after some of the proxy groups. when the jordan attack happened, realize that there would be a response of they wanted to hiding. the expectation is able go on for days but it will not be surprising if someone on the hit list has gone into hiding. i think the large-scale bombing that we saw last night while last much longer. host: if we could go back to the

deadly drone strike in jordan, how extensive was u.s. military presence in what were they doing there? guest: this was a base known as tower 22. it is an outpost with 308 american troops in the point of it is to support to another base inside of the syria. there were 350 personnel there, they had never been attacked before. they were expecting an attack so

that caught a lot of people off guard. not only just on the base but i washington as well. understanding the point of the base, why it is there, the future of the base. it is one of the bases warehousing is not as expensive so the troops were staying in barracks and tents which is why we saw a high casualty count. host: had those attacks lasted as long as a week? guest: the houthi movement in

yemen, they have continued to attack ships in the gulf of yemen because they saw the houthi plan to release drones. there are no casualties but it the risk in the region after the october 7 attack. host: national security correspondent for reuters thank you for joining us this morning. we will take your calls starting with elizabeth, a democrat. caller: i like joe biden, i'm a moderate democrat. i think he did the right thing,

iran is a terrible regime. the country is in trouble and that regime hurts women terribly . i don't like them. host: here is a tweet from a republican congressman saying that the strike should've occurred the same day our service members were killed. trumps maximum pressure campaign worked. what do you think of that? should the strike should've happen the same day?

caller: what's the difference? there is planning. we went after osama that way. the congress will make up anything to disparage joe biden anything is better than half of them. his brain seems to be working fine for me. host: we will talk to trish in seattle, washington. caller: i agree with elizabeth. i have been thinking about when this is going to happen but this is an element of surprise. i want to express my sincere condolences to the injured military members, the three who

passed. my heart goes out to their parents and i would always like to honor the military working to keep this country safe. donald trump coated see why people would do that without getting anything out of it. now that this situation has escalated, but does that mean for shipping in the red sea and commerce around the world? host: cal in new york, new york. caller: yes, hello and good morning. there a lot of those who are watching with a cup branching sense of inevitability.

anybody who has seen dr. strangelove these events are happening with this sad predictability with the punch coming from kirby that we are not seeking a wider war and we're being asked to do now the deny reality. the problem with joe biden's age is the lack of confidence and his thinking that tells him we are americans and we can swat

these people and force them away. host: do you think we will inevitably go to war with iran? caller: if you operate by the basic bylaws is just like dominoes. it's the way iraq happened, afghanistan, is frightening to say but if you just understand the basics of history and war against patients you see it unfolding as it has so many times before. it's really cap bridging. host: was talk to billy in indiana. are you there? we could hardly hear you.

caller: [indiscernible] caller: well here we go again this is all because of one of israel -- what israel is allowed to do. not war is sparking all of these words. i can't believe these beautiful souls will be used to promote a war we know netanyahu would love to blow iran out the face of the year. ukraine's war is a lost cause.

we need to seek peace and now we have iran. they are reacting to what has gone on an israel and if we don't stop that we will go into another middle eastern war and the dominoes will fall. right now, it is a mess and it would be nice if the media tells people the truth. i've been knowing about the american foreign-policy for years. the generals are lying, the media is lying. we are seeing more in front of our eyes and they are saying you don't see what you just saw. or we can ascend our young

people over. do they even have any kids to sin toward. this is a royal mess and it could be avoided if we do it right soon. host: this is a tweet on text from the house foreign affairs committe says that mos week thees are overdue following a delay that allowed our enemies to prepare. they must use sanctions to cut off the funding they are now seei t first we of our respon ttheir attacks. u.s. bombers strong sites in the

u.s. will act against those who are arins and i will work with the president to support our president is his response continues. caller: i tell you, it is mind-boggling that people cannot see what is coming. the bible says israel will be surrounded by all nations. read your bible and you will find out what is going on. the democrats are so out of it. joe biden is not making these decisions. host: who was making the

decisions? caller: we need to stop right now and make an election right now. people can't wake up and see that they're destroying this country? host: lists obsolete and oklahoma city? caller: are you talking to me? i need to turn my tv down. hang down. on. i was watching this about the airstrikes and stuff are you there? i'm a 51-year-old starving artist. the collective efforts of humanity is leading us to world war iii and i would like to

share an essay. host: we want have time for an essay but if you send it to us we will definitely get it. kendrick. caller: i'm a member about reading about vietnam. the government lied to us about vietnam they lied about iraq. our intelligence could've prevented 9/11 and that here the same wars of drums again. old man talking and young man dying. we are having to world war iii.

iran, china will get together in tried to bully every other country around. the people in the middle east, who is coming out with this intelligence? we have millions of illega m emigrants, and without any background checks. host: you said this was all by design, who is designing it? caller: i don't know. it is secretive. there is somebody behind the curtain. why would you allow israel -- or

the intelligence to know iranian backed terrorist. they are doing a disservice to americans because we only get one side of the story. the u.s. is complicit in everything that we do the destroys the world. james and florida, on the democratic line. caller: biden did what was right.

leadership takes time, to evaluate everything and i support that. all of these other people calling in, wake up. we are not going into world war iii. so many republicans said were going into world war iii and we are not. stop figuring. biden did the right thing. host: tammy duckworth said the strike slickly go first stage of a campaign without risking escalation that could lead to another protracted war in the middle east. kiing u.s. service members is

surrounded by in the strikes are necessary and just. the president will ensure that the strikes remain proportionate and deter aggression towards u.s. personnel. paul from baytown, texas. caller: good morning how are you doing today? i want to talk about really started these actions with ran, they are behind all of these attacks they are a purveyor of arms and financially what they wanted to do is kill people.

because of that i don't know how many people have died now. just because of their actions and iran is behind it. if they do a three-pronged program, leveled the oil field so they can earn any money or finance anything in three they are trying to make an atomic bomb. host: how do you think iran would respond to those attacks? you said the oil fields, those are inside iran?

caller: i don't know. but that's how they can backed these aggressors. edessa monitor. we need to destroy the resource centers where they make the bomb . the cap finance anybody, bomb anybody and eventually nothing. i feel bad for the palestinian people. these people are suffering because of these actions. we have to move on to santa barbara, california. caller: i used to be on the hard

right and switched to the heart blood. some of the earlier calls approach the horseshoe theory. we see a lot of people on the far right and far left going full lawn isolationist with this simplistic book of the world. on the right with the ideologies of reagan and goldwater and has been hijacked by pat buchanan and steve bannon. they would rather leave ukraine high and dry and let putin run amok and on the left they have

an obsessive hate of israel and would rather see that country get destroyed. what people don't realize there is a war on the west against western liberal democracy and on the others are despots, dictators and tyrants, brutal thugs. we are the police force of the world and we should use our might wisely and prudently and everyone comparing this to vietnam and the iraq war, is not the same. that's a false equivalency. these are skirmishes that are being caused by these players

and i hope cooler heads prevail. on why much of the world worries about the trump victory. i suggest everyone watch it. all the world leaders are worried about trump getting back into power and leaving all these countries out to dry. at least biden believes a global order with global trade in democracy. host: we will go next to georgia, a democrat. caller: war is no fun.

i did two tours in vietnam and those saying we should go to war, imagine your child is over there? most of the people who get guild our young folks. -- killed are young folks. if you go back to 1941 cup in 1948. -- back to 1948. ho: lloyd austin said military forces conducted strikes on facilities that included 85

targets in iraq and syria. this is the start of our response of the president has directed additional actions. o not seek conflict in the ddle east or anywherelse but the president and i will not tolerate attacks on u.s. forces. we are giving your reactions to the strikes launched yesterday around 4:00. joyce, a democrat. caller: hi, hello? host: you're on the year.

caller: my name is joyce. i was wondering why do we need to get involved in other countries problems. i understand three service members were killed. that is not a reason to perform 81 airstrikes. host: iraq and syria just to clarify. caller: hi. host: you could continue your point. caller: it wasn't necessary to have 85 strikes. host: don and a person dusky,

ohio. -- don in sandusky, ohio. caller: i have something to say to the u.n.. you know the u.n. has to conduct -- america has to get clearance from the u.n. before they do this to the world.

they have to prove to the u.n. host: must go to stan and georgia. -- in georgia. caller: iraq will not stop what it is doing until the people stand up. iraq has four ports and they are side-by-side. we could chop all of their boats in half and destroyed their fleet because that is what they're using to ship weapons. host: are you saying iranian ships? caller: boats.

their harbor is just like pearl harbor. host: what was the response be from iran? caller: who cares. they are developing nuclear weapons. host: diane, st. paul, minnesota. caller: good morning. what i would like to say is this. i've looked at the carnage around the world and everyone wants to say it started with hamas but it did not start there. 75 years ago the started and after that, these people in palestine have been suffering at the hands of the israelis.

470 5000 of them it been displaced. it will not end until people come together and live next door to everybody else. host: when you think of the u.s. airstrikes? caller: you know what, you won't tell me that you had 85 airstrikes and need didn't hit any babies. i look at all of that, and children are starving. we are just as bad as israel. i will hold my nose and vote for joe biden but i can't stand

donald trump. you guys have a good day. host: potomac, maryland, democrat. caller: i recognize that there is human suffering, i want to commend biden for supporting our allies. someone said the israel started in 1948. this is been a struggle for over 2000 years and blaming israel for what is going on in the middle east is wrong. hamas committed a war crime and why are people calling for hamas leadership to be brought to the hague? why are people calling

for a two state solution? even host: what do you think should happen in gaza after the fighting stops? caller: i think what we need to recognize is the arabs are calling for a two state solution but that will not be on the table. the truths of the terrorist attack will not be a two state solution. the arab muslims are hell bent on dominating every minority group in the region.

host: what about in gaza, what should happen there? something has to happen. caller: the war needs to be w on. host: how would you define that for israel? caller: there needs to be peace in the middle east. over a thousand people were slaughtered and massacred, 100 kidnapped and that's wrong. host: but people are saying that israel defines victory as essentially getting rid of all palestinians is taking over the area? what do you think of that? caller: that is not what i have understood from what i have been reading. that is not what i have

understood. host: so you would put palestinians in charge of gaza? caller: i would say the idf needs to be in charge of that area because there is a war. i think it needs to be sorted out after the war ends. host: iris from michigan. caller: good morning how are you doing this morning? you look a little frazzled. mike went over to israel and was urged to go and told the jewish people had the claim israel for

the jewish people. host: what do you think of the airstrike in iraq and syria? caller: we are bombing our own equipment because we love so much behind. i think that is what we are blowing up. i just want to remind people, the drones, they have no brain

or a pilot. someone is directing it. i think the whole thing is insane and we have to learn to live in peace or were all going to die. host: let's speak to steve in ohio, a democrat. caer: i love the united states and supporting defenth constitution. i am a u.s. navy veteran and i joined right out of high school. i found myself in the persian gulf during the uraniahoage crisis i was there in the persian gulf. peopleot really thinking this through.

e're doing and the mission to keep this see open. it's a global economyeople will start complaining about infl the united states navy, we have the mania it's been doing this for 45 years. it is not the uranian people, iteir government.. much like all the other the iranians, we found out whend reagan became esident. one remembers

iran-contra. a lot of this is cloak and dagger in deep state. host: when do you think about the response, do you get to get things? caller: the responses justified. iranians have their proxies but the response was justified. iranians do what they are doing they have houthis, hamas. and we're doing the same thing. do you think about the persian gulf and oil, it's for stability. we have to maintain a footprint and defend ourselves. it is nothing personal and there

will be casualties of war. i have never been in compact but i hear veterans talk about it. i just want to make a point here, the world just a dangerous place and always has been. there has always been war and will continue to be war. host: here is the text, a major player in the region and worl remains untouched. it displays a of american resolve an electe mmitment. we need gall in against iran t world's aggressors are looking for us to repel or pease them. we cannot contin othis path

we need new leadership in the white house and congress should take action. we have mike in virginia. caller: i don't think we have foreign policy. saddam hussein had held iran at bay and now we are complaining about them. it is not because of isis. it is because of israel. 25,000 people in gaza.

host: what would israel benefit for the united states to go to war in iraq? caller: maybe they were a threat to israel. they don't want any arabic country to have leadership. they wanted take a rock out and we will have a prosperous and peaceful area but that didn't happen. it is wares. if we really want to do something, iran should be hit and take the leadership out.

budgets in the interest of israel, not the united states. we shouldn't be at syria anyway. we destroyed a rock for what reason? -- iraq for what reason? host: was take a look at the statement from u.s. central command and they said this. u.s. command struck more than 85 targets including: range flowing from the united states, the airstrikes employed more than

125 munitions. facilities struck included operation centers, intelligence centers and unmanned vehicle storage and logisti and munition supplchn facilities . mary in richland, washington. caller: good morning mimi. i have a cult and so long because i tried not to watch any news -- i have no called in so long. i can understand how people are against october 7. the people in gaza that attacked

the jewish people to begin with. i am not jewish but you have jordan, the 12 tribes. people need to stop listening to computers and all about malarkey. the powers that be the hind biden -- behind biden. just like in alaska where we pick up all of our intel. they say, the guy running against biden. when he sits up

there with putin and rocket man , who knows what he is doing? he is with all of these dictators and it's almost like they are trying to spread our services to them. this is a religious war, a jihad. is not islam or any of that stuff. war is money. his guns and all kinds of arms. it is just like the crimean sea. host: let's hear from the republican line next in newport,

kentucky. mark, are you there? henry in woodruff, south carolina. caller: thank you, good morning. i think every serpent biting america on the heel is something america created itself. back in 1970, we were in iran backing the shah because of oil and then we have ayatollah khomeini and the hostage situation. with two sets of muslims over there, sunni and shiites. as long as saddam hussein was in power iran was in check.

but we went in there and overthrew saddam hussein and gave iran a chance to do with they wanted to do. obama negotiated with iran to stop nuclear proliferation and trump did away with it. we are in this situation because every serpent biting our heels is because america went in back by the military industrial complex, manipulated people in we are seeing tickets coming home to roost. host: what should we do now? caller: the only thing i could

say is dealing thing that could ended is the second coming of christ. host: from rapid city, illinois. caller: when this started after october 7 i was shocked to find out that we still had troops in iraq and syria. the iraq war and did so long ago when i don't understand why we have troops there. i think that's a bigger problem with our foreign policy. we still have troops in england, germany, japan. those countries are perfectly capable of defending themselves. there are no german bases in america or japanese bases in our country.

our foreign policy is screwed up. my opinion is the united states needs to quit being the world's police and the world's daddy. that is not our role. if we weren't over there very would not have been targeted. host: johnny in cleveland, ohio. caller: hello. host: is this johnny? caller: yes it is. i think everybody in the united states that is a christian needs to start reading the new testament of their bible. it tells us they world be wars --- there will be wars. read

your bibles. it is right there. this is what is going to happen until god comes. host: carol, alexandria, virginia. caller: do you have somebody from the military to come on their and answer a question for me. we have sent our young man to all of these countries for war in the countries we go to fight for. those people who live in our country, they need to be said back there.

this same thing happened with the vietnam war. we should not be trying to solve problems in their countries. host: bus talk to andy and owensboro, kentucky. -- let's talk to andy. caller: i'm 61 years old and i want to stand for israel. it is been settled in the bible. instead of biden going after seeker sells the need to go after iran. we need to tell

them, you need to stop it and stop it now. host: are you supportive of these airstrikes? caller: we should go after that head and not the tail. host: we will have time to weigh in on this same question later in the program. coming up a conversation on capital punishment with robin maher to focus on a recent execution that used nitrous gas. later, south carolina tv reporter gavin jackson discusses his podcast and the palmetto state democratic primary today. we will be right back. ♪

♪ >> american history tv, saturdays on c-span two, exploring the people and events that tell the american story. at seven :00 p.m. eastern, we continue with free to choose coproduced by nobel prize-winning economist milton friedman and his wife. this episode looks at government welfare programs. at 8:00 p.m. eastern on lectures in history, the second part of a lecture by university of maryland professor michael ross on the 1925 scope monkey trial on teaching evolution and the cultural significance in america. first ladies and civil rights, a look at the complicated history of american first ladies and race relations from slaveowner martha washington to michelle

obama, the first african-american to host the position. at 10:30 p.m. eastern on the historic campaign speeches, a look at a 1988 speech by george h.w. bush in south carolina followed by 2020 democratic presidential candidate joe biden. exploring the american story. watch american history tv full schedule on your program a guide or watch anytime at c-span.org/his.to ♪ ♪ >> book tv every sunday on c-span2 features leading authors discussing their latest, nonfiction books. at 8:00 p.m. eastern, former trump administration white house deputy chief of staff with his book, the five-year presidency about his idea about a new

transition period for incoming presidents that would start the year before they take office. on afterwards, her book be a revolution, looking at how everyday americans are fighting oppression and systems of institutions to bring change in communities. watch book tv every sunday on c-span two and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at book tv.org. ♪ >> a healthy democracy does not just look like this. it looks like this, where americans can see democracy at work, when citizens are truly informed, a republic thrives. get informed straight from the source on c-span. unfiltered, unbiased, word for word. from the nation's capital to wherever you are. because the opinion that matters the most is your own.

this is what democracy looks like. c-span, powered by cable. ♪ >> "washington journal" continues. host: we are joined by robin maher, executive director of the death penalty information center. welcome to the program. guest: thank you. host: give us an idea of the death penalty information center, what it is and how you are funded. guest: the death penalty information center is a national, nonprofit organization that provides information, data and analysis about the death penalty to the media, the public, legislators, to inform the debate about the death penalty. host: do you take a position in favor or against? guest: we do not. we are not an abolitionist organization. we are not pro-death penalty or anti-death penalty. we think it is important for people to understand what death penalty is and how it is used. we are critical with problems of its application when we find them. host: let's talk about the first

execution in the u.s. by nitrogen gas. it is the first execution period by nitrogen gas. guest: it has never been used before until alabama used it. host: remind us of the case it was applied in. guest: mr. kenny smith was convicted a number of years ago of participating in a murder for hire. he was convicted and sentenced to death by the jury that recommended 11-1 to serve a life sentence. the judge in that case overrode that recommendation and sentenced him to death. in 2022, he faced his first execution date. that execution was stopped midway when the execution staff were unable to find a vein to connect the flow of lethal injection drugs. he survived one exit fusion attempt. and was set for another execution attempt when alabama

decided to use lethal gas instead of lethal injection again. host: when you say execution staff, are these medical professionals? guest: we do not know. this is part of what is it difficult right now about understanding what states are doing what with executions. most states that still use the death penalty have shrouded their execution protocols in secrecy. we are not allowed to know the identity of the execution staff. we do not understand their training, their backgrounds. we do not know who supplies the drugs. the protocol that alabama published, which is a manual, step-by-step in description how that process would go forward, was highly redacted. we do not have most of the information we need to make a credible assessment about this process, but we know the american medical association believes it is unethical for doctors to participate in executions. we don't believe there were any

doctors present. host: if you would like to call in, ask a question, make a comment about the death penalty, the use of nitrogen gas for execution, you can do so. our lines this time a going to be support, opposed and unsure. if you support the death penalty, the number is (202) 748-8000. if you oppose it, it is (202) 748-8001. if your opinion is more nuanced or you are not sure about it, you can call us on (202) 748-8002. we also have our texting and our social media open. text that line, (202) 748-8003. we are on facebook and on x. let's talk about nitrogen hypoxia, it is considered an experimental method. what does that mean? guest: it has never been used before or was not used until mr. smith's execution.

this was a new procedure with a description of the protocol that really, we have no idea about its origins. alabama created this. we do not know with whom they consulted, what doctors or scientists participated in this. this was the first time a protocol had been developed around the use of nitrogen gas in execution. two other states have legislation that authorizes the use of lethal gas, but alabama was the first to use it. as a country, we have used lethal gas before in executions. we used cyanide gas for almost -- for many years, almost 200 people were executed using cyanide gas in california at the start of the last century. recently, lethal injection has been the most commonly used method until it became a problem obtaining some drugs commonly used for that protocol. that forced states to consider using other kinds of methods of execution. some of them have --

host: why were those drugs not available? where are they going? are they just not being produced anymore? guest: that is partly true. some pharmaceutical companies that produced these drugs learned that they were being used in executions and objected. they withdrew their drugs from the market, or refused to sell them to prisons for use in executions. some of those drugs that were very commonly used became completely unavailable. that forced states to start using different combinations of drugs that were available, or compounding their own drugs. that was also a kind of experiment and that resulted in a number of botched execution. we saw many executions where the prisoner was in some real pain and distress. executions that lasted sometimes up to two hours before the prisoner finally died. that was a result of the experimentation that we are now seeing alabama using. host: are there other states now

starting to use nitrogen gas? guest: not yet, but we just heard last week that ohio intends to introduce legislation to use lethal gas, use nitrogen gas, in its executions. we have heard other states indicate they may be investigating this, as well. it is bewildering because the execution in alabama did not go well. there was several minutes where mr. smith was struggling for breath. he was straining at his restraints. the media witnessed reports that it was a fairly violent execution to watch. this was not something that went as peacefully as the alabama attorney general's office said that it went. host: are there any federal standards for educations? -- executions? is it up to every state how they execute, how much pain and suffering somebody should go through, how long and execution should take? guest: there is no federal

standards, but there is federal law and international law. all of which completely prohibit torture in an execution. of course, we have our u.s. constitution, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. many people have alleged this kind of experimentation and experience esther smith went through was -- mr. smith went through was torturous and that has raised concerns. host: let's talk to callers, we will start with jeremy in carolina, supports the death penalty. caller: hey. i basically want to say, to the best of my knowledge, the symbols and easiest way to do it -- this sounds gross, the guillotine. that is my opinion. host: you really believe that, jeremy? caller: yeah, i believe you get a fair trial. all of these different ways, yeah, i believe the guillotine

would get it done quick and would set an example. host: there are other ways of executions that are going on in the country. guest: the electric chair is still in use, you lethal injections. firing squad? it is real. it israel. idaho and utah have authorized use of the firing squad. we do not have a problem figuring out a way to kill people. we know how to do that. the question is, how palatable is this for the american public? what is it that they want to see? the changes in the methods of executions over the years have been toward a place to make executions cleaner, more peaceful, less graphic and frankly, more palatable for the american public. nobody wants to see a graphic, violent, bloody's play at an execution. all of the changes we have seen have not been a result in changes in the law. it has really been changes by

states trying to make things a little more easier. host: the other side of that is, maybe it should not be palatable and maybe should act as a deterrent. you should not have, you know, mr. smith was tried and convicted of brutally murdering a woman. guest: i have heard that argument, too. here is the thing. every human being in the united states has the right to the protections of the constitution, even people who have committed violent crimes. they have not forfeited their right to be free from torture, as mr. smith has said. host: let's talk to pamela, who is in ohio, unsure. pamela. caller: good morning. robin, my question is, are these executions a deterrent to crime? i say that as a 65-year-old as i have gotten older, seemingly, crime has increased. to me, it seems that way.

we certainly want to find ways to deter crime, but i guess i am concerned. i do not feel like this is really the way to do it. not to mention, how many times criminals have been accused of a crime but the facts were incorrect and they really did not commit that crime. thank you. guest: great questions, pamela. right, it is a deterrent. that has been the promise of the death penalty for any years. -- many years. research has failed to find any meaningful way to connect the death penalty and any kind of deterrent effect. this is a real tenuous connection, if any. the other part of that is, we have many years between a death sentence and an execution. we have to do that in order to address the second part of pamela's issue, which is the fact that innocent people might be convicted and sentenced to death. we need the appeals, we need the careful and thoughtful review by

courts. we need good lawyers involved. that process takes time and accentuates any deterrent effect that may there. the data cannot support any deterrent effect. one last thing, violent crime is down in almost every major urban area. it is a very human emotion to be afraid of violent crime. statistics from the fbi and federal government to that it is actually down. host: bonnie is in brockton, massachusetts. you are against the death penalty, bonnie. caller: yes, i am. i feel if somebody has committed a terrible crime like act of murder or serial killer or something, i feel like they should spend life in prison with no possibility of parole. also, the fact that an innocent person could be sentenced to death.

also, i believe god -- it is up to god when someone's time is to go to leave this earth. host: reaction? guest: that is what we hear from a good number of people in the united states. public opinion has been changing over the years. we have seen support for the death penalty dropped tremendously over the last few years. we see that reflected in the number of new death sentences, which are very low this year. we just had 21 new death sentences. we have seen public opinion change in terms of their understanding of the fairness of the process. for the first time, we said -- we saw a public opinion poll that said 50% of americans have questions about whether their government can fairly administer the death penalty. host: i want to show those numbers, along with other polling we have got. this is from gallup last year and the question was, is the death penalty applied fairly in

the u.s.? 47% said it was fair. 50%, unfair and no opinion, 3%. there is other polling i would like to show, which is, should the death penalty be given to a person convicted of murder? 53% said that they favor that. oppose is 44%. 53% in 2007, the number was 69%. talk about that trend. guest: it has been a clear and continued trend down in terms of support for the death penalty. excuse me. that is really for a number of reasons. one is what pamela mentioned earlier. we have seen a number of people who haven't released from death row who were wrongfully convicted and that has led to questions about the accuracy and effectiveness of the death penalty. we have seen that, a number of cases in the media where the

back stories of the defendants, the history of the defendants experience, is told in a way that helps people understand the relationship between those experiences and their culpability. i mean people with severe mental impairments, severe mental illness, brain damage and history that are full of abuse, neglect and trauma. all of those things, we know the science tells us, has tremendous effect on -- especially children's brains, and have lasting effects on our ability to conform our behavior to the requirements of the law. so, defenders are telling ghost stories better at trial. those stories are in the media much more and people are understanding, these are not the worst of the worst people. the crime may be terrible, but there are people that need to be evaluated before we decide what kind of sentence they should be receiving. they are not the worst of the worst, that is what our people are understanding. host: in kentucky, supporting

the death penalty. go ahead, scott. caller: it is riverside, connecticut. no, i just want to say that i believe that -- and i-4 and i, as written in the bible -- an eye for an eye, as written in the bible. the crime a person commits, as long as there is unequivocal evidence they did it, they should die in the same manner that they take the life of somebody else. that is it. host: what you think? guest: there are a number of religious texts that can be supported in favor of the death penalty. there are a lot of religious groups who are saying that the use of the death penalty is not consistent with their religious beliefs. there are arguments on both sides that. host: i want to show another poll on the use of the death penalty, here is an opinion about that that says 28% say it has been used too often. 28%, the right amount. 39 prevent -- 39% says it is not

enough. what do you think? guest: i think these numbers are continuing to change. the information that we tell at the information center, that is part of what we want to do here, to inform this bait. we talk about all of the ways in which sometimes the death penalty gets it wrong. all of the money, the investments, significant investments of money that needs to support a death penalty system. all of those things change the public opinion. we can be affected by what is happening in our own communities and our perception of crime. i expect these numbers to continue to fluctuate. one thing that has been very clear is that we have been on a downward trend for many years and i would expect that to continue. host: jake is an old town, idaho. supports the death penalty. caller: mine is going to be short. i support the death penalty, except for i guess child blisters and rapists --child

molestors and rapists. i think we should let them in general population, let the prisoners decide what they want to do with them. i do not think they deserve to die such a painless death after everything they did. host: i know you have heard that before, as well. ron, johnstown, pennsylvania. you oppose. caller: yes, good morning. the situation in alabama, they changed that law. the judge overruled the jury. why have a jury when the judge can return the jury -- overturned the jury? he was sentenced to life in prison. the judge overruled -- i believe the lady told us that when she started her conversation. the other thing is, the kyle rittenhouse case, if that judge in that case actually won the

case from defense, kyle rittenhouse should have been in prison. the judge in case says to the prosecuting attorneys, you can't use the word victim. when you kill 70, there are victims and the prosecuting attorneys were arguing about -- never gave the judge any -- about that. what happened to the husband who paid smith to kill his wife? they never ventured what happened to him. host: he killed himself, ron. he took his own life. caller: i never heard that on the news. anyway, i am opposed to the death penalty because a lot of times, the wrong person gets the death penalty. you have to make sure that whoever is given the death penalty, make sure they are the ones that caused the crime. that is my conversation for the day. thank you host: robin do we have data on how many times juries or

courts get it wrong and convict the wrong person? guest: yes, we are at number 190 six people who have been exonerated from death row. there were people sentenced to death and very nearly executed wrongfully. host: over how long? guest: in the modern death penalty era, starting in 1976 when executions resumed in the court authorized the return of the death penalty. that number is a conservative number. we do not know how many people right skewed before we discovered evidence of their innocence. our criteria is incredibly strict. we only include people who have received a complete pardon, who have been absolutely cleared of any wrongdoing in connection with the homicide they were convicted of committing and sentenced to death row for that. it is probably a much bigger number than that. host: gary and connor bill, indiana on the line for supporting. caller: great conversation here.

i support it, but i do not agree with -- i just think that, let's solve the problem by getting rid of the person who caused the problem. just do it quick and let it though with that. another thing i would like to point out real quick, ma'am, the guest here, tell me something. what do you think? in my opinion, if you get hot -- if you get caught, tried and convicted, you should have your hands cut off. if i am thinking in terms of the rights of innocent people when it comes to that, if you would please tell me about it as far as what you think, i would appreciate it. thank you. host: an extreme view on the cutting of the hands. guest: right. host: talk to doug in laramie, wyoming, opposed. go ahead. caller: good morning. question in a statement, please. how do the costs of imposing the

death penalty compared to the costs of life imprisonment? apart from the costs, i think life imprisonment is far more severe punishment than the death penalty. thank you. guest: interesting question, this is a commonly misunderstood fact. which is, it is much cheaper to imprison someone for the rest of his or her natural life and a maximum security prison setting then it is to seek, secure and execute someone. host: why is that? guest: it seems counterintuitive but the system is an expensive one. the death penalty costs an enormous amount of money. these are independent studies. in each of the states that use the death penalty, most have looked at these costs carefully. these are taxpayer dollars. almost 2-1, there are many times

more expensive. capital trials are more expensive. you need more time and more money for both the prosecutor and defense to prepare for these trials and conduct them. there is extra security costs. there are automatic appeals. once convicted and sentenced to death, there is a death row that needs to be created. there is additional security there. all through the appeals and finally an execution chamber, all of the work and money that comes into selecting an execution method and executing that person. it is a timely and very costly process. it is one reason several states have said, we are not going to do this anymore. we have better things to invest our money and, schools, hospitals, infrastructure then to invest in a process that may be executes one person, a year. there are better ways for them to spend those dollars, that is what they have decided. host: is there an estimate of how much it costs per inmate to execute somebody? guest: it is different in every

state. each state has its own set of laws and procedures. you can find these on our death penalty website, death penalty info.org. host: let's go to winston salem, north carolina. calvin, good morning. caller: good morning, mimi anna good morning, robin. my question is twofold and i will keep it brief. one, i am reminded when we talk about the death penalty of historically the images of primarily, but not only, african-americans being lynched. so, there is the historic photos of various scenarios, lynched and burned, lynched over a bridge, etc., etc. i am mentioning that first because i'm curious, robin, when did the government, state or federal, transition from public

execution to the more private scenario regardless of the method? \ whichever way did they get executed, you do not see it like you see it in other countries where it is public and there is hanging or beheading or the guillotine like the earlier caller mentioned. none of this is public. i am curious when it went to, from the more public setting, to, you have to have the journalist there in the family members of the victims are there and people report verses -- i know it is not an apples to apples comparison of public lynchings versus public executions, but the whole idea is, there was a time in some places where the apparent or assumed determined factor, people seen this guillotine or hanging or firing squad or whatever scenario was going to be a deterrent. just curious about when it went from public private. thank you. guest: a great point about the

relationship between the extra judicial executions, lynchings, other kinds of racial violence we saw in the earlier years in this country. the relationship between that and the death penalty and what we saw was, these were illegal executions that were taking place mostly against african-americans. mostly as a way of subduing a population and keeping them in a state of terror. those states, those same states that use lynchings the most, have also used the death penalty the most. there does seem to be a relationship if you look on a map and look at the number of states that use lynchings, you will see same states that used the death penalty. there is a relationship. we have done a series of reports at the death penalty information center that tracks the relationship in a number of states between the death penalty and lynchings. so, there is a powerful and

disturbing relationship there that i have to say is a good thing to mention when we talk about use of the death penalty. the other question is, when did we go from public to private? that was a decision that states made on their own, but most of the time, states moved indoors because of the discomfort that people have. it became something that was not very much accepted. in the early days when we had public executions, thousands of people would sometimes turn out. they would make a picnic day of it with their families. that did not sit well for a while, this seemed like the wrong thing to be doing. we moved executions into the prisons, into the dead of night. prison executions used to take place at midnight with no witnesses. we understand that transparency and accountability are important features of any good, democratic government which is why we insist upon having some media witnesses at these executions to

tell us what happened. like mr. smith's execution where the ag said it went perfectly, we have witnesses that said, no, it is not. host: on your website, there is some interactive maps that show where executions happen. i do not know if you can see this on the screen. there have been 1568 executions in the u.s. since 1987. you can see them broken down by state. texas seems to be an outlier. 583 just in the state of texas compared to may be the next highest, which is 95 or 120 in neighboring oklahoma. guest: fully absurd, this is a state where we did see a lot of lynchings and racial violence. we saw it last year, texas and florida making up 60% of the executions that occurred.

that tells us something important, which is that the death penalty in the united states is becoming increasingly isolated in use. a handful of states, five states last year, conducted execution. seven states imposed new death sentences. this is down significantly from the earlier days, 20 years ago when we had several hundred new death sentences a year and many more states conducting executions. host: what about the racial disparities when it comes to who is being sentenced to death and who is being executed? keeping apples to apples comparisons for the same crime. guest: this goes back to calvin's excellent point, which is the relationship between racial violence and hatred and earlier years and the connection to the death penalty. we have seen a server line talking about the racial bias we have seen all the way through the system. both systems now, we have seen the most pronounced, racial bias with victims.

75% of the victims for people who were executed were white. what that says to us is that we are valuing -- the system is valuing white life more than other lives. that is very concerning. that is a very uncomfortable data point to look at. again, the majority of people executed bread skewed for killing white people. -- executed were executed for killing white people. host: daytona, florida on the unsure line. caller: i had my german shepherd put to sleep by the veterinarian at my house. i laid down next to her. it was a lead -- a lethal injection. i would like to know, what sort of suffering she went through. i told her, her heart racing. was there much suffering involved? host: know anything about that, robin? probably not your area of expertise. guest: i am sorry for your loss.

that sounds like a painful situation. i can say that the veterinary association has said should not be using lethal gas to execute people. they have concerns about it when they use it to execute mammals. except for some mammals, except for pigs, are the only exception. lethal injection the veterinary association says, we do not use those drugs in combination. many -- again, so sorry for your loss. that sounds like a terrible situation. that is about all i can say on this subject. host: massachusetts, donna on the line for support. caller: i support the death penalty, because i believe that crime has gotten a lot worse, especially in my own area. it seems that the younger population does not have any

respect for the population. there is more trouble in the schools with kids attacking their teachers. now, there is an incident with people attacking cops. the cops do not want to take the jobs anymore because they are too afraid to be attacked. they do not get any advantage. they end up going to court and all that kind of situation. so, i think that they should be able to have the death penalty for people who attack the cops and shoot at them and also for the teachers. it has gotten so bad where teachers can't turn their backs on the students because they will be them up. host: what do you think? guest: i think the fear of violent crime is a very, very human reaction. we all have concerns about ourselves and the people that we

love and respect in our community being harmed by violent crime. the real question is, does the death penalty solve any of that? does it make us safer? the evidence does not really support that it does. what we see is a lot of expense, time, effort that is invested in propping up a death penalty system and executing a handful of people, but there is no direct relationship to the reduction of violent crime. understandable view, absolutely. whether the death penalty can solve those problems, not so sure. host: let's go to wisconsin, carolyn, good morning. caller: hello, nice to call in. i am from wisconsin, which is one of the few states, may be the only one, that does not have the death penalty. the reason we do not have the death penalty is because in 1898, there was a horse thief that was hung at the state capital. it turns out that this horse thief did not do it.

from that point on, we did not have the death penalty in our state. now, i have also lived in arizona, in california and in florida. the reason i am on the fence about this is because when i lived in arizona, instead of using tax money to build a new prison, they decided to put all the people that went to jail in old tents that were used in the korean war. they would not pay any tax money to build the new prison. they just treated everyone that was arrested by the police to this tent city, that is what they actually called it. now, this was under the guise of, well, we do not want to build a prison and have more crime here. well, they already did. so, i would like to know how

they can get away with this. i would like to know. dated for years. -- they did for years, it was under the supervision of our sheriff, a guy that is fond of trump and wants to do this all over the united states, rather than build prisons. host: let's get a response. guest: thanks, carolyn. actually, wisconsin is one of 23 states that do not use the death penalty. there are 27 states in the u.s. that have the death penalty on the books. in reality, a number of those states have positive executions through executive order. a handful of those states are actually using the death penalty. it is a small minority of places where we can see the death penalty being used. the question about sheriff joe and some of his ideas about how to treat people who are charged with crimes or convicted of crimes, those are questions that are complex for our conversation

today. i will say that the constitution makes clear that we cannot be the thing cruel and unusual punishment. it also says something very important about us as a society, the way that we treat people who are charged with and convicted of crime. as our society evolves and it -- in its understanding of its ideas of justice, empathy, redemption, we expect those ideas will continue to evolve and we will see a better treatment for all of these folks. host: let's go to savannah, georgia. larry on the line for support. caller: good morning. host: good morning. guest: good morning. caller: i believe it is a deterrent. i have never known anyone to get the death sentence and kill again. there have been those sentenced to life and kill again while in prison. i believe it is a deterrent. host: ok. guest: hard to argue with that as a specific deterrent, that is actually true.

once you have killed someone, they cannot kill again. the question about deterrence in general is a broader one. that is about whether it actually, the use of the death penalty keeps us in society safer, whether it deters future crimes by other people. many of the people in our criminal justice system at large and in the death penalty system are people who have significant vulnerabilities, who have severe mental health issues, have brain damage, have backgrounds that are pretty difficult to hear about. those folks are not necessarily deterred by the threat of a death sentence. you have to buy into the whole premise that we can deter people through a threat -- that has not been proven out by the evidence or research at all. host: frank is next, new york, line four oppose. caller: good morning. mimi and your guest, robin -- robin, you are doing a very good

job articulating what you have to say here. you are touching all the bases. i wanted to add, there is three cases. i am asking you a question if you are aware of -- timothy evans in england was executed for killing his wife and child. they found out that john christy, the serial killer downstairs, did that. that, in effect, ended capital punishment in england. secondly, carl chessmen, who wrote his own book on death row. he articulates he was 6'3" and all of the witnesses said the man was about 5'7". they executed him in a gas chamber in san francisco in the early 1960's. this one, the airman and the carpenter was a book written by ludwig kennedy and it was about the lindbergh kidnapping.

i am firmly convinced that he had some of the money. i am sure that he did not do the actual kidnapping -- i am sorry, kidnapping. i wonder if you are familiar with any one of those three stories. america, these are wonderful reads and it turned my mind against capital punishment. would you please answer, robin? guest: sure. i know some of the names, although not the intimate details about their stories. you raised a couple of interesting points, which is, when people dig into some of these cases, they find problems with witness identification, prosecutorial misconduct, forensic evidence. it seems sketchy, even to people that are not scientists. things that raise real doubts about the accuracy of our criminal justice system, especially of our death and of the system. when the public learns, as the

public in the united states and other countries have learned that we have made mistakes, it really does shape our confidence -- shake our confidence in the government's ability to get it right. what that means for people like you, like our caller, means we should not be using the most severe penalty if we cannot be 100% sure we are going to get it right every single time. host: let's talk to cam next in lewisville, texas on the line for post. caller: good morning, everyone. i am against the death penalty because life in prison is more of a punishment than the death penalty can ever provide. guest: is that -- host: is that true, robin? do we know that from anecdotal evidence from talking to the prisoners? do they feel they would have rather stayed with life in

prison or rather be put to death? guest: that is a personal decision, but i will say that the condition that most people are kept win on death row are extremely difficult. they are usually kept in isolation. it is not all the time, then vast majority of the time, which filings international law, the use of that kind of continuous, solitary confinement. the food is terrible. there is terrible access to adequate mental health or health care. there are limited opportunities for exercise, to even breathe free air. these are conditions that are incredibly difficult and incredibly severe. in fact, we know from our experience with a number of years people are now spending on death row that many people are mentally debilitating. they are simply going mad because of these absolutely terrible conditions. this is a punishment, a significant and severe punishment on its own. really, for people who -- it is an individual choice about

whether people want to be sentenced for the rest of their natural life or would rather face a death sentence, but for many people on death row, the opportunity to redeem themselves in the eyes of their family and to find some way to go forward is an opportunity that they want to take. so, yeah. host: kam, are you still there? i did not give you a chance to get your question out. caller: yeah, i just personally think that rehabilitation is the way to go for any and all crimes committed. i think life in prison is worse than the death penalty, because you are spending your life in confinement. you know? host: all right. david is in alabama on the line for supporting. caller: yes.

this is david. host: hi, david. go right ahead. caller: ok. i work in an elementary school -- i worked in an elementary school years ago in panama city. it was 70% black. these poor children, most of their parents were in prison for selling drugs. i had one good experience, one of them boys one year i was down there with my wife. he locked the brakes, jumped out of the truck, come hugged me and thanked me for standing beside him and getting him to go through school and witnessing to him about jesus. this is where this country has went wrong. we have got to get god, church and state back in this country because that is why all the crime is -- no one believes anything bad is going to happen to them. if you think back in the west,

yeah, we hung them and there was low crime. nowadays, we got such good technology and forensics, we can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that these people are guilty. especially these school shooters. host: all right. what do you think, robin? guest: the question of the death penalty is the question about what sentence they should serve. fort school shooters, the parkland shooter in florida, he was convicted. he pled guilty to those terrible offenses. a jury there found that he should be sentenced to life and not to death. they heard his story and they found reasons to feel empathy and mercy for this individual. that is what our legal system is designed to do on a thoughtfully, carefully, select the people we think serve the most harsh sentence.

in this case, that individual was sentenced to life. that is another confirmation that juries are less likely to return death sentences. i think they are losing confidence that it is going to do anything positive for society other than punish one more person and create another grieving family. host: cliff, san angelo, texas. unsure. what do you think, cliff? caller: i think life in prison with no chance of getting out is enough. there are cases, obviously, where people are put to death and they did not do it. i am also very much a crimefighter. i want our society -- nowadays, it is full of crime. on the other hand, if you think about people who go into prison for life, never can get out, a

murder there -- it is easier than being put to death. you have got cameras there. they know they are going to be put to death. that is different. the other thing is cruel and unusual punishment. to me, is a cell with two people in it that is so small that it is unlivable. even though they have committed a horrible crime, they are paying for it by never having freedom again. if there is no air conditioning or the beds are rockhard, to me, put them away, but do not put them in such conditions that it is unlivable. one last thing that i want to say is, many, many, many people -- the lawyer over in the carolinas right now who was just

convicted of killing his family. you have many, many, many people who have skills, they have carpenter skills, plumbing skills, all kinds of skills, even though they have been committed for murder. let them go out in society very much supervised, and let them be an asset to society and let them do that -- it costs money, but they would be making money, actually, for the government because they would be giving their skills to people that need those skills for free, whether it is government or private industry. host: we are a most out of time, last comment. guest: he had interesting thoughts there. there are opportunities within prisons for prisoners to work. those are opportunities that are generally not given to people who are deaf sentenced, so that

is another thing to think about. pharaohs opportunities -- those opportunities are low paid and the overall perspective is that prisons and jails are very difficult places to be right now. we have a number of issues there that i have identified earlier. this is a very strong punishment in of itself. for anyone comparing the two, that has to be considered. host: robin maher, executive director of the death penalty information center. you can find more about their work at death penalty info.org. nice to talk to you. guest: great to be here, thank you. host: later this morning on "washington journal," south carolina etv reporter gavin jackson discusses his podcast and the palmetto states democratic presidential primary today. first, more of your calls. we will ntinue taking your reaction on yesterday's u.s.

airstrikes in retaliation for the killing of three american soldiers in jordan last week. the numbers are on the screen. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. we will be right back. ♪ >> next week on the c-span networks, the house and senate are in session. the senate will work on a bill for border security and foreign aid to israel and ukraine. next week, janet yellen, secretary of the treasury and chair of the financial stability

oversight council will testify at two committee hearings on the council's annual report. first on tuesday before the house financial services committee and then on thursday for the senate banking, housing and urban affairs committee. thursday, the supreme court will hear oral arguments in the case concerning former president trump's appeal of a colorado supreme court ruling that he is ineligible to be on the states ballot. watch next week live on the c-span networks or on c-span now, our free, mobile video app. head over to c-span.org or scheduling information or to watch live or on-demand any time. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. >> if you ever miss any of c-span's coverage, you can find it anytime online at c-span.org. videos of key hearings, debates and other events feature markers that guide you to interesting and is were the highlights. these points of interest markers

appear on the right-hand side of your screen when you hit play on select videos. this tool makes it easy to quickly get an idea of what was debated and decided in washington. scroll through and spend a few minutes on c-span's point of interest. ♪ >> c-span now is a free mobile app featuring your unfiltered view of what is happening in washington, live and on-demand. keep up with the day's biggest events with live streams of floor proceedings and humans from the u.s. congress, white house events, the courts, campaigns and more from the world of politics all at your fingertips. you can stay current with the latest episodes of "washington journal" and find scheduling information for c-span's tv networks and c-span radio, plus a variety of compelling podcasts. c-span now is available at the apple store and google play. scan the qr code to download it for free today or visit our website, c-span.org/c-span now. c-span now, your front row seat

to washington,nytime, anywhere. ♪ >> a healthy democracy does not just look like this. it looks like this, where americans can see democracy at work, when citizens are truly informed, a republic thrives. get informed straight from the source on c-span. unfiltered, unbiased, word for word. from the nation's capital to wherever you are, because the opinion that matters the most is your own. this is what democracy looks like. c-span, powered by cable. ♪ >> "washington journal" continues. host: welcome back to "washington journal." it is open forum. we are going to be taking your reaction to the u.s. airstrikes that started yesterday. the numbers are republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000.

independents, (202) 748-8002. here is the front page of the new york times that says this. u.s. strikes back at iranian forces in syria and iraq, the u.s. on friday carried out a series of military strikes against iranian forces and the militias they support in seven sites in syria and iraq, marking a sharp escalation of the war in the middle east that the biden administration has for four months sought to avoid. the airstrikes targeting command and control operations, intelligent centers, weapons facilities and bunkers used by iran's islamic revolutionary guard and affiliated alyssa groups made good on president biden's promise to respond to a drone attack in jordan on sunday that killed three american soldiers and injured at least 40 more service members. let's take a look at what secretary of defense austen told

reporters at the pentagon on thursday, talking about the fallen u.s. servicemen in jordan and warning of the strike to come. this is before the strikes. [video clip] >> our teammates were killed in a one way attack drone that struck their living quarters. we continue to gather the facts about this deadly attack. our fallen soldiers had a vital mission to work with our partners to ensure the lasting defeat of isis. they risked their lives and lost their lives to keep their fellow americans say from global terrorism. the president will not tolerate attacks on american troops, and neither will i. our teammates were killed by radical militias backed by iran and operating inside syria and iraq. in the aftermath of the hamas

assault on israel on october 7, terrorist groups backed and funded by iran have -- to create more turmoil, including the houthis, attacking commercial shipping in the red sea. this is a dangerous moment in the middle east and we will continue to work to avoid a wider conflict in the region. we will take all necessary actions to defend the united states, our interest, and our people. we will respond when we choose, where we choose, and how we choose. host: for the next 20 minutes, we are going to be taking your calls on the question and getting your reaction to the airstrikes in iraq and syria against iranian forces. those started yesterday about 4:00 p.m. eastern time.

steve is on the republican line in worchester, massachusetts. caller: good morning, mimi. i am going to address the blame america first crowd. america, for all of our mistakes, our posture in the world has always been to spread and defend moxie. i would look at the rest of the world and fiona hill discusses the rest of the world in a brookings policy letter about the global north and global south. very interesting read, how the rest of the world is 6.5 billion people, china, russia, iran, etc. global north is america and our allies, ok? i would like to talk a little bit about, quickley, somoza, the shot iran and pinochet. what bothered me on 9/11, bernie sanders talked about -- this was

the last 9/11, last year, the 50th anniversary of the death of salvador high-end day in a revolution led by the americans. it gave us pinochet, ok? pinochet was a dictator, but eventually, under pinochet, they overthrew him. chile today is one of the most stable and prosperous countries in south america. now, bernie sanders was remiss in mentioning nicaragua, cuba, venezuela, who gave us lots of refugees, ok? when we stopped supporting somoza and when we stopped supporting the shaw of iran, albeit they are dictators, these countries came in -- in nicaragua -- host: let's fast-forward to today and the airstrikes. what do you think about that? caller: let's wrap it up with the shy thereon. our position in the world has

always been to defend democracy. israel is a democracy, that is why we are in the region depending israel -- defending his real. i wonder today what iran would be like if we had -- this is all conjecture -- if we had supported the shaw who was supportive of america, as well as somoza. i know there is a lot of moving parts. yes, i am a republican. i am not a big biden fan, but hitting these targets was the right thing to do. host: edgewater, maryland, independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. i have three points, first to our the question -- i am glad that we have our current president and administration who understands the nuances and challenges of negotiating through a very difficult time globally. i have to say, you had a very

first caller who mentioned the concept of, we do not need to know everything. everything that went into every decision. but, after 30 years in the military and government, i will tell you that there is a reason that intelligence is so closely guarded. i believe the best decision was made in terms of the strikes. there were some folks who questioned why we are involved in other parts of the world. while i understand that if you are feeling other challenges that are very personal, you may not believe we need to be around the world, but that is the world that we live in today. we are a global society. we have to be part of that society and have a place in the world, and we have to have international relations and be in these places.

the first thing, a number of folks said in so many words, it is simply this or simply that, but i would advise them there is nothing simple about meeting the challenges in today's global world. host: all right. brian, independent line, goodland, minnesota. caller: hi, good morning. was it one of ours who was left in afghanistan? host: no, it wasn't. caller: can you guarantee that 100%? host: as far as the reporting, it's confirmed. caller: figures don't lie, but liars can figure. i will just leave it at that. host: do you think it was left in afghanistan and transferred to the militia group? caller: yes. host: larry in eugene, oregon,

independent line. caller: yes. this is -- our end of the escalation, of course, is to retaliate against the other escalation. this did not occur in a vacuum. the terrible, terrible destruction in gaza enraged the entire region, of course. those are muslim people, they have a long memory. they have seen years and years of this kind of oppression of palestinians and they are already in a tinderbox. when we endorsed mass murder, 30,000 people now, mostly women and children, there was bound to be retaliation against america, and there will be more than that. foreign policy in that region has been both cruel and stupid, and we will simply have more of the same.

thank you. host: another larry, this time in texas, on the line for democrats. caller: [inaudible] host: you have to turn down the tv. call hello? host:ahead. caller: i think any time the anybody, i think we should --y host: all right, we lost him. let's go to ed in laurel, land, democrat. call good morning, good morning. i would like to know at first, appened to our air defense over there? how did this dctually get through? thld be my first question. mimi, can i make a comment on

the death penalty? host: we are not really talking about that, but if you make it really quick. caller: ok, can we all agree on this, that we should give the death penalty to mass murderers and serial killers? that is all i needed to say. thank you. host: humble, texas, line for a -- republicans. good morning, mike. caller: good morning. the strike over there, wouldn't they have time to hide with the notice that we gave them? host: i mean, that argument has been made, mike. i'm not sure they were told what sites would be struck. caller: i just wondered about that. it seems kind of strange, they

announced it way before they did it. host: announcing that they would retaliate. caller: ok, thank you. host: linda in lake jackson, texas, independent. good morning. caller: good morning. i very much support what our government decided to do to take action. i am proud of president biden. we did the right thing, we took out the ability of their equipment stashed and supported by iran, and it makes our country safer, and it is helping israel. i want to say, i am proud of our united states of america and i am glad we don't have a war in our country. i hope everybody can come together in our country. thank you. host: edward is in croydon, pennsylvania, republican.

good morning. caller: good morning. i just have one question. our troops have been fired on for months and months and months . why did it take so long for us to answer back? i am a solid republican, trump 2024. thank you. host: andrew in maryland, good morning. caller: good morning. i want to say one, thank you for letting me on, but two, we need to stop getting involved. we need to learn from history. this is due to the escalating conflict in the middle east, which i say we should stay neutral in gaza. i am a more pro-israel, they are not 100% right, but as a whole we should stay neutral. i think we can still help people through the u.n., both in gaza and the middle east, but it

seems like we are trying to get attacked.we are placing bases on the border of jordan and syria, and that does not seem like the right move. it is a little too late. we have responded and now we need to get out and stop repeating history. host: jordan in massachusetts, good morning. caller: good morning. we were talking earlier about the death penalty, and i want to talk about the death penalty the palestinians are facing with the idf and the deadly hospital attacks. we have thousands of people killed in gaza and 11,500 children die at a rate of 170 eight children per day. the daily death rate of children killed during the holocaust was 127 killed per day. just like the national flag of

israel depicts the sign of david, a zionist symbol, under --. caller: hello, good morning. host: good morning. caller: with the world chaos going on right now, it it is due to the weakness of joe biden. donald trump, if he is reelected, who i voted for twice and will vote for him again, none of this world chaos would be going on. our enemies fear donald j. trump. putin would not have went into ukraine. this whole thing would not have happened under donald trump. it's weakness. donald trump was strong. he took one dollar of

presidential pay because that is the law. he only took one dollar. the rest went to charity. i will vote for donald j trump again, and the world will be much, much stronger. our enemies will be in fear, for they are laughing and walking all over. host: this is an article from reuters before the attacks. it says that iran's president saying iran will not start a war, but will response to bullies. that iran would "were -- respond strongly to anyone who would try to bully it. there have been mounting speculations as to how washington might retaliate after three u.s. soldiers were killed last saturday.

we have seen that and are getting reaction to your retaliation and the strikes, hitting 85 sites. robert in california, independent line. caller: the u.s. has to recognize we are not the world police. the united nations was created, and their forces, to recruit in situations like this. you have multiple countries fighting with each other and the united nations military needs to step up. host: what do you think, it was american soldiers that were killed, not u.n. soldiers. should the u.s. make a response? caller: the u.s. put their forces in areas that really don't belong. they are in areas they should be

in with you and soldiers. they do not need to be all over the world being the world police. host: ok. daniel in edison, new jersey, democrat. good morning. caller: yes, i am a lifelong democrat, but considering declaring independent over the president's one sidedness in gaza. someone called in this morning earlier and wondered why we still had troops in that area of iraq and syria. the rationale for that -- not that i agree with it, but the rationale for that is they are there to hamper the resurgence of isis. ok? thank you. host: darrell is next, oakland, california, independent. caller: yeah, i am just a little

confused as to why people believe that if trump was in office, none of this would have taken place. if we go with logic, that means if he takes office, then all problems all over the world should just stop. host: tim in detroit, michigan, republican. caller: hi, how are you? thanks for taking my call. donald trump, my son is 24. a few years ago, he said dad, we have been at war since i have been born. we have 500 military bases all over the world based off a world war ii strategy. it is a new world. we did not have war under donald trump. he took it a different way. he had economic or? [video clip] -- economic war.

joe biden changed the policy, and you see what happened with our southern border. it is all about policy. the u.n. is so corrupt, it needs to be dismantled and something else needs to come about from all the nations getting together. right now -- host: it's interesting you mention the u.n., because the person before you said that the u.s. should not be the world's policeman and this should be left to you and forces. what do you think about that? caller: i agree. host: but i think -- you said it should be dismantled. caller: totally dismantled. people need to stick up for themselves. we have partners with europe, we do business all over the world. it is high tech, right? economic war is the way to never

fire a bullet again. that is how donald trump looked at it. he likes war, economic war. there is the one color the guy worries about and it is the color green. bring this guy back and we will eliminate all these wars. host: independent line, louisiana. floyd? caller: yes, good morning, good morning. host: good morning. caller: i am 80 nine years old and retired from the air force in 1979, and served one term in iran. we are the most uninformed people in the world. i listen to these people calling on the phone, and i commend you for being able to hold back from laughing at these people, with these idiotic comments. i mean, they know nothing about the system. host: so, what was iran like

before the revolution in 1979? caller: we were in iran as allies. i was stationed one year in iran, and those people were just like we are here, but they are independent. president eisenhower said years ago, be aware of the military-industrial complex. it is a moneymaking system for the industrial complex. people are making millions and billions of dollars off the taxpayer setting up these wars, and we are going through the same thing over and over and over. thank you for listening to my comment. take care. host: susan in maine, independent line. caller: hi. actually republican, but that does not make a difference. war does not work and never has

worked. ever since the time before christ, pythagoras and others have said violence begins on the dinner plate. as long as man eat animals and blood foods, they will be violent against animals and human beings. the only answer is to let the world go vegan, organic vegan. stop the violence on the di nner plate. stop eating and persecuting each other species, like animals, and stop persecuting each other. we can try peas. host: susan, you have to call on the right line next time, if you are a republican, you have to call on the republican line. that is all we've got for this segment of phones, but coming up next, south carolina etv

reporter gavin jackson discusses his podcast "south carolina lead ," and the presidential primary happening today. we'll be right back. ♪ >> sunday on c-span's q&a, tech entrepreneur and ai pioneer sebastian thrun on his work in silicon valley with artificial intelligence. >> i look at people with a different lens. i believe that most interesting things have not been invented yet. i believe that the last 150 years of humanity have been transformative. they have invented everything from light switches and running water and toilets to airplanes and cell phones, so i really

care about what technologies can we invent in the future that improve the human condition and make us better people? >> sebastian thrun, on c-span's q&a. ♪ >> henry william brands junior has wooden close to 40 books in the past 10 years. he earned his phd at the university of texas in 1985. his first book in 1988 was titled cold warriors: eisenhower's generation and american forei policy. his list of other books include one-on-one with johnson, woodrow wilson, andrew jackson,

and many others. we will talk to him about his latest offering, in a book called "founding partisan." >> book notes plus is available on the free c-span now mobile app, or wherever you get your podcasts. ♪ >> a healthy democracy does not just look like this, it looks like this. where americans can see democracy at work and citizens are truly informed. our republic thrives. get news from c-span, straight from the source, unbiased, unfiltered, this is what democracy looks like. c-span, powered by cable.

>> "washington journal" continues. host: welcome back. we are joined by gavin jackson, the host of the podcast "south carolina lead," and is the reporter and host of this week in south carolina. welcome to the program. guest: thanks for having me. host: tell us about the podcast. how did it start and what topics do you cover? guest: so south carolina leed, it has its roots in newspapers. my work has been in this since i graduated in 2008, until 2016 working in charleston. when i left the post and courier for etv, we have folks following

the news in 2017, 2018. folks were not big on the news and are still not big on the news. i saw the need to create a podcast when podcasts are still pretty big. we were not doing podcasts on public radio. so we said, let's do a podcast to keep people updated on what's going on. of course, in the state house and the congressional delegation. we have made a lot of noise about lindsay graham, clyburn, and i will talk about those folks in a moment. we started once a week back in 2018 and i was talking to my friends, who were still reporters at various publications. letting them explain the big stories of the week to listeners who had not caught up on the weekly stories or did not pay attention to the news. i wanted to break through the miss it formation -- misinformation barrier out there

, and pushed through the news when the narrative was what we kept hearing. we went from once a week in studio to three times a week remotely during the pandemic, and we would be doing remote pods here at my house in columbia on skype. we switched from talking to reporters are talking about politics, the intersection of politics, business, medical, all of that because everything was so intertwined during the pandemic. we also added a wind down section, where we become the most podcasty podcast. we hear from folks, especially during the pandemic, because folks were so wound up. 2020 was a rough year and we want to have folks interact with us, so we got a lot of back and forth with folks and we have a

voicemail box, we take messages, and interact with our base and find out what they want more of. since then, we have pivoted to twice a week, every tuesday and saturday. it is 30 minutes long of south carolina focused news, what is happening at the statehouse, on the campaign trail, nikki haley especially. we also run a series for this year focusing on the republican primary, looking at how we have been such a strong predictor of what the nominee will be since 1980. it speaks to our diversity here, both on the republican side and the democratic side. host: and let's talk about the democratic side, because the democratic presidential primary, the first 1 -- new hampshire still a little upset about that. your headline was biden wins?

guest: biden will be the first in the nation democratic primaries winner. we got that, because president joe biden really saw south carolina deliver for him in 2020. he pushed the dnc, chaired amy harrison, pushed that through and we are the most diverse early voting state, compared to new hampshire and iowa. we were a big player for biden in 2020. when he lost in iowa and new hampshire, he used primary night to reinvigorate folks and get the vote out. it delivered a huge victory for him on super tuesday, so as a thank you, we are seeing south carolina go first. the polls have been opened to 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., steve

phillips is on this ballot, marion williamson is on this by allot, but he will have a better turnout. host: how has the relationship with president biden been since the first south carolina primary where he won? guest: you can trace his relationship with south carolina back to the 70's. one of our senators was very close with joe biden when he got into the senate, and his wife and daughter died in a car crash -- he really helped him get through that time when he was a young senator. even if you're not a u.s. senator, it's a great place to come on vacation, and he has developed the relationship.

of course, he fomented the relationship with jim clyburn and right before the primary, his wife told him, you need to endorse joe and give people the clarity they need to vote in this primary, that was four years ago. that launched biden, he won by a massive margin over bernie sanders, 49% to 20%. half a million folks voted during that election, and our democratic electorate is predominately african-american. so the endorsement was a huge signal, and biden has been a big player for south carolina. host: if you would like to join our conversation with gavin jackson, you can do so. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000.

independents, (202) 748-8002. you can also text us and post to social media. i president kamala harris was in south carolina to campaign the event, talking about her administration's accomplishments. we will play a portion of it and have you comment on it. [video clip] >> over the past three years, president biden and i have created opportunity and are building an economy that works for working people. we have created more than 14.5 million new jobs, increased wages for tens of millions of americans -- today, consumer confidence is up and consumer spending is at an all-time high. although we have more work to do, let us be clear. america's economy continues to be the strongest in the world. [no audio] -- [applause]

>> it all comes down to this. president biden and i are guided by a fundamental belief. we work for you, the american people. every day, we fight for you. host: gavin, there have been polls, as i'm sure you are aware, showing president biden is struggling with minority voters and black voters. what are you seeing on the ground in south carolina as far as his support vis-a-vis that sector of voters? guest: that has been a concern that goes back to democratic messaging being a challenging for some reason. we have seen a steady ramp up, joe biden and kamala harris coming to our state multiple times, first in january, now in february. we are the first in the nation and people are starting to pay

attention. the polls will start closing the gap more and more this year as they get out on the trail and tout these accomplishments. people are not paying attention at this point, but they will soon, and i think they have a lot to run on, especially when you start hearing about the economy. that is a big issue i hear about from voters, democrats and republicans, and with a red-hot economy, you expect them both to hammer home on that. black unemployment is at record lows right now, and also what we have heard, the administration is doing what congressman clyburn was pushing them to do. jim clyburn told biden that he needed to have a black woman as vp, and he listens to him. he also said we need to have a black woman on the supreme court, and he did that as well. that is a big push, we are also

seeing a lot of big things -- that has been on clyburn's agenda for years, like broadband, which is closed under the biden administration. he saw things happening now that will benefit not just democrats, but republicans too, and that is playing out in south carolina and elsewhere. host: on the republican side, nikki haley was governor of south carolina. what is the relationship between her and republican voters in that state? guest: a lot of folks either love her or were not big fans of nikki haley. to her advantage coming into this election, the last time she was on the ballot was in 2014 in south carolina, when she easily won reelection as governor and became the ambassador to the united nations under donald trump, a thank you to henry mcmaster, who was the first to endorse trump during that cycle.

henry mcmaster said, i want to become governor, which means get nikki haley out of the way. she had more foreign policy experience, executive experience, and she is using both of those to her advantage. when folks who like her here, it is a bit different. she would call out democrats and republicans alike and did not really care whose feelings she heard as long as she was pushing her agenda in the right direction, which was the tea party. i got here because i defeated the establishment and went through these folks that were supposed to be ordained as the next governor, and she was a several term house lawmaker and blasted through, beat the old boys club and is now in the same predicament, where she is talking about how the establishment is endorsing donald trump and she does not have those endorsements from several key prominent south

carolina politicians. it's an interesting dynamic and i don't know if it is going to help her. running in 2014 or 2010 were pre-donald trump years. this is the post trump era, she can say she did this before, but was never running against donald trump before. host: you mentioned endorsements in addition to governor mcmaster than the ones you mentioned, there are ones from tim scott and lindsey graham. do you think that will happen for south carolina voters? guest: when it comes to donald trump, for these folks, anyone can endorse donald trump. but if trump is on the ballot, they will be voting for him. he has engage people in a way no one ever has. he brought them into the political world and has been delivering for them, regardless of what you want to say about his record.

they see him as a winner, and that we weren't at war when he was president. all of these things they voted for came true in their mind. it does not matter who endorses him right now as long as he is on the ticket. with tim scott, could he be our vp, next governor? these will help our voters. lindsey graham is also up for reelection. he is not the most popular republican, people actually boo lindsey graham, but donald trump knows it does not hurt to have him in his corner on the senate. you have heard from nikki haley on the stump talking about how she didn't care about those endorsements, you can keep lindsey graham and tim scott -- you have to live with your decision at some point. it is interesting to see how this will play out, because she is pushing to be the last person standing against donald trump,

because she is convinced he will lose the election come november if he is the nominee against joe biden. she is trying to say, you guys are going to own this decision should this happen in november and should joe biden win. guest: and she's set -- host: and she has said she will be staying in the race, but if she loses in south carolina, it could be really embarrassing for her. are you hearing anything about her dropping out before the south carolina primary on the republican side? given how much of a spread, how much she would lose by? guest: i think we just got the latest washington post polls out that we have seen since early january, and donald trump is leading in all key demographics, including college-educated folks. they are a little more split. nikki haley is focusing her fire in urban areas, the more

democratic and moderate republican areas of south carolina, but i don't think she is worried about getting embarrassed or losing south carolina. i asked her, what is victory like for you right here? it is different with the winner take all delegate map. we have statewide delegates and elegance broken down i congressional district. we have jim clyburn's democratic district, and there is an interesting dynamic -- like a lot of trump surrogates in south carolina, slamming nikki haley over the perception of her record. she called nikki haley "china's favorite governor," which is a fascinating take on her message of growth and economic development.

what haley is going to do is an uphill battle. super tuesday, after south carolina, she is bent on going forward after south carolina and the narrative of her dropping out was fascinating and i think everyone sees the writing on the wall when it comes to trump getting the delegate map in his favor, but i don't see her dropping out until the writing is officially on the wall. if there is pressure for her to do so before new hampshire, we saw that pressure get to ron desantis -- because he did not have a path forward in new hampshire or south carolina. but nikki haley's margins are tighter and she is working to close the gap. host: let's talk to callers. larry in minnesota, independent line. caller: hi, i'm independent you know, i want to know if the people can see what is happening with the united states steel.

they want to sell to japan, and i have been working the mines for years, that is our livelihood in minnesota. japan wants to buy it -- this ain't a very good deal, because everybody has to come out and make sure he can see if he can quit the sale, because if there is a big war, japan will be over here and have all the mines and stuff and sell that stuff, this deal to japan. i don't think it is right and this is involving both parties, they have to get together and talk about this problem we have up here in minnesota with japan buying our u.s. steel mill. we make the pallets, and that goes to the steel mills. host: is there a connection with south carolina on u.s. steel?

guest: i wouldn't say so. our big trading partners are in germany and china, so i don't think that is really affecting us, but if you want to talk about energy independence, republicans are pushing hard to clamp down on foreign reliance. host: cindy in texas, independent line. caller: there are a lot of videos out right now, claiming joe biden was behind january 6 that the capital. i don't think people realize, that day was to certify biden's electoral votes. the house and senate were there to witness them certify the votes. why would joe biden want to stop that from happening? i'm so upset about all the stuff

that has been put out there. why would trump refuse -- he has been fighting with the jury on him doing that. i don't understand why would he be fighting so hard if he was innocent? guest: january 6. however voters in south carolina feeling about that? guest: i remember going to a rally in 2022 for donald trump in florence, and asked multiple voters about january 6. everyone said it was an inside job. we know that is not the case, we watched january 6 play out on our screens in real time, much to our dismay and shock, but someone who voted for nikki haley, she mentioned january 6 being fresh and traumatic for her, because it was something we had never seen in her 87 years and had not seen its 1812.

january 6 does not come up that often, nikki haley does not mention it much, except how donald trump confused her for nancy pelosi on january 6, which plays into this bit about how two older people are running for president and we need someone younger we can push for. caller: i would like to speak about donald trump. one thing, donald trump is the best president we've ever had. we had the better economy in our area then we have ever had, and he was doing a little work on the border. when biden got in there, he stopped all of that, and if anyone believes in the bible, they believe you do not kill. the bible says that, shall not kill. when you are doing abortions, what are you doing?

killing. what is your opinion on that? host: let's get an opinion on abortion and the border, how big are those issues? guest: when it comes to the border, a lot of people continue to talk about that. in south carolina, the big concern is fentanyl and the drugs that come over the border and come from china. abortion, we just saw a six-week abortion ba in south carolina past. nikki haley would support any bill, essentially, but a federal ban is something -- she could get behind it, but also acknowledges that it's unlikely that is to happen. abortion is not top of mind as much as it was last year when we got that bill passed, but our governor, henry mcmaster, was

talking about the border and going down to texas and supporting texas. we have sent troops to the border, so it is something folks continue to talk about. it is not the biggest issue in south carolina, but something they are aware of. host: daniel is next in tennessee, democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. excellent job as usual, we appreciate you. i have a question for gavin. he might want to respond to this. i was reading an article in the wall street journal about david smith, owner of sinclair broadcasting. his company is pretty much brainwashed, he covers half of tennessee. he mentions print articles are meaningless drivel? would you like to elaborate on that? guest: we have been talked

-- talking about print dying for a long time now. it is a diverse media landscape, and that is why i wanted to branch into podcasts, because we have the resources and the people to do it on public radio, especially because they are so popular right now. when we talk about news consumption in america, we have seen both local tv, like sinclair and the agendas they push and how their anchors read scripts, that does not happen everywhere but it happens with sinclair sometimes. we have also seen the demise of local newspapers. from 2016, it continued to drop, only 38% of people follow the news. i think people take the news for granted and don't realize how it

is so integral into our lives, but we continue to see the white house, especially last month, huge news outlets losing a lot of folks and some disturbing trends there. i don't know where the bottom is on this, but it affects everybody and it is interconnected, and folks like c-span provide the unfiltered view of the state and federal government and the campaign trail, but we have that with public media as well. that is where we are looking to fill those gaps, because there are gaps in the news coverage, for south carolina and other states to. rurally, you are losing those weekly newspapers. what are you going to read on tv if you don't have a newspaper? it goes back and forth. host: lake city, south carolina, democrat. sal, good morning. caller: good morning. the democratic, most of the

people who vote democratic are mostly blacks and your whites mostly vote republican. this is a very racist state and donald trump taps into that. he knows the south. he knows he taps into the people , how they feel in the south, you know what i'm saying? overall, there is racism and they will vote republican. even though they are poor, they will not have anything, they feel superior because racist and they are white, and black people vote democrat. host: are you voting today, sally ako caller: yes i am. guest: i know exactly where lake city, south carolina is.

i used to work in that county, so i appreciate a local caller calling in. a complicated history with racism and slavery in south carolina. nikki haley, or former governor, continues to deal with this discussion and issue on the stump. it is a tricky issue to disc uss, she has modeled it in many ways, and the caller talking about donald trump, contingency dog whistles happen in this race, with attacking her heritage, mocking her name, and it is striking, the birther movement we saw in 2010, 2016, with trump stirring up issues over obama and his heritage. people maybe feel they can say and do things under donald trump's administration that they cannot do under other folks, things that are prejudiced or

downright racist. it's an interesting time to be alive in politics in south carolina. caller: good morning. thank you very much for taking my call. i would like to make a comment, donald trump is a wonderful president when he was president. he will be a wonderful president again. they only showed this one time on c-span, from when biden and kamala harris got elected. kamala harris calling joe biden. you don't show these clips and you don't show any other clips about how unproductive the election was. host: unproductive? caller: some people voted for biden, but then again, i would like to know how many people actually voted for trump. host: gavin, this is the results

from the 2020 election in south carolina. obviously, it is a red state, donald trump won it. what are we looking at as far as a potential rematch. do you think this will play out the same way? just to remind you, donald trump got 55.1%. joe biden, 43.4%. guest: i think we will see a pretty similar margin, if not greater, because we have had some growth and lost some folks from our voter registration role. going back, talking about voters and turnouts, looking at the democrats in 2020, we did some exit poll data that found that 56% of primary voters were african-american that overwhelmingly supported biden, with 61% of the vote. the black democrats supported joe biden. but when you look at the general

election results, 51% of the voters in that primary, half a million voters in the democratic 2020 primary. the general election shoots up to 1.1 million democrats voting, doubling how many folks voted from the primary to the general election. 1.4 million republicans voted in the general election, so we are very much a republican state. we talk about it being trump country, because of these margins, and the polling data for him versus nikki haley. on the democratic side, it is joe biden country, but only when it comes to the primary. that is the only time these voters will have any influence as to who will be on the ballot and they will pick joe biden. host:host: south carolina is an open primary. any voter can vote in either the republican or democratic primary, but not both.

guest: when polls close, we will see how many folks voted in this primary versus the half a million democrats that voted in 2020. you had a competitive primary, but this is more of a thank you to joe biden. south carolina is making their case to the nation and dnc that they need to continue going first because they are such a diverse electorate compared to iowa and new hampshire, because of how many black voters we have here, the views and geography of our state. it could have been an easy, oh, we will not do a primary because joe biden won. this is specifically a thank you to south carolina and to kick off the nominating process, to get people invigorated and folks paying attention, not many folks were paying attention before this. the campaign is in full campaign mode and they are reminding people what they have done the past few years. host: calvin in brentwood, new

york, democrat line. good morning. caller: i believe that every woman should have the right to make a decision about whether they want to have a baby or not. abortion should be permitted. second, i think that donald trump, his associates are people like putin and china. i don't want america to be like those countries. i believe in freedom. i am about a. i serve -- a veteran. i served from 1969 to 1971 in the u.s. army. trump is a dictator. i don't like his situation. he lost the election and women

should have their rights. host: how big of an issue's foreign for south carolina voters? guest: it's probably the biggest differentiation between nikki haley and donald trump when it comes to their policy differences. we talk about personality versus policy, and this is very much a personality for republicans. nikki haley continues to point to these hypothetical matchups between her and joe biden come november, but she can win and donald trump can't. going back to the stump and talking about foreign policy issues, that is something she continues to differentiate herself on from donald trump. she mentions how he used took cozy up to dictators, kim jong-un, cozying up to xi jinping after he gave us covid, had to sit donald trump down at the u.n. and tell him to stop

cozying up to vladimir putin. when you hear trump talk about you we have no wars, you think he is too close to these dictators, but he has the ability to end wars and we are seeing wars play out in the ukraine and middle east -- would it be negligible for him to not end them right now? she is trying to save that differentiations between her and him, and she does get a lot of protesters -- you see people really get fired up over ukraine funding and calling her a warmonger, though her husband serves in the military. the last thing she wants is to put men and women in harm's way, but gets chastised for a lot of it, she believes in sending funding to ukraine but not american soldiers. caller: how are you, very good

show. excellent. i want to tell you, january 6, those guys were wrong and never should have done that. let's remember a couple of things. the media did nothing about it, said nothing about it. if anything, they were giving them positive reinforcement. as far as the sixth is concerned, it was supposed to be certified and all trump said was, don't certify it. let's look into it. those people that went down there acted like jerks. as far as the court and the judges, everybody says, 40 quarts, 40 judges looked at it, nothing came of it. that is a lie. no court would even touch it or look at it, no judge would look at it. that is another topic that has

been misconstrued. i believe that he was right. we needed to look into all the ballot harvesting, that's been going on for years when there is mail-in voting. it went on in orange county in the 1990's in california. so yeah, i knew, and there were a lot of irregularities. there is plenty of proof. host: your reaction, gavin? guest: folks reaction to donald trump on january 6, it said he did not do anything, but he really didn't do anything. he didn't do anything for hours in between folks storming the capital and his appearance on television, when he was adamant about stopping what was going on. he should have gotten on television earlier and told folks to stop, but we did not see that play out. maybe that is where you draw the differentiation of leadership.

is that your definition of a leader? someone who is watching chaos play out and not doing anything, or someone who steps up and said hey, do something, because vice president and congress are under attack. host: beverly next in casper, wyoming, democrat. caller: good morning. i believe there should be diversity. i think kamala harris and joe biden are doing their best. it's really hard when you've got the big old whistles blowing that they are not, and i hear all good from these two. i hope it continues, because the bad has to go away. the former president, trump,

he's done so much dog whistling that people are so confused. i wish they would get back to being civil. it's us against them, and i am glad that we have the two in office now. i mean, it was chaos. the disrespect for january 6, i am still baffled with it. it should have never happened. i've heard other people say, it will not happen, it will not happen, and it did. it blew my mind that people on your network were counting all this hate and we are going to take our guns, all this other stuff -- you know? i think democrats need to protect themselves from all of this chaos. host: any comment, gavin?

guest: yes, two parts. i want to talk about democratic messaging in regards to that statement, and also the podcast and what i want to do helps offset the fake narrative. we heard from kamala harris yesterday, who was in town on the people of this first in the nation democratic primary in south carolina, and says people talking about trump has st oked the fires of hate, racism, and xenophobia, and we heard similar rhetoric from joe biden last month in the beginning of january. of course, people might remember the as the site of the horrific mass shooting in 2016, the nine black parishioners killed at the hands of a white supremacist, and that's what led to the downing of the confederate flag on statehouse grounds in south carolina. there are still a lot of racial

undertones that play in south carolina, and you have joe biden and kamala harris calling it out for what it is, making sure they are on the record talking about these things, and cruelty or passion, chaos or competence, division or unity -- that could be a line you hear from nikki haley two, which might be why folks continue to call her more of a moderate. also talking about getting through the narrative of fake news, yes, social media has its pros and cons, but when you start talking about negative, fake news, bots, russia, china trying to influence how america processes news and what is going on, it is an ongoing assault, essentially. i don't think folks realize how much is going on when it comes to shaping how we talk about news that is perceived. at south carolina lede, we talk

about the news affecting you. a lot of people don't even know what goes on at their statehouse. they think nancy pelosi and lindsey graham, they don't know what happens at the statehouse. a lot of things affect you locall, and it is sad because so much of that coverage is disappearing. host: davin jackson, host of south carolina lede. thank you so much, gavin, and enjoy the primary today. that's all the time we've got for today's "washington journal," but we will be back tomorrow. have a great day, everybody, and have a good saturday. ♪

[captions copyright national cable satell