>> c-span's washington journal inviting you to discuss the latest issues in governance, politics, and public policy. from washington and across the country. sunday morning, nicholas jacobs, the co-author of the book the rooney rule voter, talks about their role in campaign 2024. and then author and political commentator ann coulter joins us to discuss the news from the campaign trail and other news of the day. c-span's "washington journal." join in the conversation live 7:00 a.m. on c-span, c-span now, or c-span.org. >> saturday, american history tv features historic convention speeches. watch notable remarks by presidential nominees and other

political figures from the past several decades. today, former vice president richard nixon continues his law and order campaign at the 1958 republican national convention in miami beach. >> the way of crime is not going to be the way of the future in the united states of america. [applause] we established freedom from fear in america so that america can take the lead in establishing freedom from fear in the world. >> watch historic convention speeches on american history tv on c-span two. watch c-span's five campaign 2024 coverage of the democratic national convention august 19-22 . you can watch the republican national convention any on our website. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these television companies and more,

including charter communications. >> charter is proud to be recognized as one of the best internet providers. and we are just getting started. building 100,000 miles of new infrastructure to reach those who need it most. >> charter communications supports c-span as a public service, along with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. ♪ [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2024] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy visit ncicap.org] ♪ host: this is "washington journal" for saturday, august 10. a few poll shows how americans feel about the strength and future of u.s. democracy. a majority say it could be at risk depending on who wins the presidential race. others say the u.s. is strong enough to withstand the outcome no matter who wins. and some say the u.s. is already still broken. the results don't matter. the poll is just a glimpse of

the electorate and we want to hear your thoughts. here are the numbers to call -- republicans, 202-748-8001, democrats, 202-748-8000, and independents, 202-748-8002. you can send us a text at text 202-748-8003 or post a question or comment on facebook fat facebook.com/cspan -- at facebook.com/cspan or on x at @cspanwj. that new polling coming from the associated press and the headline from that natural talking about the majority of u.s. adults say democracy is on the ballot but they differ on the threat. here's a closer look at the numbers. you can see here on this chart on your screen -- democracy in

the u.s. could be at risk depending on who wins the 2024 presidential election. that's at 59%. the blue at 21% our respondents who say democracy in the u.s. is strong enough to withstand the outcome no matter who wins. and 18% responded that democracy is already seriously broken and that it doesn't matter who wins the presidential election. we are going to hear your thoughts on the issue and the level of faith you have in the american democracy. but first, we want to show you a clip from last night. here is vice president kamala harris. she spoke about the stakes of the election. vp harris: so much is on the line in this election.

and understand this is not 2016, and this is not 2020. you know this time around, the stakes are even higher. and that's because last month, the united states supreme court basically just told the former president who has been convicted of fraud that going forward, he was -- he will be effectively immune no matter what he does in the white house. [booing] vp harris: but think about what that means. think what about that means in this election. think about what that means. he's been effectively told he will be immune if he's back in the white house. think about what that means when you remember donald trump has openly vowed if re-elected, he will be a dictator on day one.

that he will weaponize the department of justice against his enemies. remember that he even called for the quote termination of the constitution of the united states. understand what this means. and let us be very clear. someone would suggest we should terminate the constitution of the united states should never again stand behind the seal of the united states as president. never again! [cheers and applause] host: what's your level of faith in american democracy? that is our question for you to start our program today. we will hear first from rob from new york city on the republican line. good morning, rob. caller: hey, good morning. thank you for c-span. you're a great addition to the

crew there. my faith, i have complete faith in the system. dominion, voting machines. what was it? $800 million settlement against fox for false claims against their machinery? so, what does that tell you? it tells you a lot, unless you don't believe in the law, unless you don't believe in the court system, unless all of a sudden when mr. trump emerged on the scene, all of a sudden there's a big question about our laws and four order and how, you know, it's not accurate and how our elections are not accurate and all of a sudden -- only because he lost. so, you know, he's not a businessman. he claims to be a businessman. he was a tv reality show host.

he's an actor who plays the role of a businessman on "the apprentice." his father left him over $200 million. he inherited a huge fortune that he did not earn. he's not his own man. you know, you put money in the bank every six to seven years, it doubles on its own. how long ago did he inherit that money? 30, 40 years ago? host: so rob, to the question, your level of faith, if former president trump were to win re-election in november, do you still have faith in american democracy? caller: say again. host: would you still have faith in american democracy if former president trump were to win the white house again in november? caller: of course. you know, his family, when he passed the tax cut, his family, if you calculate it out, he didn't take a salary but he made

between $100 billion to $300 -- i'm sorry, $100 million to $300 million in tax savings between himself his daughter, his family benefited from the tax breaks that he put in place when he first got into office. that's how he got paid. host: all right. got your point, rob. we'll go to mark in scottsdale, arizona, on the independent line. good morning, mark. caller: hey, c-span. how are you doing? yeah, about democracy, let me just say i'm an independent but i am all in for trump. i guess ultimated to talk about democracy. that's fine, i suppose. i thought it would be open line, but really, it's the abortion issue and the supreme court and voting system. if these politicians could

really focus on those two things, very simple, i mean, our democracy will be safe. let's just state that fact. all that's hyperventilating about saving democracy, it's all going to circle around the supreme court, how we reformatory, if at all, and then the voting practice, which we definitively need to reform. and i don't understand why people in this country, our politicians don't just take wholesale with certain countries do with other policies. why not adopt plans from the rest of the world that actually work? and i apologize for being a little nervous. host: that's all right. thanks for your call. we'll go to pat in pittsburgh, pennsylvania, on the republican line. good morning, pat.

caller: good morning. how are you? host: great, thanks. caller: the democracy of the united states of america no longer exists. in february of 2017, an announcement was made in a major public news publication. and it basically said that the united states would require all social media entities to eliminate and control content. it was at that second that the first amendment ceased to exist. and then they joined with all of the global american dystopian groups to essentially reframe the institution as to themselves being content for others. so what's happening right now? you're seeing american citizens literally being arrested for conveying their own right to free speech.

free speech to question the war, free speech to question ukraine and gaza and now, you're seeing big tech, which was all in on the destruction of donald trump from 2017 on, and they changed all of the machinery, all of the search engines, all of the mechanisms of google to make sure that the dystopian democrat meeting cartels were in the front of the line and the american people were in the back. and now what is happening? we're seeing these manufactured polls in order to create the illusion of the democratic party being in front. i can absolutely guarantee you this. when i changed political parties in 2020 to vote for trump, i never imagined that we would be at this place. so if you are african american, if you're a gay person like i am, you better run to vote for

trump as president and if you're an african american, you better run to vote for trump because democratic establishment will literally destroy you. look at beginsler and -- gensler and the treasury. all of the rights of the american people are evaporating in your face in real time. being from pennsylvania, you better vote like your life depends on it because it does. host: good morning, annette from the independent line. caller: good morning. i'm here. thank you for having me. thank you for taking the call. i do believe that democracy is on the line. i believe that the promise of america is on the line with this next vote. the trump administration, the

trump candidacy has said that they want to suspend the constitution. they have said that they want to round up people incriminately -- indiscryptly to deport them and do a number of things. i think the promise of the constitution is at stake. i believe that the harris administration will be one that does intend to live up to the promise of the constitution. i believe that vice president

harris has lived her life for the desire of freedom, justice and the american promise. i believe that both of her parents were people that were academics and fighters for freedom. and i believe that this constitution is at stake on all branches of government because donald trump has said that he wants to actually replace people even down to the lowest level of career civil service. i believe that the supreme court has ruled in an abominable way and unethical way to not live up to the constitution. so yes, i do believe that we are -- that the democracy is at stake and the former caller said something about african

americans needing to vote for trump. the idea of voting for someone who by his own -- by his every word is a liar, a cheater and someone that has said that he is against ethnic diversity and ethnic affirmation is a trajectory that you would think that someone who is african american would be ignorant enough, foolish enough and self-loathing enough to vote for donald trump is an abomination in and of itself. host: donald trump spoke about democracy during his acceptance speech at the republican national convention in wisconsin

last month. here is a clip of that. >> this election should be about the issues facing our issues and how to make america successful, safe, free, and great again. [applause] in an age when our politics too often divide us, now is the time to remember that we are all fellow citizens. we are one nation under god, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. [applause] and we must not criminalize, dissent or demonize political agreement which is what's what'shappening in our country d that fitter the democratic parties should immediately stop

weaponizing the justice system and labeling their political opponents as an enemy of democracy. [applause] especially since that is not true. in fact, i am the one saving democracy for the people of our country. [applause] and very big news that you probably just read. on monday, a major ruling was handed down from a highly respected federal judge in florida, aye mean cannon -- aileen cannon. finding that the fake documents case against me were totally unconstitutional and the entire case was thrown out of court. [applause] thrown out of court.

if democrats want to unify our country, they should drop these partisan witchhunts that i've been going through approximately eight years and they should allow an election to proceed which is worthy of our people. we're going to win it anyway, but worthy of us. host: we're hear from you this morning about your level of faith in american democracy. you can give us a call. you can also tweet or send us a text. some facebook comments coming in. this one from ann green. she says i have faith in america and good people donald trump and republican leaders care about neither. he will lead us again. first the election and then his freedom. jim dahmer says i have total faith in our republic and our constitution but i cannot say how it is implemented by the federal government and certain

states. and dave says democracy that democratic leaders and media are proclaiming for 18 million people voted for one person and two months later forced out, is that democracy? we'll go back to the phones and we will hear from sandra in alabama on the independent line. good morning, sandra. caller: good morning. i would just like to state that i am -- i do think democracy is on the line. both of them said that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself. and fear is a fragment of our imagination that appears to be real. and that's what donald trump projects on us. be afraid. be afraid of your neighbor. be afraid of the democrats. just be afraid. and i just feel that if he's

back in office that we will lose our democracy. if kamala harris get into office, our democracy would still be at risk because donald trump is not going to stop. he's going to protest. he stated in one of his rallies about the electoral, people in georgia. he calls them out. you know, saying that they have everything under control. they have put people in place to challenge the electorate slate that will be presented. we had mike johnson who will do everything in his power to prevent kamala harris from being elected. so i would strongly suggest to everyone to get out and vote. just come out in large numbers, not to allow 2% victory in none

of the states. we, the people, have to rise up to the occasion and fight by voting. and i think that's what we need to do. and thank you for your time. host: steve, anaheim, california, on the republican line. good morning, steve. caller: good morning. i got four videos i think people should watch. farewell, iran -- 1913, the seas of conflict, made in 2015, pbs. 1945, the savage teeth, 1948, the catastrophe. since i got that off my chest, i think everybody should watch those. you can stream them or you can buy them on amazon or whatever. ok. democracy.

the problem with democracy right now is that the voters does not elect the representative. you may get them nominated, but the contributors do. and with the last, i don't know, since clinton, you have the globalization of -- which is basically with democrats which has caused, i don't know, millions of jobs, and tons of poverty. and then you have the republican, my party, which are the conservative, which doesn't want to pay for nothing. and that has brought us to the situation that we have now. trump is right on this one. it is important about the issues, not about what race i am, what color my skin is, what gender i am or what sexual orientation i am. that's what the democrats are putting forward here. and they're avoiding the immigrants -- excuse me, they're

avoiding the issues. a little background on -- she came out and made a lot of promises which she never delivered, such as i'm going to reduce all the federal charges against people that have low gun charges, and instead, she increased arresting people. the other one was during the housing debacle. we're going to look into all these fake banks that borrow these loans and stop you from kicking you out of your house, which she did nothing. that's basically what -- it prevented -- because i'm all over the place here. host: yeah. we'll give somebody a chance to

chime in as well. we'll go to jeffrey in las vegas, nevada, on the democrats line. good morning, jeffrey. caller: hi. this is jeffrey. yes, i have great faith in democracy, and i truly believe that through democracy of the people that we will not elect someone that's been found guilty of a crime to be our president of the united states. so i have great faith in our democracy. host: you're in las vegas and you're a democrat. are you going to be seeing the vice president today? are you going to attend her rally? caller: i probably won't. my wife tends to go, but i'll probably be working. host: you can watch it on c-span. we'll have it live here. john in north carolina on the independent line. good morning, john. caller: yes, thank you, ma'am. i can't believe these democrats wanting to -- they complain

about all these -- to our cities like new york, chicago, and all of that. i don't understand if they didn't want it then, how come they're wanting it now? that's amazing to me. i mean, they'll call good evil and evil good. we're all going to have to stand and give an account in what we do through you and me. so i don't understand wow in the world people -- when they didn't ever before. i mean, just overnight, they kick joe biden out. i'm republican. i'll never vote for democrat and they kicked him out. i mean, is that democracy? nobody voted for kamala harris to be president exempt for these psycho -- and this hootchie pick for a vice president. somebody wanting to put condoms in fourth grade bathroom for boys. i mean, have people lost their

mind? host: ann in sydney, ohio, on the republican line. good morning, ken. caller: yes, good morning. i'm getting tired of democrats mischaracterizing that immunity case that they decided in the supreme court. and i even heard democrat politicians saying that trump could order seal teams to murder somebody and he would be immune from it and that is not true at all. it has to be a whip -- his presidential powers. and he would be held responsible. and the democrats like to be -- like to characterize themselves as great -- of democracy when they tried to keep trump from being on ballots falsely in the

united states. that's not democratic. and they schemed and stabbed joe biden in the back until they got them not to run. what about the 17 million people who voted in primaries for? and i don't support him but that's not democratic either. like i said -- and they the roe v. wade decision, too. the republicans are faking women's rights away from them. when in reality, it just goes back to the individual state and some great man said that democracy is best when it's closest to the people.

and if -- how much closer could you get than the people of each individual state deciding their abortion laws? host: this headline from abc news. the article is from may. says democracy is a top concern for many voters. we asked them why. and the article says voter feel unrepresented with little recourse. across the board, voters were deeply frustrated over the state of democracy suggesting that the country was off on the wrong track and expressing pessimism about whether it could improve. they were also dissatisfied with the candidates they had to choose from. democracy won't get better in our lifetime, one voter said. several participants expressed the idea that the government was not representing the will of the people or the need of middle class taxpayers. many also said that democrats

and republicans need to work together more and were concerned about what they saw as deep partisan divides in both washington and across the country and perhaps unsurprisingly for a group of voter who is had fully committed to either candidate, they wished they had more choices in whom to vote for and believe democracy would be better served if there were more than two major parties. we'll hear from harold in illinois on the democrats line. good morning, harold. caller: good morning. i'm very scared for our democracy. i'm seeing some very bad things happening and i don't think our founding fathers or any politicians since then have ever imagined that we would elect a president like that and to nominate him as a major party candidate. my main concern is these secret

documents. i would like to -- we've had two presidents that have been charged with these documents. one of them kept the documents even after he was subpoenaed to give them back. the other one went and looked for didn'ts to make sure he didn't have none and cooperated completely with the justice system. i would like to know who's in charge of our secret documents and why boxes of secret didn'ts are out there for anybody to hold on to? the librarian at my local library knows where every book is checked out and who it's checked out to. i'd like to nominate her to keep control of our secret documents. and i think that the documents that he didn't give back after he said that he gave them all back, i would like to know what those documents are because i don't think he's in a

historical, a political historian just reading over these documents. i think he's selling them to other countries just like he drift off of everything he does. he sells flags, hats, he sells shirts with his picture on it. he sells parts of his suit. he's a grifter. he's wanting to make money off of the presidency. wanting to mf of the presidency. host: ryan in massachusetts on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. the question was about faith in democracy. first of all, we are a constitutional republic. that is a liberal talking point. since 2020, the liberal party of america, the democrats, used covid and covid shots to violate our medical privacy and first amendment rights. they worked in conjunction with

the social media websites and lecture us about democracy, but the dnc has had a nonworking election. local governments who are liberal, and colleges, have frequently violated free speech. i had it happen to me twice with a trespass order when i brought a trump flag to college. under biden-harris and harris in the future, our free speech is on the line, and so is our border and economic security. host: on my prompter it is showing you are an independent voter. it sounds like you are a trump supporter? caller: i am a registered independent voting for trump in massachusetts. i am going to a trump rally this morning. host: john in ventura, california on the republican line. caller: good morning. it is an interesting question

today. one of the things i want to point out is in democracy you have to live within the constitution. the constitution is a very thought out, difficult document that you have to reach compromises to do that. the people that are going to destroy the democracy is the democrats because they want to change the constitution. they don't want to live within the constitution. they want to change it. they want to pack the supreme court. they want to get rid of the filibuster. they want to have immigrants, noncitizens, voting. they have no primary in their democratic -- there is no primary. they just chlorinated kamala --

coronated kamala. it is the democrats that will be changing the constitution and not living within the constitution. that is why this whole thing about save -- no, they are not going to save democracy. they are going to destroy democracy and that they are going to make the playing field not equal. so, be very wary. i feel so sorry for the black the craddick leaders are so bad. the black democratic leaders have voted to keep illegal immigration. they take the black american's jobs. it destroys the black american poor communities. the black democratic leaders are conclusive in destroying the constitution, bending the rules, and putting everything -- and who suffers? the black people as a community.

they are being led like sheep and i hate to see it. host: steve in texas, next on the independent line. caller: good morning. this is a fascinating discussion. thank you for hosting it. i am hoping i can talk for a couple of minutes on institutional problems. we are not having a donald trump problem in this country. we are having a maga-ism that has replaced the republican party. we need two strong parties, three strong equal branches of government, and that is with the threat to democracy is now. it is not donald trump. it is not the squad. it is none of these people. it is institutional problems that are endangering free and fair elections in this country. that is what needs to be the focus of people. stop talking about the man with

the tamp on on his ear -- tampon on his ear, and about the experiment that made the united states work for 250 years. there needs to be friction between these groups. it is the only thing that has made our system work. host: you mentioned institutions. give me an example of something you would like to see done with an institution. caller: obviously, we have a problem with our supreme court not having a code of ethics or method for controlling them. that has put the balance out of power. the supreme court is giving significant executive powers that have never existed before to the executive office. they are giving immunity to anything that a president doesn't office. by donald trump's own words, joe biden could order donald trump

to be assassinated tomorrow and he would have complete immunity because it was done under his presidential orders. host: that was steve in texas. harold, one of our colors this morning, -- our callers this morning, brought the document cases. in june speaker johnson announced a strategy for cracking down on the alleged weaponization of the department of justice in some of these issues. here are his comments. [video clip] rep. johnson: something is happening and i have been traveling around the country. i was out this past week and the rust belt, ohio, michigan, wisconsin, illinois. when the verdict came down against president trump there was something palpable. i don't know if you sensed it where you were over the past week, but people realized we have reached a new low. when you have activist

prosecutors, and the democratic party, who are so desperate because of the presidential campaign and the way it is going, they understand donald trump in the polling is crushing joe biden. they are in panic mode on the democratic side and are so desperate to stop donald trump. he is winning in the swing states, winning among the people, winning among new demographics that have never voted republican before. they see this happening and are so desperate to stop him they are willing to use the judicial system to do so. it is a new low and a dangerous one. they are eroding the people's faith in our system of justice itself. as leader scalise said, you have to believe justice is blind, that there is equal justice under the law to maintain a constitutional republic. this goes to the foundation of who we are as a nation, and that is why it is bigger than just president trump. it is bigger than these cases. it is about our system itself. because of that, there is a backlash.

president trump hit a fundraising record within 24 hours of the verdict. we did as well on our fundraising platforms. we raised record amounts of money because people understand what is at stake. this is not just a contest between two individuals for president. it is about if we will defend the integrity of the system itself. we will do everything within the scope of our responsibility to address it appropriately. i announced to our conference we are working on a three-pronged approach.you heard leaders coolies and others reference it today. we are looking at various approaches to what can be done through the appropriations process, legislative process, through bills we will be advancing through our committees and putting on the floor for passage, and through oversight. those things will be happening vigorously because we have to do that. the stakes are too high. people are losing faith in our institutions, and that, at the end of the day, is something

that should concern every one of us. host: we have 20 minutes left in this segment, hearing your thoughts on the level of your states in american democracy. a couple of texts. sandy in indiana. if trump should be elected he will do everything he can to do dismantle our democracy as we know it. he is surrounded by single paths who will help him and his goal and damaging our great country. i think it is a tossup. independent, and i feel democracy will survive. worried if harris-walz gets in, trouble follows the constitution and laws. tired of the lies of the dems and how they constantly want to change the constitution and laws when things don't go how they want. they have become the threat. look what they did to biden. joan in minnesota.

we will go back to our phones and hear from christopher in detroit on the democrats line. good morning. caller: i would like to -- you all do such a great job at c-span. it's really the -- odds are -- host: we are having a hard time hearing you. we are only hearing every couple of words. do you want to try to call back? caller: can you hear me better now? host: now i can. go ahead. caller: joseph on last week, professor from texas. talked about the responsibility of all of the racism from the republican party.

i would encourage all of your listeners to go back and listen to that. your callers talking about -- a president shouldn't be about -- host: we are still having a hard time hearing you, christopher. try to give us a call back and we will see we can get a better connection. we will hear from jerry in broadway, virginia on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. i have a message for all of these people out there claiming to be democrats. socialism is not democracy. socialism is communism. they did everything in the world

they can think of to try to get rid of donald trump. impeach him on made up lies. tried to bankrupt him. try to put him in jail. now they even tried to assassinate him. that is democracy? host: scott in texas on the republican line. good morning, scott. caller: thank you for having my call this morning. i am scott from texas. just a big, big time election. really worried about the future of america. we really need to come together as a nation. i truly feel that donald trump is our option. he's not a great character, but his policies is what america needs, especially for all of the border states. it's just, you know, a really big election and it's time to

come together as a nation. thanks for the call. host: manuel in inglewood, california on the democrats line. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. a great subject this morning to speak about. the question being, what is my level of faith in american democracy, i would say that my level of faith in democracy is high, although i question whether going forward -- i believe it is in danger. i thought it was interesting listening to the statement by mike johnson, who claimed the republicans were winning in every state. i am inclined to believe that he was encouraged to say that by his almighty leader to let

people know there is still hope. i think they are surely behind. the democracy part, i must remind people i don't think it's an question that our monetary system that we operate under it is still on our coins and dollars, "in god we trust." my trust is in god. my trust is in the constitution. which is the foundation of our republican democracy. we have a declaration of independence. i do not believe regardless of what side you want to be on of the aisle that a one-man rule is anything close to defining anything remote similarity to democracy. i think we are in a place now

where we have to redefine what democracy really is. host: how would you define it? caller: i would define it as, we have one vote per citizen, we have a single-rule, we have a system by which we have an opportunity to all weighing on through our votes. democracy is the pillar of the will of the people. the people, the will, are crying out for things we are not seeing. the supreme court justice trying to declare total immunity to one person to shield him from prosecution, i don't call that democracy. i called democracy the will of the people. as they ruled against and ruled

against roe v. wade in abortion rights after 50 years of being in effect, we know in every state where they are putting it on the ballot the people are saying contrary to agreement to that. they are voting for, yes, we do need some form of abortion. although i do question the limitations. i am not 100% for abortion-rights unlimited. all i'm saying is this. we have the foundation, which is the constitution. we do not have a one-man rule. we have a rule of law, which we are trying to get away from, which is deteriorating our democracy. we have a rule of law based on the set of laws and the will of the people. host: i got your point.

let's hear from toya in ohio on the independent line. caller: good morning, good morning. i want to go back on the california caller about four to five calls before. he said black jobs. that is a racist comment to me. it is a dog whistle. i'm surprised he was able to finish that. what is a black job? i would ask him what is a black job? if you things immigrants are taking black jobs, black people work everywhere. we are the vice president. we have a person who won a gold medal, simone biles. myself, i have an awesome job. my brother is the head of an electric company.

we should have asked him, what is a black job? immigrants -- he is making it sound like we are supposed to work in the fields. going back into the decades of picking cotton. this is what these so-called -- i am not a racist person, but the certain far-right people, racist white folk will say a black job. you see the former president of the united states talking about a black job. another topic is, people are voting for a convicted felon. a regular person who goes into a job, they try to get a job and they have a felony, they are not going to get a job. here is part of america voting for this guy and he is a

convicted felon. the reason why i think his fear. fear of the unknown. what policies has he given? people forget what happened four years ago. we had this country for years ago, no. people were fighting for toilet paper in the pandemic. he got slighted the pandemic and people were fighting for food and toilet paper. host: bringing it to our question, what is your level of faith in democracy? what you brought up, will how does that make you feel about it? caller: the president of the united states, the former president, wants to take away the constitution. as a very scary thing. look up project 2025. people need to get real and really look at that, because everything in their this man, trump, is really going to

enforce that. he might be playing golf, but the people under him -- the first time he got it wrong. the second time he won't get it wrong. if he goes into being the president he will be a dictator. host: clark in peach creek, west virginia on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning, ma'am. first of all, i have very little confidence in the democrats of this country. first of all, these candidates preach that they love america. they are dividing this country. it is going to be one sorry shape before this is over with. i think that all four candidates need to back off, stop their rhetoric on both sides, and let

someone who is faith-oriented in the constitution, in god, and their neighbor. i am like the lady. there are things going on now in america that should never be. i don't even want to speak about birth control. that should be up to the man and woman to make sure that they don't get pregnant or things like that. but they need to back off. let somebody who is really qualified. not old and decrepit. i'm not saying that either one is, but -- it would take another 15 to 20 years to get this country back in shape where it was when i was a young man. in 1952 i was born. i can go back and show you statistics of what things cost then and what they cost now. also, a price freeze should be

initiated now before they go to some other country and get away from america, because they are not fit, neither party, to be president of this united states. host: let's hear from robert in raleigh, north carolina on the democrats line. good morning. caller: good, c-span. you were talking about democracy. we have to stand up for our democracy. we have to be able to go to the polls and vote. we cannot be suppressed our vote. people have a right to speak out and speak up. harris and biden will get the cease-fire deal and bring hostages home. we look at hard work. it's good work. democrats focus on the future, with affordable childcare, paid leave, owning their own home, building wealth, lower cost-of-living.

we have to bring down the prices in the grocery stores, put the middle class first. harris says that she will build a strong border with security. people can get their citizenship. have freedom to vote. i look at roe v. wade. we cannot deprive any person of life, liberty, and their property. we have to continue to stand up for democracy. host: that was robert in north carolina. he mentioned voting rights. this article from nbc news, the headline is georgia gives local officials new powers to investigate election results. the headline, trump cheered on the appointed official who approved the rule change at a rally last weekend, calling them pit roles fighting for honesty -- p -- pit bulls fighting for honesty.

a move that could delay or derail future postelection certification processes in a 3-2 vote. the republican-controlled state election board voted to define the certification election results as "attesting after reasonable inquiry that the tabulation and canvassing of the election are complete and accurate and that the election results are a true and accurate accounting of all votes cast in that election." the rule does not define reasonable inquiry, which means different counties will likely interpret the rule differently. it is expected to allow county election boards to request information and potentially delay or block certification results if they see fit. shirley in beaver falls, pennsylvania. caller: first of all, we have to

pursue something other than the democrat party for the republican party. one person governing this world. freedom, paying all of these utility bills. freedom, paying high taxes and knowing how to leverage it all. we need freedom from all of these high-priced gas bills. we need a new model car that doesn't put all of this pollution out here in the world. we need someone that understands foreign affairs as well as usa. we need someone that want to control this world and the people in an ownership manner like -- dictatorship to do

something, they have the upper hand over god and jesus christ. what they are supposed to do from day one. -- they have starved for years because of it. he didn't want to pain people, like the atmosphere that was going on in the world. they want smaller homes, smaller this. we have gigantic homes. right now we cannot afford it. host: leah in the republican line. caller: yes, first of all the lady just now was so correct. my faith in democracy is, if

mr. trump gets back into office because people call him a communist, they call him a dictator, they use all these words. the thing is, when he was in office he had the gas down very low. we could afford to buy a roast beef for our sunday dinner. we could afford housing. rent. we could buy a house. now, houses have tripled in price. a modern couple just starting out can't even look into buying a house. so, i hope he gets back in. that is my faith in democracy for all people. all colors.

he can handle other dictators around the country. he kept hamas away from us, which is getting ready to blow up in our face again. host: michael in michigan city, indiana on the democrats line. caller: good morning. project 2025 is for real. all of these callers calling in, republicans and some independents -- i think they are republicans calling in -- it's real. if you are a working person, they are stopping over time. you won't get any overtime. just like a dictatorship, project 2025. black jobs, like the lady said before, what is a black job? i can't understand it.

bring america back like it used to be? when you have black people sharecroppers or something like that? that is a black job? i can understand it. it seems like no republican out there wants to read project 2025, because it's like a dictator. you are taking rights from people. you can't work overtime. they probably don't want to understand it, because it is a serious matter. democracy is on the line for sure. to get back in, it's going to be terrible. you've got people out there now, they can't even vote with a felony. this guy gets the highest office in the land? that's ridiculous. you know, restore people their

-- if they have a felony or something, they can vote. they pay taxes just like everybody else. i cannot understand this. it is really serious. i hope enough people come out and vote to stop him from getting back into office because it would be terrible. the lady just got through saying that gas prices were down. it was a pandemic. no one was even outside driving a car. there was no food. people were fighting over toilet paper. in the store you could get one roll of toilet paper. that was great? ok. this pandemic, a week of drinking bleach or whatever, please. thank you for listening. thank you very much. host: michael in indiana.

we are hearing from you this morning about your level of faith in american democracy. you are welcome to continue calling in on that topic, but we are also opening the discussion to open forum and any social policy issue you may have. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. leeann in colorado on the independent line. caller: good morning. thank you. i have -- i would like to say that i live in the high country of the valley. they often have kennedy and the

information he presents. one of his questions to americans is, what do you care about? the most thing i care about, not in order, i have the cost of health care because i am post --. i have safety of the usa, remove illegal secure borders. i have homelessness. i have the american dream is nonexistent. number four, family values. the mom being able to stay home and bring up her children rather than putting them off in daycare or school or preschool. i homeschool. i have two adult sons.

i homeschool my second born son in the tender years. number five, the environment, because as kennedy says, i don't know the right words from the bible, but as man, meaning all people, were to be the keepers of the lesser animals, the environment. i'm really big on that. i used work for the department of natural resources. host: leanne mentioning the robert f. kennedy, jr., the independent, running for president. this headline from the hill, rfk junior claims he will be on the ballot in all 50 states. independent presidential candidate robert f kennedy said

friday he will be on the ballot in all 50 states. we have enough signatures to be on all 50 states, so we have handed most of them in. some of the states are not yet certified, but we will be on the ballot. that is what he told a fox news anchor during an interview. that's according to a ballot access tracker from the hill and their decision desk headquarters. kennedy is confirmed to have ballot access in 15 states, including michigan, nevada, and north carolina. let's hear from pennsylvania on the democratic line. good morning rena. caller: how are you today? host: great, thanks. caller: the question is my level of faith in american democracy. i think it comes down to your faith in america as a people. do they want a democracy? if so, are they willing to fight

for it? vote for a candidate that holds up the constitution? puts the american people first, and not their best interests but the nation as a whole? not being self oriented or causing a divine? when that happens, other countries like russia and china see a weakness, they see a crack and they slither in and take advantage. the race now is for space, control of quantum computer and ai, and people need to stick together as a nation and take control of what they want as a people. not what somebody else is going to be able to dictate. that is what is important to keep your faith in american democracy. thank you. host: philip in ohio on the

republican line. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. my opinion is, the democrats like to pick and choose what laws they want to follow and what laws they want to break. donald trump as president doesn't have immunity is great, except for one sticking point. barack obama and his gunrunning scheme got an agent killed and droned a u.s. citizen overseas. would that be classified as murder? murder doesn't go away. if they would like to play that game, would they like a trial in alabama? i bet they wouldn't like that. thank you for taking my call. host: jack in bridgeport, ohio on the independent line. caller: thank you for taking my call. yes, i would like to get in on

this, because i think what we need to do is start doing what is best for our country and not our parties. my first vote, i am 80 something years old, was for john f. kennedy. you know what his famous line was. whatever is best for the country is what he wanted you to do. we have to get back to that kind of politics. we don't need to be whatever is best for the party. right now, the guy that we had in there, trump, is not good for this country. i voted for three republican presidents in the past 12 years or so. none of them won. none of those who lost would vote for trump. their families. none of them would pick him. they talk against him because he

is no good for our country. republicans bow down to him. host: you are an independent in ohio, a key state this fall. who are you leaning towards? caller: definitely i think the republican party has to get back to being republicans, the lincoln republicans. they were good when they were lincoln republicans, not maga republicans. that is no good. democrats and republican, i vote both ways. i am independent. i have voted for a lot of republican ideas, and a lot of democratic ideas. we have to get this trump out of here. it is not right or wrong. it is not republican or democrat . not this election. host: roxanne in california on the democrats line. caller: good morning.

how are you? host: doing well, thanks. caller: i had a great level of faith in democracy. to explain it like this, donald trump is a black swan of presidents. even he got elected in, which meant that no matter how you felt about the guy, a swath of the country went to vote, like democracy, and they got him in there. i am proud that that happened even though i know he's not good for the country. when he tried to overturn the election, there were guardrails up because of our democracy. that proves our guardrails are up and democracy is in. there were some states who wanted him out. i will say, as bad as he was our democracy still allowed him to be a candidate for 2024. that should show us that the people still speak with our votes.

when i think should be changed is our institutions. the supreme court, they are not held accountable for the things that they did. their ethics, there is no accounting for that. i can't get over that. there's no saying what they can do. i'm not talking about their votes. i'm talking about alito and thomas. they are not accountable for that. that is one thing. another thing that needs to change, i really believe we need to do some amendments to our constitution now. it is way overdue. i will say donald trump opened our eyes to all of that, because he is the black swan of presidents. he should have opened our eyes to all of that. that's all i want to say. host: roxanne mentioning former president trump and the efforts to overturn the 2020 election results.

this headline in today's new york times, january 6 ryan turned received sentence of 20 years for police assault. the california man who attacked police officers at the capitol on january 6, 2021 in a sustained assault with a flagpole, crutches, pepper spray, and broken pieces of furniture was sentences to 20 years in prison come one of the stiffest penalties, and four years of prosecution. the rioter was so aggressive at one point he assaulted a fellow rioter who was trying to disarm him. the article goes on to say that prosecutors say that esther dempsey -- mr. dempsey pleaded guilty and climbed over other rioters like human scaffolding to get at officers protecting the entrance to a tunnel. his attacks on the officers were

relentless, prosecutors wrote in court papers. it included swinging pole-like weapons more than 20 times, spring chemical agents at least three times, hurling objects at officers at least 10 times, stopping on the heads of police officers as he perched above them five times, attempting to steal a riot shield and baton, and incessantly hurling threats and insults at police officers while rallying other rioters to join his onslaught. new york, the republican line. good morning. carmen, are you there? something like carmaine in new york, are you there? we will go to north dakota on the independent line. caller: thank you for taking my

call. i am going to make this simple. one former president, republican, george bush, read my lips, read the lips of donald trump, he is telling you what he's going to do. our democracy if you becomes the next president, absolutely not. he has already shown the world what he is capable of. he tells you every time he opens his mouth what he is going to do. i'll bring it down very simple. jesus said, all liars will have the lake of fire, a second death. that includes murderers, warmongers, adulterers, all of those donald trump is. thank you very much. host: former president trump did speak at a rally in montana last

night. he responded to characterizations by the harris-walz campaign and his running mate j.d. vance as weird. [video clip] mr. trump: j.d. vance is doing a phenomenal job. but then he said, think of the things i just said. i think j.d. vance is weird. it is the word that he uses. i think he calls me that too. we are very solid people. we want to have solid borders, good elections, low interest rates, we want to be able to buy a house, we want great education, we want strong borders. i think we are very -- actually, i think we are the opposite of weird. they are weird. they work with the press coming up with the soundbites. just the soundbites. every station that night, all of the networks, they all said, oh they were called weird.

weird. it is unbelievable. it is not a word that is used too much in politics, but it is a terrible thing that they can do this. it is just a soundbite. j.d. vance is a great patriot and a united states marine, a real marine, and a brilliant guy. he went to ohio state, graduated in two years at the top of his class, just about at the top of his class. he then got into yale. he became a marine, he got into yale, he did great at yale and he met his wife who i believe was the number one student. they have a smart family. we picked someone who is very special, and he has really stepped up. i said you have your sea legs. at first they were hitting him with a lot of nonsense. he now has his sea legs and he will be great. we like him.

he is for the working man and woman. host: we have about 50 minutes left in this open forum. you can continue -- 15 minutes left in this open forum. you can continue commenting on your level of faith in u.s. democracy. i'll than in richmond, virginia. good morning. al -- alvin in richmond, virginia. good morning. caller: i believe in democracy but i also believe in facts and honesty. we cannot elect anybody like trump who tells you what he is. what is he going to do? his plan of action is project 2025 to take away all your rights. people need to read it, understand it, both her heart, and vote for democracy -- vote their hear, and vote democracy. host: joe on the independent

line. caller: good morning. in regards to democracy, i'm not sure what the definition of democracy is to the democratic party anymore. they elected joe biden with something like 15 million votes to be their candidate. it seems like there was a soft coup to get him out of there. all of a sudden you have a new candidate, harris, who didn't get one vote. i don't know if that is considered democracy or not. it seems like over the history of this country you have powerbrokers in parties who determine who would be the candidates. over the years we went to a primary system to let people

have more of a say in that. there were obviously flaws in that, too. up until this year, either with a primary or a caucus, people got to decide who the candidates were for the primary parties. that didn't happen this year. all of this talk about trump being a dictator or wanting to subvert democracy, i think people ought to look in the mirror when they are talking about this and realize that there was a person elected to be on the ballot in all 50 states. host: i got your point, joe. elizabeth in michigan on the republican line. good morning. caller: hello. how are you? thank you for taking my call. i am a republican.

i am also a psychologist in michigan. what i have seen with the democrat party, what they have done has destroyed our families. i see families where the republicans have not changed in their love and affection for other members of their family, but democrats are blocking people. their policies are trying to take children away from their families. i am seeing the transgender thing. i have nothing against transgender people, however you should not be changing a person's gender identity at an age when they are too young to make a decision. at four years old, the schools are already trying to program the children.

the democrats have become so autocratic and so dominating, really mean and vicious. i see this in my counseling sessions. they are constantly interrupting people. they can't go around the family and give everyone a chance to speak. if you are turning males to females and females to males, they are not going to have children. if you're talking about drafting women from age 18 to age 50, which they are doing, talking about the democrats, if you do that you aren't going to have a family. you aren't going to have children being born. there is a lot of depopulation going on in our country. everyone is talking about our democracy, but we have a constitutional republic. that means the states have

rights. that is the only protection in our country, the states having the rights to make decisions with for their people. i would say in my over 30 years of counseling i've never seen families more traumatized than they are right now. host: we will hear from ed in nottingham, pennsylvania on the democrats line. caller: good morning. i would like to add to the fact that people are getting pretty well hung up on the issues of democrats and republicans and independents and so forth, but they have to look at the big picture at this point. we are facing something very different this time. i have been a republican practically my whole life, but i have switched to democrat ever

since donald trump has come along. i think what we are looking at at this point, they have put a plan together, the republicans, since donald trump was in office in 2020. since he lost the election in 2020. they have been working on this project 2025. it is very involved, it is serious, and they really plan to use it. it is really going to affect the american people. one of the things i don't think a lot of people are looking at is, if they do away with social security and medicare there will be a lot of people, the elderly, losing family members because they cannot afford to stay in their own homes. how many people backing trump, willing to vote for trump, are willing to take family members because they won't be able to afford to stay in their own homes?

are they willing to take care of them? they don't have the medical expense to be able to afford their medical treatments and so forth that they need to take care of themselves? these people are all excited about trump and voting for him. are they looking at how this will affect them personally? not just the political part of it, but how this will affect them in their own household? host: let's hear from renee in florida on the republican line. good morning. caller: hello. thank you for taking my call. i am a first time caller. i try to watch her show every morning, because i like to get opinions from all sides. democracy to me is the ability to take everyone from different points of view, different

circumstances, and have a conversation. i'm worried about this cycle. there is so much disinformation out there. the trump supporters believe every single word he says. with regard to the economy, the president does not control gasoline prices. the president does not control the cost of bread or what a restaurant costs. that is from having to raise minimum wage. those companies will not eat that from the prophet. they will raise the prices. everyone who wanted a higher minimum wage, this is what happens. as employees get paid more, those companies will roll that cost over to the customer. that is what's going on. the housing, the rent, those

landlords went for a year or year and a half without payment. they have to make up that cost somewhere. i wish everyone would look at all sides. i will vote for harris, because trump is such a danger. he's going to turn this country into a dictatorship. we already fought that during the revolutionary war. we don't need to do it again. host: you're calling in on the republican line? caller: yes. host: did you previously support former president trump? caller: i never did. i will tell you why. i am a republican at heart, but trump and maga is not a republican. he was a democrat all the way up .

he donated to hillary clinton's campaign. he was a democrat until he saw he could go in and destroy the republicans. that is what he did. i don't think he really wanted that first time. i don't think he really wanted it. i think he was doing it to clear the road for hillary clinton. what happened was everyone gravitated to him. now, it is all about power. i don't want to go back to a time where my friend who was african-american, i can't sit with her side-by-side at a restaurant. i don't want to go back to the time where i am a female, i would be expected to get married and have babies and not have a career. i don't want to go back to that. there are so many things that were fought for years to get what we have now. trump, i am not a trump

supporter. i am a republican. i believe the core values of reagan, of lincoln as the previous caller said, and i like the fact that he said if you do away with social security what about the seniors? are their children going to be able to take care of them? no. one other thing. my daughter is a service woman stationed in germany. she does not have children. she is married. you know what she told me? she said, i don't want to have children because i don't want to share my money. this was a few years ago. i said, i am so proud you are saying that, because i know that you realize when you become a parent you have no money. all of your money goes to your kids. everything goes to your kids.

i would rather her decide that she doesn't want children than to have them and not be able to care for them. i think that just because you are a woman doesn't mean you need to have a child. you could be a woman who has a career. you could be a woman who just doesn't want children, and that is ok. host: renee in florida, first time caller. always appreciate hearing from those. jim, new jersey, democrats line. thiswill be our last call . caller: i have been a democrat for almost 50 years. i am 75 years old. i am biracial. i grew up in the 1950's and 1960's and i wasn't in the greatest neighborhood. everything was pretty diverse and nobody had much. right now, democrats are saying

democracy is threatened. they have a candidate who compares socialism to being neighborly. you have trump, who i would never vote for, but i will tell you he keeps on saying they weaponized the justice department against him. i was reading an article online where after criticizing harris, the congresswoman -- the congresswoman from hawaii, tulsi gabbard, they put her on the watch list? admin mean socko is really the

threat to democracy? who we vote for candidate in the primary and basically through a coup, they pushed him aside, put somebody else in his place. host: did you vote for biden in the new jersey primary? paul: he was unopposed, so it didn't matter if i voted for him or not. i didn't really care for him, but he was the candidate, so i voted for him. host: that was jim in new jersey. that does it for our open forum in the first part of our show. but next, axios energy reporter ben-gvir men -- ben geman will join us and discuss energy and environmental policy in 2025. later, the vice president for international engagement paul salem is going to discuss his substack newsletter "thinking middle east," end of the current situation in

the region. we will be right back. ♪ >> i shall resign the presidency to like dino's food mart. vice president ford who as president at that hour in this office. president richard nixon resigned today to mark the 50th anniversary, american history tv will air 24 hours of coverage focusing on the president, the watergate scandal, and the nixon administration including a discussion on the judiciary committee impeachment investigation at 12:40 5 p.m. eastern and at 3:30 p.m. eastern the july 8, 1970 four supreme court oral arguments in the case of the u.s. versus nixon focusing on president nixon's use of executive privilege and at 6:30 eastern nixon's farewell

to white house staff. at eight: 30 p.m. eastern nixon's resignation address to the nation. throughout the day see discussions on nixon's legacy, newsreel footage from the white house, interviews with nixon administration staffers, and those that serve don't work in congress at the time. watch all day, today, at 8:00 a.m. eastern on american history tv on c-span two. >> book tv. every sunday on c-span featuring leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books. we mark the 50th anniversary of president richard nixon's resignation from office with a three office conversations on the 37th president. at 6:15 eastern garrett graham provides a comprehensive history of the watergate scandal from the 1970 two break in at dnc

letters to president nixon's resignation two years later. up at 7:15 p.m. eastern former washington post reporter michael dobbs with his book king richard focusing on the nixon administration's reaction during the 100 days after the watergate break-in. and, former advisor to president richard nixon and ronald reagan takes a behind-the-scenes look at their administration. book tv every sunday on c-span2. find a full schedule on your program guide or watching a time at book tv.org. >> the house will be in order. >> this year c-span celebrates 45 years of covering congress like no other. since 1979, your primary source for capitol hill providing balanced, unfiltered coverage of government taking you to work policy is debated and decided

all with the support of america's cable company. c-span, 45 years and counting powered by cable. >> "washington journal" continues. host: welcome back. js is axios energy reporter ben geman. guest: thank you for having me on. host: there is a newly minted democratic ticket, vice president and governor tim walz, their campaign has not emphasized climate and energy policy act. so let's talk about their previous positions and actions. what can you tell lies about? that has been a lot in about her edition on fracking.

that is exactly right. guest: she has not been at the saving energy and climate topics yet, but as the campaign doesn't fold! you're trying to save would have been which was passage of this very large climate change legislation. the piece of legislation that very much relies on parents, gnostics -- carrots and not sticks. for consumers to get rebates and tax credits on buying less polluting types of everything from home appliances to whom heating systems to electric vehicles. when vice president kamala harris was running for president the first time you turn 18, she took a lot of positions that we will see republicans emphasized that she has since either walk back or stop talking about but they will be trying to remind voters of these.

. the most prominent of these was the fact that she is being forced the idea of banning fracking when she was a candidate in 2019. for those who may not know, many do, fracking is an oil and natural gas extraction method that has u.s. production starting 60-ish years ago and that is why the u.s. was not just one natural gas producer. harris called for banning fracking. she also endorsed what is called the green new deal. she cosponsored the senate was a on the topic. the question is, will see if the size of biden-harris records, for she be successful in rebutting republicans raising the idea that she would seek to return to the reiteration of self. host: and vice president harris [laughter]

running mate, governor tim walz also has a record. he sent some state legislation last year. what can you tell us about that? guest: that's right. as governor of minnesota, he said legislation that would require 100% of the state's electricity to come from zero carbon sources by 2040. he has also done things around trying to read -- speed up permitting a renewable energy infrastructure and increase versus is mass transit and low carbon transportation. i think that will come up and we will come up and be reminded of his vote for 2009 legislation when he was a member of congress, for a cap entry system, something -- it cap and trade system, something that fell out of favors. those things will come up. one thing that is interesting to me, that this a moment ago, in

these early days of the harris-walz campaign, they have not been emphasizing climate change and energy. it's interesting because for a long time, there has been a hope in the climate community, broadly defined, i suppose, that this will become a very salient topic. in limited ways, it has, but generally speaking, if you ask people point-blank, "do you want the government to do more about climate change, do you want companies to be more aggressive about climate change?" typically democrats will answer in the affirmative more than republicans, but really, there is broad support for that idea. however, if you ask people in an open-ended way, what are your top priorities, climate change does not make it high on the list. it's the things you would guess -- inflation, jobs, health costs, inflation. is a result, it is perhaps not surprising that energy and

climate change, especially climate change, have not been a major emphasis for this embryonic harris-walz campaign because polling suggests it's not the most politically salient topic. host: and former president trump, we know he served in office. remind us of his highlights in terms of energy doing his time in office, and what he said, positions he may have if you were to return to office -- if he were to return to office. guest: the most high-profile thing is he withdrew the united states from that power is climate change agreement. generally speaking, former president trump has been someone who questions the science behind climate change, despite the overwhelming scientific consensus that there is a human-cause climate change. now is there a consensus on what policies should flow from that? no, but the existence of it is not disputed.

he is someone who is very much in favor of less regulation on extractive and carbon in meeting industries and be much more sort of putting back the u.s. on the diplomatic stage. and if you were -- he was to be reelected, he has been clear about the fact that he thinks climate change policies on fossil fuels are economically dangerous. one example would be the biden-harris administration putting a pause on approving new liquefied gas exports. u.s. lng exports are already the largest in the world, and that will continue to grow based on projects that have already been approved. that said, there is a lot of criticism on the pause, the idea that it would signal to allies that we wouldn't be a reliable partner in the long-term. he is also allowing to repeal the biden-harris administration regulations on electric vehicles , and generally speaking, go

back on what he sees as overly aggressive regulation of the fossil fuel industry. host: we are talking with axios energy reporter benjamin -- ben engagement about issues involving campaign2024. if you have a question or comment, you can start calling now, for republicans, 202-748-8001. democrats 202-748-8921. ,independents, 202-748-8002. for issues like the economy, effective right those have been at the top of voters -- what role is energy and climate issue is going to the plate on the campaign? guest: it will play a visible but perhaps slightly direct role so that it will depend on whether we're talking about the republicans are the democrats. if i had to predict, i think

they will be very much stitching energy and climate change into a wider economic message, the idea that through the 2022 inflation reduction act and the 2021 bipartisan infrastructure law and other policies, that these are aimed at helping summers more affordably use attractive technologies, and equally importantly to that economic message, it is the idea that this legislation is not just climate policy, it is really a domestic industrial -- domestic manufacturing policy, and that is why we have this unprecedented federal subsidies and incentives for manufacturing battery components or solar power components. so their message is really going to be that there climate change policy is a way to better position the united states to lean on these emerging technologies and these emerging energy and climate technology industries. the republican view of this is that while, this is too

expensive. the total bill for the climate section and the energy section of the official reduction act, there is no fixed cost, but estimates range from $400 billion over a decade or more to the north of a trillion dollars. so their arguments are one, that this is too much spending. two,, that you often hear the idea that we shouldn't for winners and losers in the marketplace. they feel that this is putting too much on the thumb of the scale for low-carbon energy. and they feel like the biden-harris administration is paring those big new subsidies with undue restrictions on fossil fuels. they have taken several steps that people if you are sowing the seeds for insufficient investment in these fuels down the line. for example, the biden-harris

administration has really pulled back on offering offshore. -- offshore areas for drilling. so what if anything is not necessarily the concern that they will throttle current production, because that has obviously still been growing, but that their policies would sow the seeds for the u.s. to be in a weakened or not advantageous position in these areas that are a source of economic strength for the country, and as we see with lng exports to europe, a source of politico power as well. host: let's build nadia: to the discussion started with deborah in west chester, ohio, pounding on the republican line. good. caller: thank you for taking my call. two points, and i think you just mentioned geopolitical. it is critical from a geopolitical standpoint that the

united states and other nations in the united states -- in the world to look at the main source, because what that does is deny countries that are adversaries, like russia and iran, denies them the money that they need to continue with wars, et cetera. from a geopolitical standpoint, my point of view. now, from an energy and environmental standpoint, i am a conservationist. co2 is important. but -- i am not a climate scientist, but we have a nasa engineer in our family. there are so many things about our planet's relationship to the sun that we can exchange. and rather than focusing -- that we cannot change, rather than focusing on climate, we should be focusing on conservation. for example, everybody was so excited about the northern lights, that was a geomagnetic storm from the sun due to the

split from the north of the stock flow that caused the northern lights. when it hits the oxygen, when the solar particles hit oxygen, it causes the nitrogen, the right colors, the blue. we can't change that. we will not change our orbital patterns. people are not informed about basic planetary science. and you have to remember, years ago, people thought the earth was flat and people were put to death if they didn't believe earth was the center of the universe. it is not science to say human-cost climate change. host: let's get the answer from our guest? guest: on the first point, on the question of u.s. energy dominance, the term that former president trump uses a lot, i

think they geopolitical angle of this that deborah mentioned is really interesting because there are two sides to this cori. it is true that the u.s. has become the world's largest liquefied natural gas exporter and the skill of our domestic oil production, even if most of it is used domestically, although we are increasingly exporting crude oil, as well, provide to the u.s. and some insulation against energy shocks in our perhaps we didn't have before this huge domestic oil boom, as it gives us more leverage with both allies and adversaries alike. i think the caller mentioned this, it becomes much more politically palatable and possible to do things like put sanctions on iranian oil when the u.s. is producing so much because the goal with that is to try and curtail the power of these large petro state without raising crises in ways that

would harm the economy and be logically unacceptable in the united states. so the domestic energy boom has created that leverage. but there is another side of this coin, which is, if you look at the industries that are increasingly mature today and certainly going to be the industries of the future, it is also advantageous -- there is a view especially among them and to some extent, both parties -- that the united states also be positioned for if not dominance, to be competitive there. right now, china, obviously a huge rival, dominates industries like electric vehicle production, the mining and processing of critical materials used in batteries, dominates solar panel production and so i think one of the theories of the case behind both the inflation reduction act, and related policies, is that we need to

position the u.s. to be just as in these emerging industries of the future as the u.s. has become in terms of these in the and legacy energy sources which will also be around a long time. there is debate around when global oil demand is going to peak. some people think as soon as the end of this decade. some people think that until 2040 or later, but where there is agreement is that even if this peak or to a car on the sooner and that spectrum -- -- sooner ended -- and end of that spectrum, it would not be an immediate but a slow decline. ,her knowledge of the atmospheric physics of this far exceed mine, so i will not way in there, but the scientific consensus of the existing of dangerous, human-caused climate

change is rocksolid. the policies and how to address it, how to weigh different types of economic and developing-country needs, there are billions of people in the developing world who are seeking the same standards of living we have to get how you balance these things is a very question. but the existence of human-caused climate change, there is consensus. host: let's hear from tad in new hampshire on the democrats line good morning. caller: good morning. i am concerned. i know that they talk about electric cars. we had this solar eclipse and it -- -- was like 25 miles of cars, bumper-to-bumper, with no chance of getting charged. i am concerned about the electric cars. but i am more concerned about the batteries of these cars. junkyards will not take them.

they also ignite and cause a garage fire is. another concern is nuclear. we have the waste from nuclear plants. what will happen with these batteries that can't be recycled? that is a major concern of mine. why not use the ocean also to create some energy to create the tide which goes in and out every few hours and he can put a generator that could help power along the east coast? that is my main concern. guest: thank you. yeah. let's take these in order. all great questions. on the concerns about the power system, addition of electric vehicles, certainly, that is

right now one thing a lot of utilities, power companies, state and local regulators are all trying to figure out, is how do we best deal with the increased electricity demand that will come from electric vehicles. in the grand scheme of u.s. electricity demand, it's not yet and will never become necessarily a gigantic or dominant drop. but in very localized ways, it can put new demands on the power system. how to accommodate that is very much on people's radar. the point about challenges with ev batteries, no technology is perfect. when we see power outages, gasoline stations can't operate either because their systems, while providing gasoline, nevertheless, the pumps run on electricity. certainly, when there is widespread power outages or

challenges to the grid, electric vehicles are affected. now there is a lot of interest in something called, p perhaps i've seen at the electric f-150, the idea of what is called vehicle to grid, or vehicle to hold the ability where batteries that electric vehicles when plugged in can fill in the other direction and provide electricity to people's homes and also back to the great at times. couple of other things, with nuclear power, that is one area where you see more bipartisan support. aside from a couple of exceptions, we just had very new reactors, line in georgia, it's been decades since the u.s. built new reactors. one, there is a lot of interest in emerging technologies. you hear about small modular nuclear reactors, ways -- more consistency to the design of reactors so that they are not

all of these one-off engineering nightmares and that will lower the cost. there is also i think, because it u.s. electricity demand have been pretty static for the last 15 or so years, now it is really starting to spike again. one is electric vehicles. another is that we are starting to see more manufacturing in the united states at again, whether it is for cleaner technologies, semiconductor chips, and that is a big draw on the power system. another big source of power demand is artificial intelligence, training large language model for generative ai south and then using them, is a very power-thirsty, electricity-thirsty thing, so there is interest in building data centers and the huge policy question right now is how do we meet the growing needs for electricity demand without prolonging the life of some of

the more polluting sources of energy? so i think natural gas producers will see an upside to the growth of data centers, increasing need for data centers. but renewable companies, as well as small modular reactor companies. i had a conversation with the executive of one of these companies who was telling me that this is a big potential market for them, artificial intelligence. how to meet these power demands, i think, will be an emerging question for policymakers, both at the local, state, and national levels. i like the point of question wave energy. it hasn't gotten a lot of traction yet, it is nowhere near the scale of wind and solar which is now commercially a large and mature technology, i am not an expert in this, but i know there have been experiments are the pacific northwest coast in ways to use tidal energy -- and i believe there have been some in new york state as well

-- about how to use tidal energy to power the grid. whether they will become a meaningful source of energy in the u.s., i don't know, but it is something people have been exploring for some time. host: let's hear from cy, in new york on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. i have a question about the tires on the electric vehicles. my understanding is that the batteries you weigh a thousand pounds or more, they may be last eight years, but the tires wear out prematurely and cause hundreds of tons of particulates in the air. they are actually more polluting the energy they say in terms of hydrocarbons. how is this being addressed?

i would hate to drive a car and all of these particles will in the air to everybody and they are actually carcinogenic. guest: yes. i think he trailed off a little bit, but i got the guts of the question. when i am writing about these technologies, often put the term "clean energy" because there are always impacts the technology. cool but not being the most carbon a meeting, but also oil and natural gas, the effect of that is not only carbon emissions, but also quoted" traditional forms of air pollution, smog-forming compounds. but it doesn't mean that all replacements may -- while

they may be less carbon the meeting, they are also not spewing these types air pollutants. causing cardiovascular problems. it's not a free lunch. certainly there is a lot of concern around that impact of mining cobalt and lithium and other materials needed in the electric vehicle batteries. something on people's radar as well. it's also been linked in certain places to human rights abuses. his point on the tires, this is a thing. ev batteries weigh a lot. electric vehicles are very heavy and that does create more wear and tear on the tires. if you look at the broad aggregate a question, does this make electric vehicles less polluting?

certainly carbon emissions related to electric vehicles will be lower, almost no matter what power grid you are drawing from, certainly if you are drawing from a cleaner power grid. but even if you are drawing from the more carbon-heavy power grids, it shakes out to be more carbon-friendly even in the circumstances. in terms of the tires, i believe some tire companies are starting to make products that are more oriented towards these heavier electric vehicles. i think both the last two callers mentioned recycling and that is a great theory of interest, what do we do with electric vehicle batteries when they are at the end of their life within the vehicle itself. there are several domestic companies that are trying to plan the recycling of these batteries and try to get the raw materials out of them in order to reuse them. there is also some thought that when batteries are no longer at the performance level for use in an electric vehicle, they can still have some stationary power generation applications as well.

host: a question for you, remind our viewers of president harris's record on climate energy when she was interested in it. she\ -- the that green new deal. guest: absolutely right. the green new deal was a resolution that sort of tried to have the climate topic cut across a much broader swath of dishes. this idea that you are going to marry aggressive regulation of greenhouse gases with things like job guarantees, very strong health care provisions. this idea that in the course of fighting climate change, you would also reorient the u.s. economy in several other ways and alter and expand our social safety net in different ways. this has been something that has been criticized because it is

this idea that people looking to fight climate change are also looking, to be in certain ways, socialize, or certainly have a heavier state hand in large sectors of how our economy and health care and other systems work. remember, everybody was running to the left in the 2019-2020 period, although she ended her campaign aide 2019. that is something she was a cosponsor of along with other democrats who were running for president at that time. her sort of nascent campaign has not released an energy and climate platform yet. she has said she no longer supports our on fracking -- it ban on fracking. certainly i think you will see in the course of this campaign, republicans reminding folks that she did hold these positions. this is not ancient history, this was only 2019.

and raising the question of, which she seeks to return to these if she were to be elected president? i think you will see that as the harris-walz can pay starts to talk about these topics more, -- campaign starts to talk about these topics more, they will say our posture is implementing the policies we have on the books. remember the inflation reduction act, it's about to turn two years old, and most of the money has not yet been allotted. some of the programs both in that law and in the 2021 infrastructure law are still being rolled out. so i think they will say "we want to continue to implement these laws." one important thing to remember is that the distribution of these resources, the availability of everything from consumer to industry subsidies, to the building cleaner materials, these are flowing to red and blue states i like, to

write and blue congressional alike. so i think you're starting to see the seeds of tensions within the republican ranks if trump were to be reelected, right, because it is one thing to oppose the green new deal and oppose the inflation reduction act in principle. it's another if you are a member of congress if you are seeing infrastructure projects in your district no longer being supported if the legislation were to be repealed or if the implementation of it were to be significantly pared back. the other day, for example, the energy department's loan programs office announced about $1.5 billion in a preliminary commitment for a very large solar equipment factory in the very conservative part of the state of georgia -- georgia is a purple state, but it was in the district of a very staunchly republican member of congress.

so i think going forward, one thing that would be important to watch if trump is reelected, is what would he seek to do with these existing financial incentives and financial benefits? we know what he would like to do on the regulatory side, but how would he deal with the inflation reduction act, is another question. and then getting back to the harris-walz campaign, again putting on my prediction had here, not what they will exercise our not necessarily -- will they mention regulation, perhaps. but i think they will be big on saying look, this is an economic gain for people living in districts that are represented by republicans, and represented by democrats. it's not a partisan thing. host: thomas in new haven, connecticut on the independent line. good morning. caller: i hope you don't cut me off.

a deal in the world really have peer review articles. i would think -- 90% of what this guy is saying is complete nonsense. i would like to know rocksolid -- science is a political thing. but rocksolid? climate change? it's complete nonsense. listen, you don't have to have a phd in hard-core science. 0.4% of the atmosphere is co2. 0.1% of that is attributed to humans. so please report. i am begging you, do your homework. this is all nonsense. we don't have -- where we can move electrons from one point to

another, in other words, electricity, that -- to the environment. it doesn't exist. it takes more oil to store electricity. this is complete nonsense. host: alright, let's give our guests a chance to respond, thomas. guest: taking you to consider a reverse order, as i was saying before, even with technologies that are cleaner for the environment, and that is cleaner on the more traditional air pollution side, so you think of smog, you think of particulate pollution which embeds itself in people's lungs, these are all things that are associated with coal and oil and to some extent natural gas even if climate change is not a concern. it is, of course a concern. and to continue on that point,

nobody is saying there aren't negative environmental effects of dust in almost any energy technology, right, as we were discussing before certainly, mining of materials associated with ev batteries, even renewable electricity, requires very large amounts of natural resources, a lot of copper is needed and other elements needed. there is no free lunch here. but if you are sort of looking at the broad brush calculation, which of these technologies are cleaner for the environment? i think it generally shakes out on the renewable and on the ev site. but are there trade-offs? sometimes very large trade-offs. are there concerns about biodiversity, for example, with the types of raw material extraction needed for these technologies? 100%. that is worth keeping in mind.

on the question about climate science, i am not a scientist myself, but i have read a lot of peer-reviewed science and what i can say is the consensus is very strong on the existence of human caused climate change. are there still a very small number of dissident scientists or scientists that reject this view? yes, there are. but in terms of the threshold existence of the problem, you can see much division about that. in terms of what the impact would be and how to address them, science is a living thing and there's a lot of disagreement on all sort of topics, especially when looking at 20, 50, 100, 300 years into the future. but in terms of the threshold view that there is human-caused climate change and we are already seeing some fairly

significant harms from it and they would likely worsen in the future, there is widespread agreement in the scientific community on the question. host: sydney in florida, on the democrats line. good morning. caller: good morning. i would like for you to delve into actually what is the cause -- cost of the price, in terms of regulations. i hear a lot of people always talking about i have to have gas from a vehicle, and the price of gas fluctuates. so what is actually the cause? is there a political equivalent, or is there some relative to whether you are a republican or democrat, that has anything to do with the price of petrol? guest: thank you. it's a good question.

a lot of things go into the price of oil, and consequently, the price of oil is the biggest determinant, not the only one, but the biggest of the price of gasoline. it is set for markets. there is very little correlation between an office and what oil prices are because it has to do with so many larger factors. it has to do with the macroeconomic state, with what energy demand is in far-flung places, most notably china which is a huge source of oil demand and demand for oil energies -- for all energies. there's a lot of things affecting the price of gas and oil. certainly there is an impact on inflation. for example, there are different levels of gasoline taxes in different states. people in the oil industry would say that when he had different types of regulation on their

operations, whether that's their upstream -- exploration, production of fossil fuels, or downstream, regulations around refining -- that will have some effect. but i think as we have seen with the price of gasoline, if you map the price of gasoline against who is in office, you didn't see an especially solid relationship there. we are talking about the global macroeconomic effects that are probably the strongest determinant. but you often see higher prices in california. one of the reasons for that is the particular regulatory regime in that state. state policy makers do matter. but i would think that driver is that much broader, national and candidly global economic factors. host: we have a california or for you next, david from los angeles on the independent line. caller: good morning. let me start by addressing one

of your previous callers talking about carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. he mentioned it was 0.2%. that was correct back in the industrial revolution. however, it has increased by 50% since the start of the industrial revolution, which supports the fact that there is a global warming and it is -- has to do largely with human activities such as burning fossil fuels. so the increase is quite significant and it can be measured scientifically. i work in an industry that contributes to global warming unfortunately, however, we have made significant changes, particularly in los angeles, where we have installed systems to neutralize exhaust and it increases emissions by about 90%. that being said, i would also like to talk to you about the ev batteries, the inflation reduction act that joe biden

passed. phase 2a, seven, 80% of minerals being used in ev batteries must be mined and processed in north america -- by 2027. your guests neglected to mention that the fact that charging your battery draws from the grade. but when you install solar panels in your house -- which we did recently, we actually are a net negative here in california. now we don't spend a nickel on gas. we charge our ev in the hospital solar panels restore that energy. and we are using what is called net metering -- i don't know if your gentleman is familiar. it generates so much excess electricity, it can actually been put back to the grade so we

actually received a check for 1000 dollars for the excess energy regenerated. so i would like your guest to comment on that please. guest: so you're neither is spinning backwards and generating some income, some revenue, yeah, i am glad he brought that up. it's a good point. you often hear the term in climate circles, the idea of electrify everything. it's not just electric vehicles, it is electric appliances, electrified homes and possibly even via solar panels. so i suppose for a lot of people, a very ideal circumstance, certainly for the color it sounds like it has worked out very well, is to have not already that electrified vehicle, but have the source of that electricity not only clean and renewable, but on site as well. one thing you see you are interested in. solar storage facilities --

solar plus storage installations where you have both the panels, but you also have an on-site battery. also the idea that perhaps your electric vehicle battery could provide home power at times as well. i am glad the caller brought that up, it's an important part of the emerging energy system of the future, these systems singing in harmony with one another. host: our guest, ben geman is an axios energy reporter and also author of the daily actually is generating newsletter. deep inside his work online at backsies.com and on x, @axios. thank you. guest: thank you really enjoyed it. host: next is now spotlight on substack. we talk to the middle east institute vice president of international engagement paul salem about his newsletter

"thinking middle east," ,and the current situation in the region. we will be right back.. ♪ >> next up for c-span's coverage of this summer's political party conventions, we had to chicago for the democratic national convention. watch live beginning monday, august 19 as the party puts forth their presidential nominee. hear leaders talk about the administration's track record and their vision for the next four years as they fight to retain the white house. the dnc, my monday, august 19 on c-span, spend now, or online at c-span.org. don't miss a moment. visit our website for the latest updates and to watchful coverage of the 2024 republican national convention. you can also catch up on past conventions anytime on demand at c-span.org/kim, or by scanning the court -- c-span.org/, or by

scanning the code. caller: on saturday, august 24, book tv takes you to the washington convention center from what annual coverage of the library of congress's national book festival. since 2001 we have featured hundreds of talks at the festival, with this year's guests including the librarian of congress carla hayden, bullets or prizewinners, and others. the library of congress's national book festival, saturday, august 24 beginning at 9:00 a.m. eastern on tian tian -- on c-span2. ♪ [gavel bangs] >> >> the house will be in order. announcer: this year sees. celebrate 25 years of covering commerce like no other. in his 1979, we have been your primary source on capitol hill,

providing balanced unfiltered , coverage of government, taking you to where policy is debated, and decided, all with the support of america's cable companies. c-span, 45 years and counting. powered by cable. ♪ washington journal continues. host: welcome back. joining us for our spotlight on substack's segment is paul salem, president of engagement at the middle east is to do the program. guest: thank you for having me. host: you are the author of the substack "thinking middle east." tennessee why you started it, and your background working in that region. guest: i spent a career working in the region and on the region. i have been writing on the region for a long time. as you said, i was the president and coo of the middle east institute for six years until i set -- stepped down in june

to go back to the middle east. i am based in beirut although today i am in new york for a visit. i write a lot in the press and the middle eastern press and on our middle east city's website. i also started that substack for people who really wanted more frequent thoughts and contributions, things i wanted to post but aren't necessarily on the national website or the original website, michael and thoughts about what is happening in the region, also puts them -- my own thoughts about what is happening in the region, i also put them on the substack. nice to know there is an audience there. host: obviously a lot to talk about when talking about the release. what kind of issues does your substack look at, what do you focus on? guest: i try to look beyond the headlines over these days it is very hard, and to try to look at

deeper dynamics in the middle east and north africa, things about political stability, political change, economic and military and issue that is why i called it "thinking middle east," try to look for it. but i must say, since october and all the events that have been happening between israel and hamas in gaza and then spreading around the region, been focused on the dangerous headlines. host: you should read "thinking -- who should read "thinking middle east," and why should anybody subscribe? guest: i think it is private to a number of audiences, obviously policymakers, people have to think about the middle east while living, journalists who are trying to understand the region. students who are trying to understand the region, as well, and the general public who is trying to get a better understanding of what they see

in the headlines and they have been seeing for many, many years. i also directed to the region, to the middle east, east, who themselves are trying to get a better handle on what is happening in the region. host: and how often are you releasing new content? and let people know where they can find your work. guest: i try to release -- it's not an ironclad schedule, but every two weeks, i tried to release something. the easiest way to find it is to put "substack thinking middle east" in google and you will immediately find it. host: you were talking about the fact that you try to go beyond the headlines, but, like you just said, that can be very challenging right now. when we look at the latest on the ease, how would you summarize the situation, where you -- the israel-hamas war? guest: year in a very dangerous

situation. potentially on the brink of a major escalation into regional more that involves israel, hezbollah, iran and the houthis of young men and militias of iraq and syria and will almost necessarily involve the u.s. military. that is a dangerous moment we are at. do you administration is trying frankly to headed off -- to head off that potential escalation and has called all parties to the meeting on the 15th, which is a couple of days away, to try to get a cease-fire in gaza, hoping that a cease-fire in gaza will defuse the other fronts with iran and the others. but it is a race against time. host: we are talking with the vice president for international engagement at the middle east institute, paul salem, also author of the substack newsletter "thinking middle

east." if you have a question or comment about either of those issues, you can start calling in now. the lines for republicans 202-748-8001. , democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. paul, one of the concerns is an iranian attack on israel. there was one overnight, there was an israeli strike on gaza. what do we know about the attacks that could be coming, what they could look like, and their target? guest: that is the worry currently. last week israel, as is well known, attacked one of the military leaders of hezbollah in the lebanese capital of beirut. hezbollah is approximately shot, or allied with iran. a few hours later there they

detonated a bomb in tehran which killed ismail haniyeh yet, the head of hamas, in the iranian capital. they didn't claim responsibility for the attack in iran, but according to the media, they told americans that it was them. so we are at this moment now where both iran, which feels that it was attacked in its capital, and hezbollah, the very powerful militia i to iran in lebanon, are coordinating potentially play counter strike on israel. israel is bracing for that. the u.s. has sent forces into the region, partly to deter turkey run and its proxy militias from retaliating, but at the same time, to engage with israel if an attack were to happen -- to deter iran and its proxy militias from retaliating, but at the same time, to engage with is really for the top were to happen.

host: we will hear from our first caller, bob. caller: thank you. i think hamas is doing more harm than good. they should surrender and leave the gaza strip. you can be anti-israel, but you should also be anti-hamas, to help the palestinian people. guest: yeah. if i were to comment on that, i think hamas, obviously the attacks of october 7 go well beyond any military targets, attacking civilians, atrocities, horrific attacks on october 7 on israeli military and civilians. but also it brought on a massive counterattack from israel on their own palestinian civilians in gaza and i know there are a lot of palestinians were very, very furious that i am asking for what it has done and putting

palestinians, and dare i say israelis, in a very difficult situation. there is also fury at the israelis, at the extent of their counterattack and how it has affected civilians. a very, very difficult situation indeed. host: bryant in massachusetts on the independent line, good morning. caller: good morning. i was wondering if your guests could speak to netanyahu's association with the far-right, how he seems to be pushing our interests, how he seems to be disconnected from our interests, and wanting to put us into a war. guest: i mean, that has been an issue of great division inside israel, and an issue of great division between the u.s. administration and the netanyahu government. indeed this government is the most right wing government in israel's entire modern history

and it involves a number of ministers who outright are sort of wanting to do ethnic cleansing, wanting to take over what is left of the west bank, who want to push palestinians completely out of gaza, some who wants to resettle gaza. they are also very illiberal forces inside of israel itself wanting to weaken the rule of law and the court in israel. before october 7, israel was in the midst of some of its largest interloper tests at, again, in its modern history, so deep divisions there. and let the devil has been clinging to this far-right -- netanyahu has been clinging to this far-right alliance because if he leaves his allies, his government will fall and premised netanyahu will have to either face another election, or face legal consequences for accusations of corruption that are in the israeli courts.

so a position in which these extreme right-wingers are holding a lot of sway. in regards to the u.s., it has been clear that while the biden administration support israel's right to defend itself after the attacks of october 7 and has been supplying his with military support throughout this period, divided administration has been stymied in its plan first of all, to bring this war in gaza till negotiated an to speed up the release of israeli and american hostages in gaza, to arrange a postwar governance and reconstruction plan for gaza, as well as to revive a pathway towards a two-state solution. prime minister netanyahu has pretty much opposed all of those american steps throughout this period. and i think he felt very empowered when he came a couple of weeks ago to the u.s. and address the u.s. congress, got multiple standing ovations, and i think he feels he can dominate

u.s. foreign policy more than biden can. and i think sadly that is continuing as netanyahu seems more positively oriented and interested in expanding the war to lebanon and maybe around whereas the u.s. definitely does not want that, but it doesn't seem able to get its way. post from bob from oklahoma on the democrats line. good morning. caller: good morning. i would just like to say in reference to the framework of your question, i don't think fate has a lot to do with democracy, regardless of popular opinion. host: we are talking right now with the guest about the situation in the middle east and his substack newsletter that focuses on the middle east. do you have a question or comment about that? caller: yes, i do.

my comment is that obviously, faith and democracy, in terms of religion and how it is all framed up, have little to do with one another. i think diplomacy is what you do if you want democracy around the world. i don't think war is going to bring you democracy. guest: that is an age-old question. how do you bring in the role of faith, religion, politics? the u.s. long ago chose a pathway to separate church and state in terms of the politics. i agree, politics should be about the people, the interests of the people, decisions made in policy in that regard. in the u.s. as well as in many other countries, religion does find a way, for better or for worse, to find a way to get into politics. for israel itself, obviously the

zionist movement going back to the land of israel is very much based in a religious history. for some of the groups on the others, particularly hamas, which is a religious-based organization, in islam, an islamic based organization, for them religion plays a big role as well. that might be why the politics is so difficult. so destructive. two different religious points of view are very hard to reconcile in a negotiated political sense. certainly, very dangerous to have religion draw its politics. host: thomas in north carolina on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. are you hearing me now? host: yes, we hear you. caller: i have both a question and a statement. i studied with noam chomsky at m.i.t. and put me in touch with

the devastation in the nation is per capita. the october 7 is not being framed by the media properly, because they compare it to 9/11 where a few more americans died in 911 then in october 7 in israel. however, with 8 million jews and 320 plus million americans the actual devastation per capita in israel is more than 15, 16, 17 times as horrible as what happened on 9/11. the media refuses to frame it this way. i just wish that someone would point out that there would have to be 17 repetitions of 9/11 against america to be as devastating as october 7 against israel. guest: that is a fact. i agree with it. it was an extremely horrific, devastating attack. the scale of it was particularly

large given the population-size of israel. and, i would say the geographic height and size of israel. the u.s. is an enormous place. 9/11 happened in new york in d.c., but many americans were hundreds of miles away from that. that was not the case in a small country like israel. the large israeli response in gaza, gaza is a very tiny space and you have 2.3 million civilians caught in the middle. a very terrible situation indeed. host: the u.s. is trying to tamp down any expansion. you touched on it earlier. the expansion of the conflict over there. what role does the u.s. play and when prime minister netanyahu is rejecting the biden administration's suggestion? guest: well, i mean the biden administration -- i think it has

been saying the right things about what it wants to get done, but it has been many months now. it's clear that the government, the particular government of prime minister netanyahu and his allies, are not responding to that. i would fault the biden administration for not being more forceful about what it views as u.s. interests and u.s. priorities. after all, it is the superpower. it is the one that's primarily guaranteeing israel security. ve liked to have seen a more forceful, more robust, and more effective u.s. engagement to bring this conflict to an end, bring back the hostages, and move forward to a better situation for palestinians and israelis which has to be moving towards a two-state solution. the u.s. administration has been tagging along. unfortunately, unable to call the shots.

now, what's very dangerous is the u.s. military might be on the brink of getting, unwillingly, engaged in a major war in the middle east potentially with iran, which may impact energy and oil prices, the global economy, the u.s. economy. none of which is of america's choosing. host: talk about the potential factors that could lead to military action. what are you watching for? guest: a couple of things. one is the size and extent of the response from iran, hezbollah, and may be the houthi militias and other ma -- and other militias. they have said all along that they do not want a major war with israel. and the united states. at the same time, they have been engaged in a limited war with israel.

they claim in support of hamas to get a cease fire. even today, the representative and the united nations said that we are eager for israel and hamas to get to a cease-fire agreement. we will consider that a win if that happens. the risk is that their retaliation will be of an extent that pushes the situation into a major retaliation from israel, which might get out of hand. the u.s. might find itself fighting a multi-front war along with israel. the other worry is more direct. there have been voices in israel, the israeli military and israeli political leadership, since october 8 or nine, at least, that israel wants to engage in a major war with hezbollah in lebanon to degrade it, to defeat it. it would certainly need the u.s. defensive support to do that.

they might be intent in launching such a war and has blood in lebanon -- war in lebanon regardless of the retaliation. host: let's hear from maurice in portage, michigan. on the independent line. caller: good morning. i am listening to this gentleman talk about the war in the middle east. i remember that war is the event that happens because diplomacy failed. if diplomacy is failing because these people don't realize that the purpose of war is to win. every time we restricted a government from winning, the war has been lost. to continue despite what

netanyahu has with the people in gaza, it is based on the survival of the country. this b.s. about diplomacy being the answer is silly. all it will do is continue the problem. guest: well, i mean, war is also the continuation of politics by other means, often, as well as it is also often called a failure of diplomacy. i would unpack it a bit. the conflict between israelis, arabs, and palestine has been going on for about a century. since the 1920's. of the last century it has some elements of the civil war. a fight of two people over who

controls the land. who is in charge, who gets what, and all that. the a ructions of conflict between arabs and israelis, or arabs in jews in this land of israel/palestine is a long-standing civil war. on the other hand, you have a war or conflict between israel and iran, which is a completely different thing. that is where you have militias like hezbollah the houthis that are backed by iran and at war with israel. different levels of conflict there are those in israel who believe the internal situation can be resolved through military means, and so on. others believe that the u.s. and ministrations believes that there needs to be some sustainable solution for the

israeli-palestinian conflict. as long as there isn't a sustainable solution radical groups like hamas or iran will take advantage of it causing problems for israel and the palestinians and problems for the region at large. as i said, possibly for the world in terms of the global economy, and so on. it is certainly a crisis of many layers. host: let's hear from jane in illinois on the democrats line. caller: good morning. my question is, what is linkage diplomacy? i heard that term used. does that apply to the middle east? is that going on? as a comment, isn't it really bribery where the united states is in the middle of this and we have to promise to do so much for this side were so much for that side, foreign aid, rebuild

gaza, all that kind of thing? my other comment is, i believe the invasion of ukraine and hamas action of attacking israel is a way to try to influence our elections. what do you think about that? guest: i interesting comments. sometimes linkage diplomacy, the craft of crisis management or conflict resolution, they often say if you're not finding a solution make the pie bigger or expand the scope of what you are doing. in that case, sometimes linkage diplomacy might be something like the following. right now, obviously israel is engaged with the war with hamas in gaza. there are a lot of negotiations about getting a cease-fire and the release of hostages they are, but there is also the

engagement with iran and its proxy. the linkage diplomacy and the u.s. in diplomacy with iran trying to get iran not to retaliate in a major way, to climb down from its position. the u.s. might be offering things to iran in order to, maybe, have a reduction of the implementation of some sanctions or a sweetener that has nothing to do with gaza but may help tamp down this current crisis and avoid a major war. on the second comment of the u.s. getting dragged into these things in terms of war, in terms of aid, that is certainly the case. there are a couple of views about that. one is that the u.s. is the global power. it has invested a lot in being the global power. it does not want china to become the global power in the near future. being the global power and maintaining a presence and influence around the world,

including in the middle east, does come with a cost. it means that you are there. you are involved. sometimes at risk because of security issues. you are asked to be part of the solution. interestingly, china, our main global rival, sits back and watches america get dragged into these conflicts and is very happy not to be dragged in itself. on the other hand, the u.s. is the most powerful player and influential player. that still means a lot in terms of u.s. interests and what the u.s. needs. thanks. host: in virginia on the independent line, good morning, toni. caller: at first i would like to say that as an independent, i see positive and negative on both sides of the aisle. in this case, i think of our forefathers. i think of when they didn't want us involved in all of the old

world scenarios. they wanted us to be free, live the european enlightenment here, right? we seem to be getting involved constantly in empire building. rebuilding gaza, could you get any older than israel and palestine? we are slapping our forefathers in the face. we need to stay out of these global conflicts. we should not be isolationists, but i believe we can influence without sharing technology, without sharing the way we live with other nations if they live differently than we do, where they are warning all the time, killing their neighbors. we tend to do everything by force nowadays as opposed to influence. living well. showing people what it's like to be an american.we have lost our way. i really believe that. i don't think is necessary to go over there and help israel right now. what would happen if the united

states didn't exist? if we have an environment where we have some civil conflict and we cannot afford to help israel, they have to learn to help themselves. although i feel for israel, because it was terrible what happened to them, terrible! i still don't think that it was a sustainable situation where we are constantly helping them. if they need to go out and fight this war and win this war the way they know how, we need to let them do it. guest: what the caller is talking about is a profound element of u.s. history. the founding fathers, their whole point was to get away from the old world and come to a new world, set up a republic that has no entanglements. i think that persisted for a century or a century and a half. then you had the beginning of new thinking after world war i.

the u.s. was dragged into that work or felt like -- into that war were felt like you need to be engaged. after that u.s. went back into isolation hoping that that was a one-off. with the rise of nazi germany, the risk that that seem to oppose for the u.s. itself, the u.s. got engaged again and ended up inheriting sort of an empire after the british empire collapsed. i would say that this has become a very contentious issue in u.s. politics. there is a big stream in the republican party that wants to go back to that. part of the america first idea is that america has to attend to its issues at home first and foremost. if and when it engages in the world it should do so for specific u.s. interests. but there is another view that says that the u.s. cannot afford to retreat from the world, particularly when you have a

rising power like china supported by russia. if they take over the key points around the world that the u.s. now dominates, at the end of the day many people think, and this is a point of contention, that that will obviously impact the lives of americans here who have benefited from the global dominance for the last 70 years. if someone else controlled the sources of energy in the middle east, iran or china controls them, what would that mean for the u.s.? the same for trading routes? the caller points to a very critical issue. i think the last u.s. administration, whether it was president trump the first time, or when president biden ran, they were all saying we should get less involved in the middle east. indeed, the biden administration

withdrew from afghanistan and did not want to get dragged into anymore wars, which is why this current situation we are seeing, the crisis and netanyahu government dragging the u.s. into a war it really doesn't want to be part of his creating this acute crisis. a lot of people in the u.s. i think agree that abandoning the world completely is a bit dangerous, but being this involved is very costly and the american public doesn't want to do it. host: paul, there is a headline from military times a few days ago -- sorry, for military.com. military leaders call for calm even as morehead to the region. if we were to become involved on a military level, do we know what it would look like? guest: i think we do know what it would look like.

part of it was played out in april of this year when iran launched a missile and drone attack on israel. launched about 300 missiles and drones. the u.s. military in the region participated, along with israelis and other partners in the middle east, in shooting down those missiles and drones. at least most of them, before they were able to do damage. certainly, if the attack from iran and its allies is repeated at a larger scale, the u.s. will be involved in the antimissile and anti-drone defense of israel, no doubt. another aspect of the conflict has already also developed. enron's allies in the region, as they had early on in the gaza conflict, have been targeting u.s. military posts, u.s. positions and assets in the region, and injuring american servicemen and women. that could escalate in a major way.

those are, at least things that are pretty obvious. if the escalation between israel and iran directly escalates to a high level, it might be possible that the u.s. military assets, not only in the mediterranean but also in the persian gulf, might get involved in something which might end up escalating into direct war with iran. which is something that multiple u.s. administrations have been trying to avoid. host: connecticut on the democrats line. good morning, philip. caller: how are you? this is a long story that goes historically back to many years to address here, but i'm very happy to hear mr. salem state that we are being dragged by israel into an unnecessary expansion of war. mr. netanyahu, in my humble

opinion, wants nothing more than continue and expand the war. we are seeing a genocide, actively in my humble opinion, occurring in the west bank in gaza. yet, the world, particularly the united states, continues to aid and abet this genocide. this has been going on prior to -- which we all have a consensus on, the october 7 was horrendous. that was a terrorist act. that was inhumane. talking about inhumanity, the treatment of the palestinians. many literal decades of no civil rights, no human rights, and so on. land theft continuously and daily. again, you cannot justify a terrorist attack. you cannot justify a genocide. the united states needs to step

up, literally, in my humble opinion, even though it's a very complex situation in the middle east, and look at netanyahu and israel and say, if you do not sit down in good faith along with the other partners, such as hamas, and work out a fair cease-fire and save over 40,000 deaths in palestine, majority being women and children, then i think we are going to lose. diplomacy or otherwise. thank you so much for listening. guest: that was a very heartfelt statement. i agree with the caller. obviously, the october 7 attack was horrendous, horrific in all measures. israel had a right to defend itself against hamas. but he didn't have a right to devastate an entire civilian population of 2.3 million.

the 40,000 deaths are the ones that we know about. the death toll is probably considerably higher than that. that is not to speak of the at least 100,000 or more injured or traumatized, an entire population displaced, and so on. also, not leading to any solution or any endpoint to this century-old civil war, effectively, between roughly 7 million jews and 7 million arabs about how to live in this small piece of land. all we've gotten is more extremists on both sides. that is not going to entrance a solution. the u.s. definitely needs to step up more. i think, maybe the advantage we might have in the years ahead is that that leaves most of the arab companies have indicated they want to live in peace with israel.

they want to normalize relations. some have already done that. they are willing to be a guarantor and partner to build a more peaceful middle east where israelis and jews can live in peace and security, and also palestinian arabs can live in dignity and peace and security. that is the only way that israelis will have a bright future in the middle east or the world and the only way that palestinians and the region itself can be at peace. it is achievable. it is attainable. we need to get to that table and get progress made. host: yvette in columbus, ohio on the democrats line. good morning. caller: good morning. i love this conversation, but i want to go back to the previous caller about 10 minutes ago who gave a comparison to what happened in israel in comparison to what happened in the united

states, september 11. i know you guys made a comparison to say on scale one was greater. that's an issue to me. when we are talking about the devastation and the murder of innocent lives in gaza, it is impactful. when we start to have that political rhetoric as to which one was greater, you lose --. host: we are losing your call. caller: can you hear me now? host: yes. caller: then, we lose the opportunity for consensus. what happened to hamas and what happened in israel -- then the caller comes and says basically what happened in israel was greater than what happened in the united states. tell that to the peoples'

families who died september 11. it doesn't make a difference. if we are going to build consensus around the subjects, especially in the united states as our country continues to pursue to be the world leader, we have to change our dialogue. we have to change the rhetoric. it doesn't make a difference which one was greater on scale. host: we are running out of time. we will get a response from paul. guest: i think that there's a lot to that. it's not a matter of counting how many people were killed here or there. both acts were unacceptable, extremely brutal, targeting civilians. i agree that it's not a matter of who got hurt more. maybe it is indicative of israelis to communicate to americans how traumatized they were on october 7, and that is legitimate and understandable. at the same time, to understand how traumatized palestinian civilians are, those who are

still alive. the point being, for people engaged in policy, i write about policy, we are looking for a solution, for a way forward and a way out. thoughtful palestinians, thoughtful arabs, thoughtful israelis say that the solution is there, it is visible, it's to move toward the two state solution with international guarantees and with integration into this new middle east, which wants to live in peace. it is obtainable, it is achievable, but you have to silence the extremists on both sides and put in the diplomatic heavy lifting that needs to be done to finally get to a solution so that nobody suffers these horrific thomas on either side. -- horrific traumas on either side. host: one more call. good morning, anne. caller: thank you very much. i believe that i heard leon panetta say yesterday, maybe i

am wrong, you could tell me if i'm right or not, that israel is now part of the u.s. central command. is that correct? what would that mean? does that mean u.s. soldiers, not just equipment, would have to go and fight if israel goes to war with iran, hezbollah, or lebanon? guest: no, that is not what it means. thank you for the question. the u.s. military organizes the globe into different commands, different areas of operation. the middle east area of operation is called central command, because it is not eastern asia or western europe. for many years israel was part of the european command. the arab countries were part of

the central command. a number of years ago, not this year, israel as an area of operation was moved to central command, which involves saudi arabia, egypt, and many other countries in the region. it is a technical military management issue. it has no bearing on whether the u.s. goes to war with israel were not. it's just an organizational issue for the u.s. military. the u.s. engagement, alongside israel, is really related to the u.s.'s long-standing political support for israel and america's general commitment to israel's security, which applied even before israel technically entered what is called central command. host: our guest, paul salem at the middle east institute and author of the substack newsletter "thinking middle east".

you can find his work online at paulsalem.substack.com. thank you for being with us. guest: thank you for having me, and thank you to the callers and listeners. host: we will be back tomorrow morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern, 4:00 a.m. pacific for another addition. enjoy the rest of your saturday. ♪ >> c-span's "washington journal," our form involving you to discuss the latest issues in government, politics, and public

policy. from washington and across the country. coming up sunday morning, college professor nicholas jacobs, co-author of the book "the rural voter," talks about their role in campaign 2024. an author and coulter joins us to discuss the latest news from the campaign trail and other news of the day. c-span's washington journal. join in the conversation live at 7:00 eastern sunday morning on c-span, c-span now, or online at c-span.org. >> later tonight democratic presidential candidate kamala harris will be joined by her running mate, tim walz, for a rally in las vegas. join us on c-span, on our free mobile video app c-span now, or online at c-span.org. >> book tv.

every sunday on c-span two features leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books. we will mark the 50th anniversary of president richard nixon's resignation with three author conversations at 6:15 p.m. eastern garrett graff, author of the book "watergate: a new history," provides a comprehensive look at the watergate scandal, to president nixon's resignation two years later. then washington post reporter michael dobbs with his book "king richard" focuses on the next administration's reaction. then a former advisor to presidents richard nixon and ronald reagan takes you behind-the-scenes look at their main ministrations. -- administrations. find a full schedule on your program guide, or watch online at any time on booktv.org.

>> the house will be in order. >> issue c-span celebrates 45 years of covering congress like weather. since 1979 we have been your primary source for capitol hill, providing alice, unfiltered coverage of government. taking you to where the policies are debated and decided, all with the support of americans cable companies. c-span. powered by cable. >> the national transportation safety board held an investigative hearing on the january 2020 four midair blow out of an alaska airlines door plug. that incident caused the boeing 737 max 9 aircraft to make an emergency landing. ntsb members questioned boeing and spirit executives on the inspections process of the products before certification for use. this portion of the two-day hearing is about half