companies and more, including buckeye broadband. ♪♪ >> buckeye broadband supports cspan as a public service along with these other television providers giving you a front row seat to democracy. the associated press teaming up with center for research taking a look at this idea of trust in the scientific and medical communities. when the general overall confidence in those communities was taken amongst those who participated, 48% of those saying that they would say that they have a great deal. that's how the poll expresses it in those scientific and medical communities. and 45% saying that they have

only some confidence in that. with very little saying they have hardly any. break it down by bipartisan views. 51% of democrats who were surveyed during that time. 42% of republicans said they had a great deal of confidence in the scientific community in 2018. when you go to 2021, that gap widened significantly to 30 with nearly two-thirds of democrats expressing confidence in those scientific communities compared to one-third of republicans. then taking a look specifically at medicine in that survey. only a little bit 37%, 38% saying they had a great deal of confidence. that's just some of the survey results that were taken by the associated press. this came into play over the last few weeks over the podcaster joe rogan. a group of scientists and medical community people who

sent a letter to the company spotify about mr. rogan's podcast and in that letter they write in part this. throughout the pandemic joe rogan has repeatedly spread misleading and false claims provoking distrust in science and medicine. discouraged vaccination in young children and gene therapy and off-label use to treat covid-19 contrary to fda warnings and conspiracy theories. it goes on from there including the fact that mr. rogan had hosted dr. robert malone who was suspended from twitter for spreading misinformation. you probably saw in the news in the most recent of days mr. rogan apologizing for some of that content, specifically taking a look at the covid and issues related to covid saying he would take a better approach as far as how he chooses guests and those topics, as well. with that in mind, we want to ask you about that confidence

particularly that you might have in the science community, in the medical community and if that confidence has been influenced by any way during the covid-19 pandemic. again, here's how you can let us know your thoughts this morning. if you say those yes, those views have changed, 202-748-8000. if you say no 202-748-8001 and perhaps if you're unsure where you stand 202-748-8003. you can also text us. some people posting on the facebook page saying chris chase from facebook saying, yes, we need more education on science and medicine in schools because clearly so many republicans who doubt science and medical are a product of lack of understanding and science and medicine in our schools and our education system. from michelle killburn from our facebook page saying, no, it has not changed my view of science and medicine and the abysmal

state of u.s. education and the people who follow and mimic demagogues and christina from facebook saying not when it comes to the true facts of science and medicine. i still don't trust the world health organization. the cdc, the government or anyone pretending to have a medical degree. then maryann from facebook saying scared of conclusions that might have a subjective motive. again, facebook is how you can post there if you want to share your thoughts this morning, as well. on our yes line as far as views changing on the science and medical communities because of covid. this is margaret in lebbenworth, kansas. go ahead, tell us how those views have changed. >> caller: hi, good morning. i have 30 years as an rn in this country and i think our education is so behind in

science and it was very abysmal for me to see how dumb people are. i mean, you think our country would be smarter than this. and how somebody politicized an epidemic. that's very, very dangerous. so, i think science and medicine is good, but i think our country should be embarrassed. i think if you took a survey of people, you'd find they're like fourth grade and what their understanding of the human body and how you spread diseases. i mean, it's woeful. people need to get educated. not the internet, but real school. you know. thank you. >> also on our yes line saying those views have changed of the science and medical communities. this is from paul in new albany,

indiana. go ahead. >> caller: well, i think covid-19, i think things have changed for the positive. i see vaccines, we're developing more, we're developing more awareness and i think we need to give a little more time. but it's better than it was two years ago and people are gradually getting better and the word's getting around that vaccines are the way to go. and i do believe in mandates. >> when it comes to the specific changes or at least the changes that you're expressing, as far as vaccine development process or are there other things involved there, too? >> well, i think it's vaccine development but i think if you looked, little children are becoming more aware of the

disease than their parents. that's where the future is. is the youth. >> okay. that's paul there in indiana, telling his thoughts about how thee thinks things have changed or views have changed. when people were surveyed about their own risk to covid and "new york times" survey done of almost 1,500 adults saying and the question was, how worried are you about becoming seriously sick from the coronavirus? 14% of democrats saying very worried, 33% saying somewhat worried, not too worried at all. not at all at 22%. the same question posed to republicans. 6% saying they're very worried about getting sick from coronavirus. 16% saying somewhat. not too worried at 24%. and then not at all at 52%. again, you know, if you want to share your thoughts on your views of science and medicine and if they've changed due to the pandemic, again, you can call us on our yes, no or unsure

lines. jim from wisconsin. also on our yes line. hello, you're next up. >> i should be on the no line. i told the telephone operator that i made a mistake. but i was on the yes line, yes. >> so, you're saying, no your views haven't changed then? >> no, they have changed. >> well, tell us how they've changed. >> i don't like things being mandated from above, way above by the cdc and all that stuff. i think that everything should be done on a person-to-person basis with a doctor and that there shouldn't be any because how can they have any familiarity with what is going on with each individual person when they're mandating and it

doesn't make sense that everything is remote controlled from an outside source. i mean, no medicine has ever been like that that i ever heard of. doctors are supposed to have a high degree of discretion on each individual patient. and all of a sudden they got their hands tied behind their back. i don't understand this. >> so, if you look at the science community in itself, the medical community itself, how much trust do you place with them today? >> well, i don't have any trust in this rna vaccines and dr. malone and all these people. he's the one that came up with the vaccines and he's one of the cheap people that makes it. a 55-year-old hold on medical

information that we can't look into it for 55 years. those clinical trials. it's an experimental vaccine. >> okay. >> i can't understand any of it. >> this is on our yes line. this is cindy in norwalk, connecticut, asking about views on science and medicine if they've changed due to covid. cindy, you're next. hello. >> caller: hi, good morning. i don't think it really helps when people try to say, oh, it's a republican thing, democrat thing or you're stupid and you're not educated. i think it just makes people dig their heels in. the reason why my views have changed is, you know, it's not so much the medicine per se. i feel like most of the medical community do honor their hippocratic oath but there's just a lack of respect for

people who are questioning it. just like people question anything. religion, what have you. i don't feel like, i feel like a lot of it is big pharma pushing it. the whole joe rogan thing. i don't think he did anything wrong. i feel like the squashing of people that are questioning it make people suspicious. >> when you say questioning it, you're saying specifically questioning doctors about covid or medical professionals about covid? that kind of thing? >> you know, i think it's more the institutions. the cdc. i think there's a lot of good doctors that would like to use some of the medications that maybe ivermectin but maybe the

monoclonal antibodies. if you watched joe rogan interview with sanjay gupta, he doesn't always have what some people consider quacks. dr. malone is not a quack. i think we're demonizing, formally respected people in the medical community because they have a different opinion. so, you know, it is right. the emails what fauci showed that they saw this was engineered when he talked to a bunch of scientists when it first came out and he squashed it. but he didn't know that this was possibly an engineered virus. you know, when there are things like that out there, it is going to cause suspicion whether you're educated. i don't care, you could be highly educated and still be a little suspicious. and as far as polio vaccines. >> i'll stop you there because it goes further than what we're talking about. margaret is next up in texas.

she says, no, views haven't changed. margaret, hello. >> no, i haven't changed. i'm a critical thinker which means i believe in science. all of these people around who lived within the results of science and they, like driving their cars, they don't think critically about it. you don't have to, i may be highly educated, but a person doesn't have to be highly educated to be a critical thinker. you can learn it through life experience. and like the first woman that was on, i am shocked by the people who cannot think critically. cannot think reasonably one step at a time on what is going on and how, how medicine has evolved. >> let me ask you this when it comes specifically to covid-related issues. you think critically about the

science. what science do you reference as far as thinking critically. what do you look at yourself? >> well, i believe in the science behind the vaccines. i believe the science behind dr. fauci who's been in it for years and years in this environment. i'm sorry, i didn't hear you. >> it's okay. you answered the question. there's a bit of a delay when you watch on television and everything else. when it comes to the vaccines themselves, news of yesterday saying it is the food and drug administration granting full approval to moderna's coronavirus vaccine. the agency announcing monday that vaccine known as spikevax was previously available under emergency use authorization and get the full fda approval and pfizer and biontech's was approved back in august. the views changed.

alexander in brooklyn said no. alexander, good morning, you're next up. >> caller: good morning. it's pretty sad just listening to some of the callers and their concerns. i guess, you know, just thinking about this as i was waiting i think it's more about what is the reflection of this country. this is a sick country. we have so many people with so many underlying conditions. and, you know, when you think about the way that we eat and the way we live our lives here, there could be hesitation to believe in science and say, well, you know, this vaccine is good for me. it's going to save my life. i spent two years in new york city in the middle of this and i didn't even get sick. and i went one week to arizona. one week and i went to a bar for ten minutes. there were no vaccine signs outside, they didn't even need

vaccine cards or anything. people just walked right in. the bartenders didn't even have masks and i got sick. i'm in the last day of my quarantine in my apartment in new york city. >> when you talk about your level of trust in science and medicine then, what do you base that on? >> i'm basing it on, you know, proof myself. like i got the vaccine. i got the booster shots. and for me my case was mild and it wasn't that hard. and i understand, you know, if you haven't gotten this, you know, for a lot of the things that people say out there. it could be too much and you could say, well, no, i haven't gotten it or i don't trust the science. and then you get it. and then you understand. and then you're like, oh, my, this is real. all i will say is i trust the science and i just hope that people don't realize too late that, yes, vaccines do work. and hopefully you don't have to learn the hard way by somebody in your family passing away or

you getting a very bad case of this. >> so, in the worlds of the scientific and medical community, if your views have changed on those communities because of covid, that's what we're asking to engage with us is in this first hour. if you say, yes, those views have changed 202-748-2000. if you say no, 202-748-2001. much like michael is calling from washington, d.c., on our unsure line. michael, good morning. >> caller: good morning, sir. it's a blessing to be here with everything going on. and we got this war and we got this going on and you have people scared, man. i'm serious, man. i have been wanting to talk to a real political person for a long time. >> you say you're unsure of your views on the medical community. what do you mean by that? >> caller: i just believe that

scientists going a different direction depending on where you're getting the information from. wherever you live is probably different from where i'm from like the city and the country or california or the east coast. like real confusing. >> so far as information you say because of covid, where do you look to for that? >> i look to my own professionals around me. and we laugh at this for real. >> okay. michael in washington, d.c. public policy center did a survey on its own particularly taking a look at dr. anthony fauci, the face of the pandemic over the last couple of years. and his work at the cdc, as well. it said in the survey it said americans have said battered by waves of covid-19 ask confusion over shifting messages about it, americans confidence declined in

january with drops among democrats and democratic leaning independents and republicans and republican leaning independents according to the january survey. confidence in the cdc is providing the public with trustworthy information about the means of preventing and treating covid fell from 77% only two months ago in november of 2021 to january of 2022. in addition the survey found for the first time a significant drop in confidence in dr. fauci who as director of the national institute of allergy and infectious diseases conservative media outlets throughout the nearly two-year pandemic. confidence in fauci dropped to 65% in january of 2022, a statistical meaningful drop over the nine months in the nine months since april of 2021. dr. fauci himself was on msnbc himself and was asked about these questions of the lack of trust in science and public health. here's part of his response. >> the issue of restoring trust

in the public health sector. there's been, look, we discussed this, you and i have. there are people who are intentionally trying to polit size you, politicize this. how do you want to fix this going forward? what are some things you would recommend in improving whether it's the cdc's reputation, public health in general. you know, i guess lessons learned in the communication part of things. >> well, i think you just said it. first of all, we have to stick with the science. and one of the, the treacheries of this, if you want to call it that, is that this is a moving target. and the public understandably expects a very consistent message that doesn't change. and, in fact, when the virus, which has changed.

i mean, let's just look at the facts, chuck. we've had the original wuhan strain and then we had alpha, beta, delta, omicron each with a different bit of characteristic to it. things have changed. with the change in the virus has come change in some of the scientific issues that have resulted in change in some recommendations. that's the reality. could we have done better in communicating that? no doubt, chuck. i think we all need to admit that and realize that. but the underlying reason for the change and some of the underlying reason for some of the communication issues is the fact that people need to recognize we're not dealing with a static target. we're dealing with a moving target. and i know that's so difficult for people to appreciate but that's just what the reality is. >> again, that was dr. fauci on msnbc. of course, on this program and

on events from the white house. plenty of dr. fauci and other medical officials talking about covid over the last couple years. if you want to get the collected work so to speak of what they had to say about the pandemic over the last two years, invite you to go to our website at cspan.org. when the president of this administration and the previous one held forums and briefings by medical communities we tape them and archive them. you can see them all at cspan.org. talking about levels of trust and science and medicine was the ap along with another research poll asking people about this idea of confidence in the scientific community. 48% of those saying overall when they were asked showing a great deal of confidence breaks down to 64% of democrats showing that confidence, 34% of republicans and 30-point gap. that's up nine percentage points since 201. let's go to chris in texas on our yes line.

hello. chris in texas. one more time for chris in texas. all right. we'll go to max. max in mechanicsville, maryland, on our no line. >> caller: hi. thanks for taking my call. this is a great question. you put out there the split between the two different politics, parties in this country and what they feel about science and the two topics have nothing to do with one another. nothing nothing's changed with science. we wouldn't have the cure for the common cold or the cure for cancer and without science we certainly wouldn't have fentanyl out there. science hasn't changed. what's changed is the way scientists view themselves. scientists now view themselves as infallible. science is flip-flopped with the

clergy of the church. you can't question the clergry of the church and science is still the flawed practice and the method and the experimentation and everything we believe about science today by the time our kids have grandkids, it will all be laughed at because scientists will know more than what we know now. >> you're saying your views haven't changed. is that the case? >> caller: right, no. science is science. science hasn't changed. i know exactly what science is. it's a method of finding out like how the universe works. it's like an enormous body of study. you can't just wrap it up into republican and democrat. what's changed are scientists and the way they view themselves in our society. that's what changed. we're elevating these people to something they don't deserve. >> do you think to that degree they should be listened to on these -- he's gone. let's go to matthew.

matthew in jeffersonville, indiana, on our yes line. good morning. >> caller: good morning. and thank you. >> you're on, sir. go ahead. >> caller: yes. my view has changed. being a type i diabetic when the pandemic started i was like everybody else, i was scared because i had auto immune disease and then i caught it. i wasn't vaccinated or nothing. i was in the hospital with diabetes issues when i caught it and i didn't have any symptoms, no nothing. but i had no immune system so it should have devastated me. so, after that my views did change a little bit.

so why are they being held accountable and make the decisions for all the population? >> when you look into backgrounds, you focused specifically on the financial side of it, not necessarily the medical side of it or at least as far as treatments and how people experience covid and that kind of thing. >> caller: well it should have killed me. i mean, i had no immune system. they said if i caught a common cold, it would kill me. but i caught covid and i didn't have a fever. >> and you're looking in the medical background, what have you found, or the financial background. what have you found? >> caller: well, not very much because it's all hidden. it's hidden through shell companies and stuff. there's no accountability any more. nobody is held responsible for their actions it seems like.

i mean, you can go across the board with police and endeavors and now dealing with a medical consequence in the public sector and it's affecting everybody in the world, it's a little bit more on tv now per se than most. so, it's just the way i'm looking at it our country ordered 800 billion vaccines. if they charge $1 for each vaccine, that's $800 billion, they're not going to be a dollar, they're going to be a couple hundred dollars. you're talking about trillions and trillions and trillions of dollars moving around over this. >> matthew in indiana giving us his thoughts, as well. looking at the financial background of it. the death tolls and to the like the "wall street journal" this morning saying accord to federal authorities they estimate that 987,456 more people have died since early 2020 than would have otherwise been expected based on long-term trends.

people killed by coronavirus infections account for overwhelming majority of cases. thousands more died from derivative causes like spikes in overdoses. covid-19 has left the same proportion of the population dead, 0.3% as did world war ii and in less time. you can find that in "wall street journal" when it comes to views of science and medicine and those views have changed because of covid. louis in pennsauken, new jersey, says no. >> caller: hi, pedro. it looks like you lost some weight. no, science nothing's changed my view on science. the only thing that's changed my view is as the previous caller stated. this has been politicized and with fauci and the man explains that the virus has changed.

everybody knows that. but, according to him, we just can't grasp that. that's all i have to say, sir. bye. >> lakeland, florida, on our unsure line. we'll hear from lynn. lynn, good morning. >> caller: good morning. well, i'm unsure because shortly after i got the moderna shot i noticed a huge lump on my neck. and it turned out to be a lymphoma. since then it has gradually decreased and decreased and is now showing very low active. however, i keep running into people who came down with a case of having cancer and having cancer of the breast. and it doesn't seem like there's any place to report it. so, i'm reporting this now. the other thing is when we see ads on television for drugs, they evidently are required to

report possible side effects. and yet we hear nothing of any side effects having to do with any of these, with any of these vaccines. and i am not going to get the booster because having been diagnosed with the lymphoma that is being fed by my carotid artery and i won't take the chance of getting that cancer activated by the shot. i do have to say i was worried about getting covid before the shot, i am 75. after i got the two shots i felt relieved. and then, of course, when i had the cancer in my neck, i was not too relieved. >> what convinced you to ultimately get the vaccine? >> caller: well, because of my

age. it was very simple to get it. i'm in florida and we were having spikes and also i'm obese, so, i didn't want to take the chance. and i hadn't run into anybody who had covid except that my son's father-in-law who's in his 80s got it and was very sick. he was sent home from the hospital and seemed to be getting sicker and sicker and he went back to the emergency room and they said to him, well, are you taking your medicine for pneumonia. and he said nobody ever told me i had pneumonia. i didn't know i have pneumonia. they sent me home from the hospital with no medication and they said i was over moderna. there are all kinds of side effects we're not hearing about from anybody. scientists or medical people.

>> there is reporting out on some side effects. you would have to find that online. point you to the internet if you want to search that. about a half hour in. this question on if your views on science and medicine have changed due to covid. you can call and let us know on three lines. if you say, yes, the views have changed 202-748-2000 if you say no, 202-748-8001. and unsure 202-748-8002. rick up next in los angeles, california. good morning. >> caller: yes, good morning. i just want to start off by saying i had a brother-in-law who died from getting that booster shot. the first time i ever heard of that. somebody dying from getting the booster shot. anyway, you had a caller about eight calls ago that called on the no line when he was really a yes. he called on the yes when he was really a no. i believe when you mix politics

with science, you get political science. that's what we have. as far as dr. fauci, all you have to do is follow his emails. if you watch fox news they have been following this from day one. they have all his emails showing he knew this came from the lab as far back as march of 2020 and he's the funder of many of these scientists and he got them to corroborate to say it did not come from the lab, it came from nature, which is a total lie. you listen to jim jordan -- >> they're questioned all the time. they questioned him on several committee hearings that you can watch on cspan. what specific views about covid at the beginning of it and how has it changed? >> i believe it has gotten too political. it has become political science. you can't question it. they're on the side of the democrats who do nothing but lying to us. they lied to us from, from

obamacare to constantly lie, lie, lie to get the cameras and lie to your straight. >> okay. we'll go to oakerage, tennessee, on our no line. hello. >> caller: good morning. i'd like to say i lived in the world of science for a long time and that the one thing that scientists love to do when they go to meetings is to prove each other wrong. and that is how eventually little by little they approximate the truth, the truth is out there. we don't always know what it is. you know pasquel said the truth does not exist the minute we discover it. it's always out there and we're always trying to find it. when i was a teacher, which was for 20 years, my students would come and interview me and say, what is your philosophy of life and what are you going to say. so i decided i'm going to say,

action causes reaction. and that people should double check before they jump on the band wagon -- >> let's start specifically then as far as your views of covid going into it at the beginning and why they haven't changed. what were your views at the beginning? >> caller: i heard about on cspan, i think. and little by little i realized this is probably a very serious situation because i listen to what the scientists or the biologists had to say about their findings. and little by little, you find out this is really viralant and check and double check. >> how did you double check that once you listened to it? >> caller: i read and i listen to cspan and all the television stations that i have time for. and you listen to people like dr. fauci who is a specialist. who knows more about these things than we do.

and when people say he lies, i really think it is anecdotal and really tragic. people cannot double check because they have not been alerted to the fact that the scientific method is the only thing that we really have hope in. >> okay. yada in tennessee. one of the names you heard especially connected was dr. robert malone. he spoke at a recent rally against vaccine mandates. that rally here in washington. you can still see it on our website at cspan.org. here's a portion of his presentation at the rally. >> i come to you with an open heart. as a physician committed to healing bringing three simple words. each of which ring like bells in the soul of honest people.

integrity, dignity, community. integrity is a commitment to truth in what you say, how you live, how you treat others. dignity flows from respect for ourselves, for each other and for the world we live in. community is what binds us together. to each other and gives our lives purpose and meaning. st. agust even the doctor of the roman catholic church famously said the truth is like a lion. you don't have to defend it. let it loose. it will defend itself. harry truman, a warrior against war profiteering, something we

could use more of now famously said i just tell the truth and they think it's hell. these are my truths. and i believe they're self-evident. we should not have politicized the public health response to sars cov2 and covid-19. >> again, more of that event available at cspan.org. we'll hear from michael seattle, washington, on our no line. hi. >> caller: hi. thanks very much for taking my call. can i say something about neil young/joe rogan? >> if it's connected to trust in science and covid, sure. >> caller: i have stuff to say about that, too. >> let's start with that and reverse. >> caller: i prefer to start with that. the lady was talking about critical thinking. for me that means questioning everything.

and then the other lady was saying scientists challenging each other and trying to prove each other wrong. that again is what i'm saying. question everything. and for me the american medical association and the u.s. government has about the medical qualities of cannabis. and they've been saying there is zero medical qualities to cannabis. and you have to ask why when they could have been helping hundreds, millions -- hundreds of millions of people, you know, children with epilepsy, on and on. cancer, so many different things. >> and how that relates to your views to covid? >> well, they've lied to me my whole life so why wouldn't they be doing it now? they lied about cannabis so they could make a bigger profit off it. that's the whole reason. why wouldn't i question what they're doing now? >> so as far as specifically the medicine and science behind covid, what are you questioning? >> caller: i'm questioning the

entire medical -- >> i know, you said that, but specifically to covid and science behind it, what are you questioning specifically, since you question everything? >> caller: my roommate of 20 years just tested positive for covid two weeks ago. and i sat in the same room with him. i'm not -- i'm not -- he was fully vaccinated. i'm not vaccinated. i drove in the car with him. i ate my dinners in the same room with him. and i'm fine. so, yes, i question all of this science, which is what the job of being a critical thinker is. >> and joe rogan and spotify? >> caller: and joe rogan and neil young, the thing about it is neil young, uh, he owes his entire career to freedom of speech. you know, back in the '70s, when he wrote "rockin' in the free world," he would not have wrote that if he was in china or russia and now he wants to shut

down other people's free speech and that's just wrong. >> okay. michael in seattle, washington, talking about views on covid, particularly science and medicine, and those worlds, and if they've changed because of covid, in his case not. edgar in bridgeport, connecticut, on our "yes" line, good morning, you're next. >> caller: good morning and thank you for having me. yes, my views are changed a lot, especially with the medical establishment we have now. dr. fauci has been caught lie after lie after lie. and we cannot trust this man to continue to lead us on this course. and i'm just saying, we have no confidence in leadership now, because of what dr. fauci has done to us. >> is your concern more with the cdc and government officials or is it with science and medicine themselves? >> caller: i'm concerned with

every -- with the whole establishment, with the cdc, with fda. they've been -- but flip-flopping ever since this pandemic started. dr. fauci has been caught lie after lie after lie. like they said, if dr. malone, the inventor of mrna, is saying it's dangerous, why wouldn't we listen to him? and, you know, it doesn't make no sense, you know? >> okay. that's edgar in connecticut. "the new york times" talks about international opinion of science and medicine in a recent poll that was taken. it says, the results come from the public opinion poll in a report published by a foundation in london showing 80% of people from 113 countries said they trusted science either, quote, a lot, or, quote, some. about three-fourths in the

survey. i am not surprised by the results of the survey, said a geneticist and science communicator. she said interdisciplinary response to the pandemic helped people understand the connections between science and their own well being. quote, the general public may not know scientists in real life but most people know a doctor or a nurse, now most everyone has heard something or read something from a scientist. we're asking you to share your thoughts as far as views are concerned. chris says his views have changed. he or she is in texas. chris, good morning. >> good morning, pedro. can you hear me okay? >> you're on, go ahead. >> excellent, okay. the principles of science and medicine have not changed but i

think the profession has and the professionals. we now have a better idea of what providers are basically willing to accept wholesale, whatever medical authorities say, to be the truth. even before covid, though, i was concerned about the state of health care in our country. i think a lot of people would call our system instead of health care more of a sick care industry. and, you know, that has to do with pharmaceutical industry, the hospital systems, insurance industry, et cetera. but to me it appears more so that the health care industry, there's a lot of parallels with the military industrial complex as far as truthful information and i'm most interested in those voices that are being censored by big tech and media -- you know, big tech and the media overlords. >> such as who? >> caller: well, so i really

respect the opinions of dr. robert malone, dr. macaulay from the houston area, he's affiliated with baylor. umm -- >> so as far as the providers are concerned, specifically how have your views changed because of covid? i know you talked on a broad sense, but specifically how have those views changed? >> caller: uh, well, the way i would choose providers now has changed. i'm interested in knowing, you know, what my provider's opinions may be regarding covid. that's more of an individual point of view. on a broader sense, i'm concerned about, you know, where covid came from, the origin of covid, why we're dealing with this in the first place and what we're going to do to prevent it from happening next time. i see a lot of parallels with 9/11 as this just being a

massive event and there's a lot of questions surrounding it, a lot of people don't trust the official story. >> okay. we'll leave you there. chris in texas. we'll hear next from kyle. kyle in south glens falls, new york, on our "no" line. >> caller: yes, good morning, pedro. >> good morning. >> caller: my opinion is this. we live in a small piece of history, every part of humanity. and we had this horrible pandemic that came down in our lifetime. so we put our best scientists, our best medical people on finding us a vaccine. they did the best they can and in good faith. we lost 60,000 people a year to the flu. we lost 900,000 people to covid. i've lost two personal friends, friends that did not get vaccinated, even though we pleaded with them, younger men, 60, 57 years old, healthy.

people, listen to the scientists. listen to the doctors. these vaccinations are helping. they're saving lives. other countries are begging for the vaccines, begging to save their populace. >> which doctors or scientists specifically are you link to? >> caller: well, i typically listen to -- i do trust the cdc. i do trust dr. fauci. i do trust my own physicians and the doctors in my health care system. i can't find a doctor or anyone that tells me not to get vaccinated, sir. i mean, i don't listen to the guys on the street. i don't listen to construction workers. i don't listen to guys that search their cellphone on facebook to find medical advice. i listen to guys like fauci who spent their entire career studying these problems. these aren't just guys -- these aren't politicians. fauci's not a politician, sir.

fauci is a man who dedicated his life to saving lives. >> okay. >> caller: i hope everybody's good. thank you for letting me talk. >> that's kyle in south glens falls, new york. if you look at the opinion pages of "the wall street journal" this morning it talks about what was commonly known as operation warp speed in the previous admission. this is by elisa finley, a member of the editorial board, under the headline "operation warp speed." this encouraged pharmaceutical companies to expand manufacturing capacity to vaccines and therapies were ready to be distributed once they had the fda's green light going on to say that operation warp speed in july of 2020 announced a $450 million manufacturing and supply the agreement with regeneron for up to 300,000 doses for its experimental monoclonal antibody

a few months later it ordered 300,000 doses of eli lilly's experimental antibody. the fda granted authorization in november of 2020. supply of those monoclonals competed demand last winter because many people were unaware of the extremities. operation warp speed ordered another 1.25 million doses of regeneron and 650,000 of eli lilly's antibodies, so the biden administration is well-supplied. this is josephine in new jersey, good morning. >> caller: good morning. my view of medicine hasn't changed in the sense that if you go to your doctor, you listen to your doctor. but on the other hand, as two examples, i have two family members, both have cancer.

one has -- i can't even pronounce it. the other one has metastatic breast cancer. any cancer hospital that you go to will automatically have you vaccinated. they don't ask you. and so you're saying to yourself, gee willikerrs, if these people are so ill and they think it's important to be vaccinated, there has to be a good reason to protect their lives. it's sad that we think today that we know more than they do. i know you all talk about joe rogan. i looked at this tattooed man, he's supposed to be the science? i don't know, i've never heard of this individual. >> he's a podcaster host. no medical background, as far as i know. but he's a podcaster host. go ahead. >> caller: i mean, if he was on the street, think about it, if he was on the street with all those tattoos, i would say, is he a criminal? i mean, this is what you're listening to?

now, as far as dr. fauci is concerned, the man was appointed in 1984 by ronald reagan. he's won so many awards forring his contribution to science. he's never lied. now, does science evolve? of course it does. i mean, anybody who's ever been treated for cancer knows how well science has evolved, thank god, for the better. do we always trust your doctor? of course not, you question when you go to your doctor, there's nothing wrong with that. but to say someone has lied, to say someone has made money over it, look, you have to be an individual, you've got to act on your own. if you cannot think critically, and i did take science, i trust science because i studied it. >> okay. that's josephine in new jersey, giving her thoughts this morning. let's hear from darryl colfax, washington state. hello. >> caller: hey, how's it going? >> it goes well.

go ahead, sir, you're on. >> caller: hey, well, i do -- i have changed my views considerably. early on in the pandemic, we knew that it was spread through aerosols, yet have you ever seen an expert on aerosols talk about it? all's we here are people who really don't know that much about aerosols telling us how the disease is spread. umm, and then initially, now we're -- now we're to the fact that we do need the proper masks to wear to prevent aerosols from intaking -- from, you know, from taking them in. and, uh, prior, earlier, you know, they were saying just wear anything you want over your face and you'll be fine. and then we've found since then that actually people are contracting the disease if they're not -- if they're not properly protected.

there's been a lot of stuff that has been said that has changed in the last two years, that was obvious initially when it came out. in 1918, we knew more about how to protect ourselves from that pandemic than we do -- than we did today, knowing how to protect ourselves from this one. umm, you know, all the stupid rules, initially, in our state, we cut off fishing. i mean, how stupid is that? no better place to be than out fishing, you know. do you understand what -- >> gotcha, gotcha. that's darryl there in washington state. larry from new jersey texting us this morning, saying that when it comes to views, it's given me hope for future episodes of viruses yet to come. he says, more concerning are the anti-vaxxers and overwhelming of the health care system. you can text us at 202-748-8003,

your views of science and medicine, and if they've changed due to covid. from garland in lufkin, texas, garland says his views have not changed. garland, hello. >> caller: how are you doing, pedro? >> i'm fine, thank you. >> caller: my views haven't changed. when trump was in, i thought he was doing the jonestown thing. when biden got in there, still trying to get people help. so i feel like, you know, science -- you know, you have to go with the science and the doctors. i mean, like they say, the variant -- the coronaviruses, it changes. so they got to change too. they're giving us the best information that they can. like trump, once he was in there, it wasn't going to be nothing but chaos and it's still

chaos today. >> dr. fauci was part of the trump administration and this administration. do you trust him back then and now? >> caller: yeah, i trusted him. but i didn't trust trump, because he was trying to stand up but he didn't want to disrespect trump. and he was trying to go along with it but it was too much for him to take, that he could sit there and just lie. that's why they took him off the tv for a while. and i've been watching this stuff since the beginning. >> in ohio, we will hear next from paul in painesville on our "no" line. good morning. >> caller: good morning. i had the covid back in august of 2020 when it was first coming out. and i had taken the vaccine and the booster since then. you know, science and medicine, you have to have some faith in science and medicine. i mean, the medications you take over the counter all go through some form of clinical trial of

sorts to see if it's safe for the general population. the individuals who may not want to take the vaccines and the boosters, i'm sure they're taking some type of a medication, whether it's prescribed by a physician or, again, it's over the counter. and if it's not going through its regimen of testing, those medications, those antibiotics, the cancer treatments, people that take insulin for diabetes, all of those medications are -- this particular vaccine certainly went through a speed-up process for approval, but those medications that you and i take and everybody else takes at some level, to some degree, goes through science and medicine. and if you want to take the approach of, god forbid, you come down with cancer, are you going to refuse chemo? it runs in the same clinical

trials. those individuals that decline to take, you know, chemo for cancer treatment or extend your life, if you take the opinion that science and medicine can't be trusted, then don't take the chemo, and then you would die within the time that the physician would say that you would end up dying from, because you're not taking the chemo to save your life. >> okay, paul there in ohio sharing his thoughts this morning. by the say, the senate panel today looks at the topic of covid particularly when it deals with mental health issues and substance abuse issues as well. it will feature experts there. if you want to see that hearing, you can see it live, 10:00 today on c-span3, online at c-span.org. you can watch the full coverage of it on our new video app, c-span now. gregory in silver spring, maryland, our "yes" line, views

of science and medicine due to covid. >> caller: wonderful question. there's a distinction between science and medicine and how to applies to where we're living today. in my opinion, pedro, science is proof, while on the other hand, medicine is a way to believe any misconception. and that's the only thing that we have, is medicine. we can't save ourselves any other way, by checking back, looking into our own misconception. >> what do you mean by that, can you give me an example? >> caller: okay. example of what? >> the second point you made, about medicine. >> caller: yeah. so, you know, it's just a fancy way of saying that, you know,

medicine, ultimately i think it's, uh, a way of finding out whether we're being misconstrued or correctly guided. and that's what the practice of medicine is all about. and i wanted to add to that, that faith in my opinion is completely out of the picture. it really is just between science, whether it being proof, substantiated, unsubstantiated, or medicine, being a way to believe or prove or disprove any misconception. >> okay. we're going to hear from john, last call, north hollywood, california, on our "no" line. hello. >> caller: hello, pedro, dear viewers. according to reliable sources,

someone from china, spread coronavirus because of criminal in american government and another criminal in belgium's government keep killing good-looking people. >> caller, we're having about views of science and medicine, how they've changed because of covid. what are your views and how have they changed? >> caller: yes, i'm going to say it after i -- >> we're running out of time, caller, if you would tell us how your views have changed, i would appreciate it. >> caller: nothing has changed. the science spreading coronavirus is wrong. this man wants to spread the virus because there's criminals in belgium's government, netherlands government, kill good-looking people, they want everyone to wear masks. >> okay. that's john there. north hollywood, california,

finishing off this hour. i appreciate those who have participated. thanks for doing so. coming up, a couple of guests joining us to talk about various topics including conflicts as people are try to go what's happening with russia and ukraine. russian world chess champion and human rights activist gary kasparov will give his thoughts. later in the program we'll dig into a new report on the biden regulation's regulations. dan bosch is director of regulatory policy, when "washington journal" continues. this week, on the c-span networks. the house and senate are both in session. the senate will vote on nominations including university of pennsylvania president amy

gutman to serve as u.s. ambassador to germany and rita jo louis to be president of the import-export day. today at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span, before the senate homeland security committee. at 2:30 p.m. eastern, live on c-span.org, they'll testify before the senate budget committee. on thursday, 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span3, former employees of the washington football team testify about sexual harassment and discrimination within the organization. the hearing comes the day after the team is expected to announce its new name. watch this week live on the c-span networks or on c-span now, our mobile video app. also head to c-span.org for scheduling information or to stream video, live or on demand any time. c-span, your unfiltered view of

government. c-span offers a variety of podcasts that have something for every listener. weekends, "washington today" gives you the latest from the nation's capital. and every week, "book notes plus" has in depth interviews with writers about their latest work. and in our archive, how issues of the day developed over years. "talking with" features extensive conversations with historians about their lives and work. many of our television programs are also available as podcasts. you can find them all on the c-span now mobile app or wherever you get your podcasts. "washington journal" continues. >> our first guest is garry kasparov, the author of "winter is coming: why vladimir putin and enemies of the free world must be stopped."

mr. kasparov, thank you for giving us your time today. >> thank you for inviting me, good morning. >> on a tweet announcing your appearance on this show, you wrote, stop seeing this as a ukraine problem. could you expand on what you're seeing play out between russia, ukraine, and the united states? >> i think that's very important to understand, that we are talking about putin's problem. and putin is causing troubles in ukraine, and belarus, in syria, in venezuela, in africa, it's a long list. 15 years ago in munich at the security conference in europe, putin made a very clear statement about his geopolitical intentions. he talked about return to the time of the spheres of influence. he claimed that russia would be

entitled to control not only former soviet republics directly or indirectly but also a return to its dominant position in eastern europe. and since nobody wanted to believe him, that's quite tragic, because we had experience in the 20th century with dictators, so he followed up with his program. next year, in 2008, he attacked the republic of georgia, annexing part of its territory. six years after that, eight years ago, in 2014, he annexed crimea. also started a war in eastern ukraine, only heroic resistance of ukrainians prevented him from taking bigger territory. also he appeared or actually reappeared in many parts of the world, like in syria why he propped syrian dictator bashar al assad. maduro survived directly because of support from russia.

now we see putin's military and oligarchs boosting their activities across the african continent. again, it's all about putin. i think it's time to recognize that putin is an existential threat not just to america or europe or ukraine. it's to the very principle of the free world, because he does not believe in self-determination. he does not believe in individual freedom. what he thinks should happen is a division of the world between free and unfree, and people like him, dictators and thugs and terrorists, are in their rights to exploit people they control, and nobody should intervene with their criminal activities. >> you also wrote about what's going on currently, you said this. sanctions and other members must come now before putin invades again, not after. if he doesn't believe you'll ever call his bluff, it's not really a bluff at all. talk about this idea of a sanctions approach to dealing with russia and the ukraine and

how effective you think that might be. >> look, when we hear the word "sanctions," people are getting confused because they think, oh, sanctions, the sanctions have been implemented eight years ago and these sanctions never worked. look, there are sanctions and sanctions. naturally, sanctions that have been imposed on russia after annexation of crimea, it's more like a lip service to public opinion. and they never touched putin's -- the foundation of putin's power. you can simply look at the number of russian billionaires in the first place. it keeps increasing all the time. and no matter what former chancellor in germany angela merkel told us about europe's united position against russian aggression, at the end of the day what matters to putin? it's the amount of russian gas that everybody kept buying, and it doubled since 2014.

so now i believe that, you know, we have to make sure that putin recognizes that the price of further aggression could be prohibitive, the cost could be too high for him. and it's not just making threats. it's about making laws that will convince him that this time america and europe are serious. and even if we're not ready to implement sanctions against putin personally and his oligarchs and companies like gas prom and russian financial system, it should be put in the bill that it will trigger automatically if he does this or that. right now there's big talk, but i think there's very little to convince putin that this time the price or the cost of his aggression will be prohibitive. >> republicans, democrats, independents, you can text us for our guest.

mr. kasparov, it was yesterday at the united nations security council that both russian diplomats, the ambassador, and we also heard from the american ambassador to the united nations, about the events there. i want to play a little bit about what she had to say about the situation and get your response to it. >> in all of these talks, our messages have been clear and consistent. we seek the path of peace. we seek the path of dialogue. we do not want confrontation. but we will be decisive, swift, and united should russia further invade ukraine. we continue to believe there is a diplomatic path out of the crisis caused by russia's unprovoked military buildup. we're working to pursue diplomacy in every possible venue. but we also know that diplomacy will not succeed in an

atmosphere of threat and military escalation. that is why we have brought this situation before the security council today. the united states has been clear. if this is truly about russia's security concerns in europe, we're offering them an opportunity to address these concerns at the negotiating table. the test of russia's good faith in the coming days and weeks is whether they will come to that table and stay at that table until we reach an understanding. if they refuse to do so, the world will know why and who is responsible. >> that was linda thomas-greenfield, ambassador to the united nations, talking about the approach as they see it. mr. kasparov, what do you think of that approach? >> it's good to hear that now instead of saying if putin

invades, saying if putin further invades. that's a correct statement, because putin already invaded in 2014. but i'm not sure putin is very much impressed, because the american administration is still talking about some mythical russian security concerns. no one is threatening russia. nato is a defensive alliance. and thinking that baltic states could represent any threat to the russian security is absolute nonsense. it's russia that is threatening all these countries, and by invading the republic of georgia and ukraine, it just proved that eastern european nations that have been suffering under occupation for four decades, they rushed to nato to have a defensive umbrella. hearing these outcries in russian media, which is totally under kremlin control, and i'm listening just to get an idea what's being told to people in

russia, so about flying time for missiles from ukraine to russia and how it would be a huge threat to russian security, absolute nonsense. estonia is much closer than ukraine, a hundred miles or so to st. petersburg. i never heard about any aggressive acts from estonia. what we know is that in 2007, russia launched a major cyberattack on the estonia, for a couple of days paralyzing the entire critical infrastructure of estonia, the estonian state. it's a one-way street and the threat comes from putin. yes, bringing them to the table is a good idea because it can save lives, that's top priority. but again, it's not just about offering him some goodies. it's about demonstrating that

america is back as a leader of the free world and is ready for decisive action. i'm still not hearing this from u.s. administration. i would say there's missing steel in their voice. and that's what putin may get wrong. and if god forbid he gets it wrong and crosses a demarcation line and pushes into ukraine, ukrainian territory, it will be the first major conventional war in europe since world war ii and it will lead to massive casualties on both sides. >> as far as the strongest hand the u.s. could play, as you talk about it, what would it look like? >> oh, you can look at great britain. the foreign minister, she made a very strong statement about go after russian oligarchs and their illicit wealth in the uk. it caused panic in moscow, they are now shouting, you hear

outcries, threats to great britain. and of course america has more leverage. if america decides to join great britain and to push other european allies to announce immediate sanctions, i'm not saying do it now, although i think it's overdue, but to make clear that any aggressive act from putin will immediately trigger sanctions, not new consultations, not debates, how we do that, because the bureaucratic process is long and putin knows that. if his tanks are in -- deep in ukrainian territory, they're not going to turn back because of sanctions. so right now it's time to announce very clear package of sanctions that will hurt putin personally, putin's oligarchs, and the most vital part of putin's economy. i say putin's economy because

it's all about oil and gas and natural resources. it's very unfortunate that russia, my country, that was known for its brilliance, now it's reduced to being a petrol state. >> our guest is the chairman of the renew democracy initiative. mr. kasparov, what is that? >> the renew democracy initiative is an organization i founded in 2017 after the very important elections in 2016 and the riefz donald trump and also the elections that brought two very unpopular candidates to contest the presidency. i joke that it was amazing that two candidates, hillary clinton and donald trump, had a combined negative rating of 120%. and i thought that americans had to recognize the value of their

democracy, because it seems to me that many things have been taken for granted. and i wanted to share my experience and experience of people like me to point out the danger of rising extremism on both sides. and now we see that this country is dealing with two illiberal trends. on the right you have a cult of personality and on the left you have a cult of ideology. these two illiberal trends are competing against each other, fighting each other. it leads to the decimation of the political center. and our board reflects this nonpartisan approach. two members of the board, former democratic senators, kerry of nebraska and heitkamp of north carolina, michael steele, the former head of the rnc, retired colonel alexander vindman, and many other people who look at

these issues not from the partisan point of view but, you know, from the global perspective. and i also am trying to utilize my own experience as a dissident and also bring dissidents from other places to tell americans, especially young americans, how to fight for democracy and also to recognize all the threats to democracy, no matter whether it comes from far left or far right. >> our guest also came -- his claim to fame was at the age of 22 he was the youngest world chess champion in history by 1985. garry kasparov, our guest. mark stone tweets that nato will do nothing because european countries need russian oil and natural gas and the u.s. might, because of the ukraine/biden relationship.

>> yeah, that we hear every night on tucker carlson, this point of view. let's start with russian oil and gas. it's actually more about gas. it's correct that europe buys nearly one-third of its gas, natural gas consumption from russia. but russia sells 80% of its gas export to europe. and it's absolute nonsense that russia could reverse the pipeline and sell it to china, because there's no pipeline that could take this amount of gas and compensate russia for losing europe. after angela merkel's leadership in germany, europe did nothing to replace russian gas. the germans' decision to end the use of nuclear energy, nuclear

plants, in 2011, after the fukushima disaster in japan, increased this dependence. as for america and ukraine, look, there's big talk about biden/ukraine relations. it's trump's attempts to get some dirt on biden from the ukrainian president in exchange for political support. and what america is defending in ukraine, and we're not talking about boots on the ground, we're talking about military support, political support, diplomatic support. it's the world order that secured peace in europe since 1945. further violation of ukrainian sovereignty, it's not just about ukraine. like, czechoslovakia in 1938 was

not just about land. it's about global peace. thinking that, oh, who cares about ukraine, but then, you know, next will be taiwan. and i want to hear whether the same people say, oh, we can sacrifice taiwan. don't tell me xi jinping isn't watching very closely what's happening there and learning when to take his chance at taking taiwan. it's about sending a message to all dictators, thugs, and terrorists, that they will be experiencing a decisive response from the united states. i thought they could act decisively much earlier. what we know from history, while dealing with dictators, every day of our -- of us delaying decisions, of us not demonstrating our readiness to

fight, simply puts the price up. the price goes up. if we lose this ukrainian battle today, then next will be a test for nato countries. and we already hear noises from the same quarters that why should we fight for estonia, why should we fight for countries we cannot find on the map, exactly what neville chamberlain said in 1938. but the end of nato turns america into a paper tiger. and by the way, america, it enjoys its global economic dominance because dollars is the currency, not because it's strong, but because it's stronger than others. it's relatively strong. and america's role in the world is being recognized. if you think you can do america first and ignore american responsibilities to be part of the global solutions around the planet, so you're wrong, because a weakened american means eventually you will have problems, both economic and political, at home.

>> what did you make of the ukrainian president basically telling the west to calm down, that we're fanning the flames as far as this conflict is concerned? >> look, if you are the ukrainian president, you don't want your people to panic. and naturally he's trying to keep calm in the country, because it's not clear whether putin will attack. so we don't know. i wonder if putin knows himself. clearly when you're listening to the russian foreign minister and putin's henchmen, they also don't know. i'm listening to the statements, both in english and russian, and the russian propaganda machine, 24/7, for many years, they have been attacking ukraine and denying their right to be a sovereign state. the idea of ruining ukraine's sovereignty was always in putin's mind because he knew that a democratic, prosperous, independent ukraine as a russian neighbor could be a deadly

threat to his kleptocratic, fascist regime. it will definitely send a message that the same people can live in the free world without suffering from the iron fist of a dictator. so putin's goal was, is, and will be to remove this potential threat of a sovereign ukraine, a democratic state, from the map. zelenskiy needs to make sure his country keeps functioning and not under hysteria all the time. at the same time, they are, as far as i know, preparing for war. and thanks to some of the nato countries like great britain and poland and baltic states and of course the united states, now

ukraine army is being armed and receives weapons that could put the cost for the russian invasion too high for putin. and by the way, speaking about ukraine's president, it's quite amazing to hear the outcries of russian propaganda calling ukraine a fascist state and all sorts of accusations about dictatorship. zelenskiy is a jew, to have a jewish president, and a jewish prime minister. it's a democratic state that elects their leaders based on the merits and ability to lead the country rather than on race or nationality. >> garry kasparov joining us. you can call in and ask him questions on the lines.

you can text us at 202-748-8003. mr. kasparov, you were talking about accusations. those came from the russian ambassador at the u.n. itself. i want to play you what he had to say. >> translator: colleagues are talking about the need for de-escalation. however, first and foremost they themselves are whipping up tensions and rhetoric and are provoking escalation. the discussions about a threat of war is provocative in and of itself. you are almost calling for this. you want it, you're waiting for it to happen as if you want to make your words become a reality. this is despite the fact that we are constantly rejecting these allegations. >> mr. kasparov, his use of rhetoric in that situation, what

do you think of it? >> words are cheap. you should look at actions. the whole conflict began with russia massing up troops on the ukrainian border. we have way over 100,000 russian troops brought from different parts of the country, massing up, both on the east of ukraine and in belarus, which is much closer to kyiv, the ukrainian capital. those troops are there, what are they doing there? if there were no troops, nobody would be talking about it. it's typical for a dictator, they talk peace but they look for an opportunity to get further gains. putin never stopped thinking about destroying ukraine. you have to listen not to this mouthpiece of russian propaganda in the united nations, but just listen to what russian propaganda says in russia. as i said, 24/7, you can hear the same story, that ukraine is a failed state, this is a state

that should be divided between russia and poland, this state, you know, it's a threat to russia, while ukraine suffered from russian aggression. so russia annexes crimea. something that people should recognize, ukraine, 1994, signed, under american pressure, by the way, signed a memorandum, a very important document, i couldn't deny this fact, because since the collapse of the soviet union, the nuclear warheads, they had been spread across former soviet union. most of them were in russia, then ukraine, and a little bit in belarus and kazakhstan. i understand why the american administration alongside with the brits wanted to nuclear arsenal to be brought under one country, russia, to prevent nuclear proliferation. but ukraine had at that time the third largest nuclear arsenal in the world. they had more nuclear warheads

than china, france, and britain combined. nearly 2,000 warheads. and this nuclear arsenal had been given to russia on the conditions that ukrainian territorial integrity will be protected. that was a guarantee signed by americans, brits, russians, of course, boris yeltsin, and eventually france and china joined, and the problem of nuclear proliferation was solved. and since 1991, the collapse of the soviet union, russia and ukraine signed numerous treaties that boris yeltsin signed, the first russian president, vladimir putin, then his shadow president, medvedev. putin, ratified by many consecutive russian parliaments. crimea annexation had no diplomatic backup, he just decided it was time to grab this

territory. now, it's important to remember, it was a first forced change of borders in europe since 1945. and again, since putin saw no real actions from the free world, he paid no price for his aggression. he decided he could go even further. dictators never ask why. they always ask why not. >> we have some calls lined up for you. it's iris in michigan, independent line. you're on with our guest garry kasparov. go ahead. >> caller: hi there. i saw a member of the russian government come as an ambassador to the u.n., sit down and spell out their case. i was just wondering what percentage of the people who immigrated to the united states from the russian sector as compared to the ukrainian sector and wasn't ukraine part of russia and didn't russia have our backs in world war ii and

fight with us against what was going on with the concentration camps? we left, they came, they drove their tanks in and told the people, according to "schindler's list" and american history, that they told people that the war was over and we just cut and run. and how many american lives have to be lost in order to bring some kind of control, not peace, into an area of the world that constantly wants to be, umm, embattled? how many american lives are going to be lost, how many widows, how many orphans, how many american graves, we won't even see them because we can't bury our dead from covid. when is this insanity going to stop? >> okay, caller, thank you. >> again, it's a very emotional speech. unfortunately it's wrong on every historical count.

so was a part of the russian empire. speaking for ukrainians, they can point you to many tragic parts of history, one, at least 3 million ukrainians have been starved to death because of stalin's policy to destroy the push for ukrainian independence, that's in the '30s. and there was the ongoing history, over -- it's a long period of time, when ukrainians fought for independence and they got it in 1991. yes, i grew up in the former soviet union, actually born in the south of the ussr, in republic of azerbaijan. russian is my native tongue. i had to stay in the russian capital after the collapse of the soviet empire. but now, i was a bit confused by hearing the same propaganda point, again, this reminds me of tucker carlson. so america is not sending troops

to ukraine. there are no boots on the ground. stop repeating this lie. all that is being asked is for america to support ukraine militarily, sending weapons, lethal weapons and other forms of help. no boots on the ground. no americans going to die in ukraine or eastern europe. now, if you don't defend ukraine, then you may actually see the challenge to nato countries, and then america has an obligation to defend them. so you don't want to have this crisis in estonia or latvia, nato countries where america as two choices, either you defend them or you walk away. and then you are a paper tiger. and by the way, taiwan is the next one, i already pointed out, please listen to that. so you want to give up taiwan to china? fine. then america first, and america last, because america's greatness was based on its global role. so people like me, and millions and millions of people today,

look at america as a beacon of hope and a country that emphasized freedom and opportunities. and pretending that america could become great or stay great without continuing its global leadership, it's wrong. it's naive. again, please stop talking about a loss of american lives. yes, and don't mention covid to me, my mother died from covid, on christmas night in moscow. and i live in exile, you couldn't even be with her when it did happen. so madam, i understand your frustration, but speaking about covid, it makes me cry. >> steve in baltimore, maryland, democrats' line, you're next up. >> caller: how do we lop the heads off of dictators? the united nations and the

geneva conventions are toothless critters. if we could limit ourselves by lopping the head off the snake, that would go against everything in the united nations, geneva convention. how do we get rid of dictators that, as you said, want to expand, grab landmass? i couldn't agree more with you that i think russia and china are actually in cahoots, working together. we're also going to be pulled down into china and taiwan, that spreads the united states out awfully thin. and then where are we going to be? so how do we get -- lop the head -- and my question would be, why don't russians lop the head off of putin? what is the problem? why can't we go ahead and -- i know it goes against all laws, but remember, they're toothless organizations. the united nations and geneva convention are toothless organizations and if they weren't toothless organizations, we should be able to say and

come to all agreements, it's the united nations, hey, this s.o.b. has got to go and this s.o.b.'s got to go. >> okay, caller, thanks. >> yes, thank you very much, it's a very important reminder about toothless organizations. but they have been built for a very different purpose. the united nations was the brainchild of fdr and the idea of the organization was to prevent another world war. and it did work. at the end of the day, it was built to freeze conflict, because everybody knew after 1945 that the next war could be a conflict between american and soviet blocs. and the compromise had to be found to avoid nuclear armageddon. we were at one point, in 1962, during the caribbean crisis, we were close. thanks to the united nations and diplomacy, it was prevented. but since 1991, united nations became obsolete because the

organization that was built to freeze conflicts all of a sudden turned into something that it was not supposed to be. they tried to solve problems, but you cannot solve problems in an organization where everybody has one voice, and you have democracies and dictators getting together every week in september, it's in pre-covid time, we had one week of united nations general assembly, and it's a catwalk for dictators. the city is being paralyzed and you have dictators from all over the world gathering here to boast about their achievements. and when you look at the united nations commissions, it's just a laughingstock. you have the commission on human rights that spends most of the time criticizing israel. you have countries like saudi arabia talking about women's rights. to make a whole mockery of the united nations, recently the country that is appointed the

chairman of the commission of -- about weapons, so how to reduce the number of weapons in the world, it's north korea. it's mind-boggling. north korea. it's the country that has been using -- extensively, by the way, using russian technology to build its nuclear missiles. now it's the chair of u.n. commission to actually prevent the further spread of these weapons around the world. so i agree with you, and i can only say that late senator john mccain was right, talking about legal democracies. it's very important that america builds an entity that brings

countries, not only paying lip service to democratic principles, but acting upon them. and it's long overdue, because relying on the united nations and all its agencies doesn't make any sense. russia and other dictators know how to abuse them and to warp these agencies in their favor. and simply now the majority of the countries in the world, they follow russia or china, because for dictators, there are no rules. they can bribe their way in, they can buy favors and twist hands, something that america, because of the laws of the land, cannot afford. >> also from baltimore, this is from milton, democrats' line for our guest garry kasparov. >> caller: hello, good morning. first of all, mr. kasparov, you've been a hero of mine for many, many, many years.

if i could, i have three questions i would like to ask you. first, i would like to is to understand -- to respond to that first caller, though. if it was not for the ukrainian president, we might not even have a democracy right now, so anything that we can do to support him, i'm all in favor for. so people like her and tucker carlsen, we can just grab them by the throat and push them aside but my three questions are this, sir. first of all, i believe i invented two chess openings, one for white and one for black that helps out the gate is take the initiative right to the opponent. i want to believe if you have ideas to get that further looked into and my further question is this. being a chess player and considering my opponents options and next moves, sir, are you

taking preventive measures to make sure you stay safe. because god forbid, if we lose you, we lose a very important voice. >> thank you, thank you very much. >> let's start with your question. so we do what we can. i emmigrated from russia nine years ago facing political arrest for my stand in the dictatorship, i live in new york with my family and that's the best can i do. the rest is beyond my power. i could worry about all the threats to my physical security but would it help? i don't travel to countries where i think my safety would be in jeopardy, countries with close relations to russian dictator or could be influenced

to expedite me. i don't drink tea with strangers but otherwise, there's nothing else i can do. as for the game of chess, yeah, it's the statistically if you play white you make a first move so it's about 53% chance of winning if you look at the grandmaster games but i'm also quite reluctant, you know, just to use chess parallels to analyze the international situation because i always say that putin and dictators they don't play chess, because chess has rules and it's 100% opening formation game so you know exactly what your opponent has. they always play poker and they know how to bluff, because they don't care about public opinion, about compromise in the parliament, in the congress, they're immune from the criticism of the press, so they

can move on instantly through bargaining chips at the table and raising the stakes and it's very unfortunate the free world keep folding cards for too long. >> leo, in california, republican line, go ahead. >> i want to talk about trade roots, ukraine is surrounded by the baltic sea which russia controls and belarus, and based in syria. my main concern is the arctic circle and the ceilings of the south china sea. the arctic circle, russia has troops stationed there, ice breakers where they're setting up camps, literally surrounding the north, and in the south china sea, china controls the south china sea, they're putting on the pressure in the philippines to take over that

area. they also have bases in africa, also controls in the canals, i'm wondering how long before these axes of evil surrounds the united states and puts pressure on our dollar. thank you, sir. >> thank you, very much, it's a great question, and that brings us back to geopolitics. that's why every conflict is important because it's part of a plan, plan of dictators, axis of evil, to end american role as a global leader. and, of course, attacking dollar and american economy is one of the top priorities and recognizing these danger as very important so actually ukraine doesn't have access to baltic sea and i think the swedes and things may be flightened by the

statement that russian controls both sea. still pretty strong influence of scandinavian country and see nations like poland or latvia and estonia, but destroying ukraine would be a strong statement of putin's intentions and you put it out quickly that putin has massive build-up in the arctic circle and it's still, you know, it's overdue for canadians to recognize this danger because trudeau administration is very slow in responding and, of course, china is, considering south china sea, it's home sea, home lake, and if it continues the build-up there, again, keeping time in mind, it's all about the edification of china, the chinese people who

build the most successful economy in the region, maybe south korea, those two countries, thanks to america, the taiwanese and south koreans, are prosperous, democratic, and play a role in supporting tech industry in the world and china looks at taiwan as a top price for its expansion policies. you also pointed out africa. correctly so, it's not just china as i said already, you can see russians now, russian paramilitary and oligarchs making deals with african dictators, in bali, central africa republican, mozambique, so across african continents, zimbabwe, they're trying to plunder the riches of africa and with china, you may call it friendly competition. it's all, after all, it's about

reducing america's influence and pushing america away from the global stage. and if nothing has been done, if america has no long-term strategy, go back to chess, strategic vision, so how to stop the expansionism of dictators, we all suffer the consequences. in 1926, administration came up with a global plan to stop the spread of homonism and took decade to see win this war, what we know, follow the strategic concept, there could be some minor differences but the plan was there and i think america for a long time has been missing the strategic plan, the vision, what is america's role in the 21st century? we still have a big role to play and those who say china will be dominant, i say china gave us covid, america brought the

vaccine that saves the world. >> from wisconsin, democrats line. >> caller: thank you very much, mr. casparov for bring happening democracy and your vision to life. i'm very disappointed with american military planners, our american vision for the future. they seem to have their heads buried deeply in the sand. i agree we must come to the aid of the ukrainians and thwart the russian aggression. i believe that we also have a chinese threat at our northern border with the chinese pilots that are training allegedly in unused canadian bases but that's another issue. i'm thinking that we must come immediately to the ukrainian aid and shake hands with the ukrainian people and tell them that we are their cohorts for

the future. i'm thinking like 2008, '10 warhogs would basically lay the force to scrap metal and body part and see that would send a very strong mention to mr. putin and the chinese -- >> okay, that's, got your point, dennis, in wisconsin. mr. casparov. >> again, i keep saying, no boots on the ground. all america needs, has to do, is supply ukraine with weapons and it has been happening as we speak. again, probably less than ukrainians wanted but it still sends a message, it's late, i wish ukraine had the weapons earlier but now with antitank missiles and also with antiaircraft missile so ukrainians are in the position to inflict massive damage to

invading russian troops. russians have over 100,000, it varies, 125, 175,000 troops around ukraine but ukraine can mobilize three to 400,000 men or, who have experience in military training and that will definitely cause tremendous damage to putin's invading army. and with america, this administration, demonstrating its readiness to support ukraine, that's what causes putin's hesitations and that's why the russian ambassador you just heard a few minutes ago in the united nations, it was plain, talks about peace and russia's intentions to find diplomatic solutions. this is a solution, bring the troops from the border, bring them back to their stations inside russia. russia's a big country. you don't have to concentrate hundreds of thousands of troops next to ukraine, in the west, while, by the way, oh no, that

only threat to russian integrity comes from china. if you look at the china's maps they put nearly half of my country as future china and we have a situation that we're in, in russia, from west siberia and others far east, we have about 20 million or less russians and we have more than 250 million china on leaving the border and keep crossing the border, building the businesses and they're grace transferrable country, working to support china's economy, that's what russia has to be concerned with and i hope that one day, russia will join the family of civilized nations, europeans, to fight against chinese threat because that's the real threat and what we should be considering. >> website for renewing democracy initiative is adi.org,

casparov serves as chairman and also author of the book, and why putin must be stopped -- >> thank you very much. >> back to the question we started off, when it comes to the world of science and medicine, have your views of those changed because of the covid vaccine? you can call and let us know. if you say yes those rules have changed, 202-748-8000, no, or unsure, we'll take the calls when washington journal continues. >> sunday on "in-depth" george town university law professor sheryl cashin will talk about race relations in america, the latest book, "white space, black hood" join in with calls,

comments, texts and tweets, live sunday at noon eastern on book tv on c-span 2 and before the program visit c-spanshop.org for the latest copy of her book, "white space, black hood". >> what watch the day's latest political events live or on depend, on our new mobile video app, c-span now, access top highlights, listen to c-span radio and listen to new podcasts all for free. download c-span now today. >> weekends on c-span 2 are an intellectual feast, every saturday, find events that explore our nation's past, on sundays, book tv brings you the latest on nonfiction books and authors, it's television for serious readers.

learn, discover, explore, weekends on c-span 2. washington journal continues. >> the associated press did a survey taking people's opinions on the world of science and medicine and how much faith and trust they had in those and opinion of t especially due to the covid pandemic and here' some of the results of that. when they were asked 48% of those who were surveyed said they had, what was called, a great deal of confidence in the scientific community. that broke down to 64% of democrats, 34% of republicans, and that showed also a 30 point gap up from 9 percentage points since 2018. we'll show you more of that poll but we're asking you in the 20 minutes or so we have, when it comes to the world of science or medicine, have your opinions changed with those worlds due to

covid and here's how you can let us know, if you say yes, two 0 two-748-8 thousand, if you're unsure, you can call us, also text us your thoughts at 202-748-2003, this is jay bos 0, x saying covid has made me more grateful for science, donald cartmell saying when it comes to his opinion, he says i know more about mrna and the process of developing modern vaccines now, covid changed my view of my fellow man and modern brainwashish techniques however. allen saying money seems to drive everything, the mandates prove that no form of government run system is acceptable, it's time to decouple the politician

and bureaucrats from our doctors and hospitals. opinion from the facebook page again, you can post there, a couple pieces from the last couple of weeks. dr. david englef 0, wler, recent op-ed in usa today in which he wrote this, the concept of science has been misused and abused since we first heard of this novel coronavirus, science is not owned by one political side and not a talking point to scoff, it's of the natural world, asking questions about why things are the way they are, testing hypothesis and results to add to our collective knowledge. science is not a discreet set of immutable facts, it is a continuum of learning, science should be used as neither a punch line nor a weapon, rather, as louis pasteur said, it should

be a way to serve humanity. this is from david henneger in wall street journal, from the same idea, from the 22nd of last month, political leaders try to convey the impression of control over events insofar as most are always on thin ice with the public, with the face of the u.s. authority over the past few years, trump, bind, cuomo, became caricatures, the process of scientific discovery as understood the centuries. the problem is "science" a plit siesed term, how can we be winning in the portion of the u.s. population has come to believe the representations are largely disinformation. your thoughts on science and

medicine if those views changed because of covid, we'll start in california, in oakland, john says those views have changed, good morning. go ahead. >> caller: hey, i'm john, so i i'm amazed at how fast the vaccine was developed. i don't think it has anything to do with trump and lightspeed but better living through chemistry. >> let's hear from josh in illinois, says when it comes to his views, they have not changed. good morning. >> caller: good morning, joe. i want to make a few comments as the doctors people keep referring to as the preventive mrna vaccine and the ones who keep saying they're finding out, this rob johnson second opinion panel, say you got $10,000 you

can always find a group that are always going to say no, no, no, this is wrong. don't want their voices heard over everybody else. imagine when the aids pandemic started and we had social media back then and with how it was portrayed back then, if you could get aids by kissing someone you can get aids by drinking after someone. all these theories about how you could get aids back then. imagine the social media how they would be, these days, with something like that. >> so your view specifically on the science and medical communities you say they haven't changed, is that the case? >> caller: no, i mean you got to believe in the science like the previous caller talked about,

cancer, when you go into the cancer doctor you don't say no, i don't want your help, you know, knowing that they're there and they have the treatment to help you, even though you don't know what it is, you haven't heard of the treatment, you don't know what ingredients are in the drug that is are helping you with the treatment. >> okay, that's josh there in illinois, hear from joe in east lake ohio on our yes line. hello. josh -- sorry this is joe, i apologize. go ahead, joe. you're on. go ahead. >> caller: yes, hi, how are you doing today? >> you're on, go ahead. >> caller: i want to say, i have very little faith in the cdc or the nih anymore. my feelings are as long as the scientists work for the government they will do whatever the government tells them to do. this is how they get paid, this

is how they get promoted and having spent 30 years with the government i know in a anybody that doesn't follow the line has no future in the government. it's that simple. plus, the facts that we got fauci, we have emails where he has bought off people that have disagreed with them. i mean, how can you trust any of these people? >> okay. that's joe there in ohio. usa today when it comes to testing kits, a story in their pages saying in a few short months, states have gone from donating surplus rapid coronavirus tests with shortages to demanding them as the spike in covid-19 cases strains supplies, last january, north dakota masted 2.7 million abbott

laboratories rapid tests from government, in a state of 775,000 people, had so many tests it donated 1 million of them to montana and pennsylvania, part of a sharing program when the delta variant was the dominant strain. now that omicron has turned the entire nation into a coronavirus hot spot and driven up demands for tests everywhere that system is up and states are holding on to expired tests as a last result. one with a stockpile of 600,000 expired rapid tests. you can read more of that at usa today, charleston west virginia on your views of science and medicine if they changed due to covid, this is chuck on the no line, go ahead. >> thank you, good morning, and no, i've always been very scientifically minded and actually, this past july, i retired after working for over

28 years forput west virginia bureau for public health so public health is very important to me and it's interesting one of your previous callers was talking about what it would be like if social media was around during the early years of the aids epidemic and i remember those early years very well. people were screaming about how people with hiv and aids should be quarantined, how they should have some kind of tattoo on their forehead to be easily identified and, you know, they were just talking about cracking down on people living with hiv because, of course, those were, you know, other kinds of people not, you know, regular folk like us. you know, and nobody was screaming about their personal freedoms back then. and now i look at what's happening today and like i say, a very scientifically minded person and i have seen dr.

anthony fauci speak, i was in atlanta a few years ago for national hiv conference and i listened to anthony fauci speak. that man has impeccable credentials and the people calling to turn him into some kind of monster, they don't know what they're talking about and in the age of social media, i'll tell you what, pedro, i'm really starting to lose hope in the future of this country because we used to be on it's forefront of the advancing modern world and now we are devolving into a nation of narsicistic conspiracy theorists, people who think evolution is a host, people who think climate change is a hoax, people who actually believe the earth is flat. >> let's hear from tampa florida on our yes line. hello. >> caller: hi, yes, i do believe

this has changed my view. i don't disagree with the science itself but to me, science has changed what we believed 2 years ago has changed and evolved over time. what i do believe has changed my view on science is how people use science. science can be used now, not necessarily by the doctors and the scientists actually studying it but the people who take that information and, you know, use it to their advantage and that's how it's really changed my view. what can be done and what can be, you know, pulled out to meet somebody's needs, some politician's needs, you know, not denying the science is there, but again, what we thought was true last year has changed and, you know, many ways this year and, you know, how, how it's being used against us or how it's being used to advance us is just where my view

point has changed. >> that's tessa there in florida. burt from facebook, when it comes to his views, have changed, yes, i found out that when you question science you're literally attacking science. and then gina says not at all, but it has changed my view of people completely. it's difficult to care for those who don't give a second thought to anyone but themselves. the washington post takes a look at the story of health and human services javier becerra and his role during covid with stories saying there are questions about it coming from inside the white house, part of the story reads becerra, with no healthcare experience, was never given a clear role and response out of the white house prompting defenders to say it is unfair to blame him for recent stumbles, still his low profile recently more confounding as the pandemic

goes on and statements have blind sided the president and bewildered the public according to some officials and outside experts, also the health secretary isn't fulfilling the role of the job, acting to fasten the nation's vast health bureaucracy, to achieve the white house's strategy, differences over booster jobs and covid-19 isolation guidance is confusing and unnecessary and say the tension between becerra and the white house is complicated at a time when americans already exhausted and struggling to make sense of ever-changing guidelines. you can read more at the washington post. let's hear from pleasant grove, alabama, on our no line, this is robert. >> caller: thank you for taking my call. it's a no for me, because my wife fits for the, without the

mandates, recently, two days ago me and my wife was diagnosed with covid, so, you know, thank god we're 100% vaccinated. we got our booster shots, she's getting the brunt of it, her body hurting and everything, we're together. she's getting the brunt of it. i'm not feeling too many of the symptoms and, you know, the doctor told her if she didn't have her vaccine she would not have made it, you know, having pressure in her chest, couldn't breathe, she was having aches all over her body, you know, and it was just bad, you know, and i applaud people, you know, this thing is picking and choosing who it want to take over here. you can't play with your lives, america, it's really serious. thank you for taking my call. >> in massachusetts on our yes line, hi. >> caller: hi, yes, my views

have changed on science because they say the science changes but then i keep hearing so many different things. i heard dr. robert malone talking on joe rogan's podcast how it hurts your immunity to get so many shots and now i'm hearing it again that it can hurt your immunity to get so many shots in a short period of time and on infowars.com they were talking about how you can't really listen to the science because i mean if you want to listen to science then there's only two genders and then abortion is murderer. >> as far as those sources, why do you trust those sources fundamentally? >> caller: it's not that i trust those sources but 17,000 people, i mean 17,000 doctors, and they won't believe them what they're saying about the shots so i mean there's very different opinions. you can say some is misinformation or that the science is wrong on it when

people have monetary issues like fauci making money on these different things and then their views are clouded and not impartial. it's just ridiculous, i want all the different view and see see what i decide and make my own decision. >> okay, dr. malone was part of that event the caller talked about that rally that took place here in washington dc taking a look at vaccine mandates as part of his presentation talked about the state of vaccines and such. here's part of that event from last week. we'll go to les in earl park indiana on our yes line. >> caller: hi, how are you doing. >> you're on, go ahead. >> caller: yes, hello, can you hear me? i was going to say, it has

changed my mind, because you got these people out there who are like ready to have their stuff for so many years the round up, find out it causes cancer. gets approved by the fda then found to give cancer. what good is the fda and fauci, the guy who lift them up, realize something, he helped create this little virus that makes him money, i don't know why we lift him up on a pedestal and i don't know why we trust the fda anymore because if someone pays them off, they'll turn around and approve the drug and sue them later if you're one who got sick from it. >> okay, this is dr. malone from last week. >> i come to you with an open heart, as a physician committed to healing, bringing three

simple words. each of which ring like bells in the soul of honest people. integrity, dignity, community. integrity is a commitment to truth in what you say, how you live, how you treat others. dignity flows from respect, for ourselves, for each other, and for the world we live in. community is what binds us together, to each other, and gives our lives purpose and meaning. st. augustine, doctor of the roman catholic church, famously said the truth is like a lion, you don't have to defend it. let it loose. it will defend itself.

harry truman a warrior against profiteering, famously said, i just tell the trugtd and they think it's well, we should not have publicized their response to sars covi 2 and covid-19. >> we'll hear from richard on the yes line. hello. >> caller: good morning, yes, my view of public health has changed particularly because of the organization caused the public health and, you know, there's two things they don't care about, the public and the public health. this disease is being used as a

cudgel for a power grab for, by the government and for manufacturers. i didn't come to this decision right away. looking at the vaccine, i thought let's wait a while, it's brand new, see what's going to happen with it and as i watched what happened, i see that they are creating a religion that i call vaccinism, that there's no good scientific reason for having mandates other than government control and selling -- the vaccine manufacturers make the big money on this thing because according to their very own reports, the vaccine does not prevent you from getting covid, it's not preventing you from spreading covid, and so it's, there should be no mandates. so like i said, the entire

scientific establishment is being used as the cudgel, cutting off the debate is part of the cancer culture, the whole scientific and medical profession, it's not really scientists it's just cancel culture which is not science, it's not new. galileo was the same thing, they tried to sensor him too. >> let's go to don in st. joseph missouri on our no line. >> caller: you know, when i grew up, we didn't have an edict come down from washington dc, we went to our family doctor, guy with office on the corner up stairs, so what made american medicine greatest in the world is the freedom of choice, buyer beware. you don't get an edict down from washington dc telling you what attorney to hire. you go to the, who you think is

right, who you get word of mouth is good, and so these edicts coming down, mandates coming down from washington dc is ridiculous. totally ridiculous. >> okay, that's don in missouri on our no line, a few more minutes of this question, but before, let you hear from dr. fauci himself, asked about this idea of trust in public confidence in science and here's some of his perspective. >> the issue of restoring trust in the public health sector, there's been -- look, we discussed this, you and i have, there are grifters, there are people intentionally trying to politicize you, politicize this, but obviously, there is a collective disappointment in public health. how do you want to fix this going forward? what are some things you'd recommend in improving whether it's the cdc's reputation, public health in general. you know, i guess lesson learned

in the communication part of things. >> well, i think you just said it. first of all, we have to stick with the science, and one of the, the treacheries of this if you want to call it that is that this is a moving target. and the public understandably expects a very consistent message that doesn't change and in fact, when the virus, which has changed, i mean let's just look at the facts, chuck, we've had the original wuhan strain, then had alpha, beta, delta, omicron, each with a different bit of a characteristic to it. so things have changed and with the change in the virus has come change in some of the scientific issues that have resulted in change in some recommendations. that's the reality. could we have done better in communicating that? no doubt, chuck, i think we all

need to admit that and realize that, but the underlying reason for the change and some of the underlying reason for some of the communication issues is the fact that people need to recognize, we're not dealing with a static target. we're dealing with a moving target and i know that's so difficult for people to appreciate, but that's just what the reality is. >> let's hear from patti in new york, on our yes line, hello. >> caller: hello, good morning, thank you c-span for taking my call. it's interesting, for me, the way that science and medicine has changed in my view isn't necessarily science and medicine has changed it's just astonishing how i never would have expected people, especially so many people to question folks that we look to for years, you know, for advice and folks who

do this for a living, who study it and the impact it's had on people close to me. i was really quite upset, excuse me, to see dr. malone's comments arid on your program this morning, pedro. it's dangerous, the kind of rhetoric that they're putting out there and to platform these people. one there's a certain level of creditability, but i certainly don't think it's helpful. >> that's patti in new york, couple of stories otherwise of topics of science and medicine, this one dealing with former president trump, new york times its front page, trump sought ways to seize voting machines, story reading six weeks after election day with his hold on power slipping, president trump directed rudy giuliani to make a call to ask homeland security if

they can legally take control of voting machines in key swing states, three people familiar with the matter said mr. giuliani did so calling the department's secretary saying he lacked the authority or audit to impound the machines, trump pressed giuliani to make that inquiry after a separate comment from his advisers to have the pentagon take control of those machines. more on that in the new york times, also mark short, former aid to mike pence, saying he appeared in response to a subpoena from the committee according to three people with knowledge of the developments making him the most senior person around mr. pence who is known to have cooperated in the inquiry, later on in the story, saying that mr. short was with mr. pence on january 6, as a mob of mr. trump supporters attacked the capitol and his allies tried to persuade the former vice-president throughout the legitimate electoral votes for joseph biden in favor of fake

slates of pro trump electors then go to washington post this morning, archives and records saying the national archives on monday took the unusual step of confirming the habit saying former records were ripped up, saying that turned up, records turned over from the trump white house, included paper records torn up by the former president, donald trump, statement in response to a question from the washington post whether some january 6 related had been ripped up and taped back together, some of the documents turned over by the white house not reconstructed at all, according to the archives, one more call from this, john, tampa florida on the unsure line. go ahead. >> caller: yes, i'm unsure, more or less, about everything because the science and the politics of it, because

america's got to remember when this, this virus hit the world, we didn't have a case here in america. we were all, in america, watching places like italy and spain and prior to that in china. didn't even have case here in america and the president at the time, president trump was saying that it was a democratic hoax so it's politicized again by donald trump. he thought he was so important that the democrats had the power to release a virus in china to destroy him. i mean he's not that important. this thing's affecting the whole world. so the problem is, i just realize that the science part, i understand, but what makes me -- >> we'll leave the last few

minute to see take you live to romando testifying on her department's plan to expand internet access. senator jerry moran top republican on the panel, live coverage from c-span 3.