efficient health insurance system available. that is medicare. that is a no brainer. >> thanks for your call. their lead story has to do with the former state employees. a washington couple charged with spying for the cuban government lived double lives. >> also in this story, alicia stanton becoming the first african american woman to be or

contained a rabbi. she is scheduled to resume leadership in north carolina in august. coming up on our line for democrats. go ahead. >> i think congress needs to pass a law that would separate the bad ones off social security and ssi that are misusing the system by being a drug pusher on it.

could you reduce social security and ssi by promoving the dope pushers. >> in new york. go a head. >> yes, sir. and having to pay taxes on health benefits. my husband is not yet on medicare even working people having to pay taxes on the health benefits. is this part of the bill they are working on? i zont think this is fair to people. >> thank you for your call and all the people who have called in. on wednesday, the reagan statue was unveiled in the capitol.

here is some of what the artist had to say as to how he chose the char acktur of the statue and nancy reagan's reaction. there's the personality and the memory of the man that he was. from all the snap shots you could think of in history, big in the expression. >> there's a lightness in his face. the hope was to try to get a little bit of personality in there. what was the former first lady's reaction? >> that was the highlight of my entire visit here was spending time with her last night and

her reaction to the end result. it was possibly too emotional for me. can you share with us anything she said? >> just very simple words on how it is exactly ronnie. others mentioned or were convinced that i had known him, when i never did. i feel like i do. you'll be able to see the entire interview with the artist today including coverage of the statute unveiling as well as the interview and you'll be able to hear remarks from nancy pelosi.

joining us now at the stable is jar red allen of the hill. he's here to talk about congress' interrogation tack picks. the first one, the hail storm and the buyers back. sort this all out for us. >> a lot of chatter. this all started thursday morning. the subcommittee on investigations and oversight on the house intelligence committee had a closed-door meeting. we suspected that they were looking for development of techniques in the new a lot

lately. they limited it a different oversight. one member specifically who was in the meeting they told me the interrogation technique did come up. what he came away with was that this method worked to disrupt the plot. terrorists were furious lafe alluded to the fact of the committee revealing that the sensitive and maybe even

classified information that it went too far in what it said as describing from taking away from the briefing. do we know who said this? >> we do not. that really does speak to how eager republicans have been to by any means necessary to get out information as much as possible that they believe that these interrogation techniques that we've been hearing so much about have proven effective. the owe becomea administration has been accused of releasing intelligence and document that's show that they don't work and show how they were

developed. he along with vice president cheney saying that there needs to be more out there did you have to grille representative cline in order to get this? >> it was easier than that? >> almost like he was anxious. >> no. but there was not an attempt to dance around the issue. he prefaced his response with "i want to chows my words carefully." he was open in saying this was his assessment.

>> we are talking about congress and the scamition by the u.s. if you want to get involved in the conversation. please call. >> is it your feeling -- are they more upset that the information came out from this particular hearing or that the information tht republicans have been saying or what the democrats have been sayinging? >> when we heard verifies our standing all along that these techniques are working we are

not going there because we are not talking about a closed hearing. they are limiting their anger nancy in colorado springs colorado, go ahead. i am concerned that we have decided to become chicken littles because we have used methods to district information from very, very bad people that

we train our own military with this method -- that we've used these on our own military and yet we find it a horrible way to treat people that don't have any regard for life at all. i am very afraid that we have come to a point in america that we have become very strong. the debate about the use of the techniques has been a real hot topic. one of the things that originally was supposed to happen was after president obama released declassified bush administration legal memos

used to justify these techniques. we thought we were gooding to have a full investigation truth commission to find out as we came about to justify and use these issues. democrats dance around that. when the speaker got involved in the issue and raised questions about her involvement when she was ranking member on her intelligence committee on what she was told. democrats had a lot of trouble dealing with how forcefully they want to hammer away on the use of these techniques. republicans are really getting some sea legs under them in terms of saying that we should

be doing this stuff. we know it works. it's the democrats preventing the full slate of information from coming out. it is unclear as to how much information is going to be declassified. >> johnny on the line for the democrats. the republicans are always good at shift the issue. they do it largely with the help of the journalist like the one that's on this morning. they will tell you anything. they are the one that's told you it was good for tuesday go to war with iraq because they are threatening us. why should we believe them. the experts tell us that this type of torture in general does not work because you go so much

bad information. i'm pretty sure this journalist there today knows a lot of bad information was give tone this government because of the use of torture and it set them chasing the wrong thing during the time these people were tortured. that is not being brought out. the republicans are very good as changing the issue. whether it works or not, it's illegal. >> if someone gos to a bank and says, well my family was hungry or i needed to get my child to the doctor, it worked. how could you prosecute me? would anyone lift tope that and say, it worked? >> democrats have use that had line in saying that

intelligence that we have show that these methods have not worked. the senator from rhode island held a subcommittee hear age few weeks ago. i can't remember the date. and had a form f.b.i. interrogator to testify publicly that they were able to obtain valuable information with the normal techniques and further said that these techniques that were veffed by the cia and justified by the bush memos don't work. they do lead to bad intelligence or unusable intelligence. with regard to the latest hearing. if that was part of the hearing, they didn't say.

that information to believe to suggest that these don't work. they haven't come out with any new information to suggest that. it is difficult for them because you can't choose the republicans of violating the rules of a closed subcommittee hearing. and then the subcommittee come $out to say, what we know about these is that they don't work. that goes to my next question s. there any indication that rules were broken. >> congresswoman january who chairs the subcommittee who had the hearing has said that

that's an issue that may be discussed in terms of sacks she didn't give any idea. other than saying she thought the account ability should be there but didn't -- wasn't specific by what she meapt by that. >> next el on the line. >> thank you for taking my call. this is my question. as you can tell, i have an accent. i am a citizen. the reason we come to the united states is because there is justice for all. i'm pretty sure you understand that the united states is different than all the other

countries. the reason we come here is because we run away from tortureug[ and being proyson an all kind of reasons. you sit here and argue torture. this is where the terrorists want you. that's why they did what they did. it doesn't matter how much you torture, they will tell you anything you want to hear. they'll tell you what you want to hear. it doesn't justify to torture because it doesn't work. i've been there and seen it. that's why we run away from here. it is sad to see all the congress res and the vice president to a torture worked.

>> where were you from? >> i was born in ethiopia and went to italy to the united states. >> the reason i left africa is because i was in prison over a year and a half. they don't care if you are a woman or anything. they will beat you up until you tell them what you want to hear. >> you are ok that this information came out from a closed committee hearing, right? >> the important thing is whether you torture or don't torture, that's what makes the united states different. >> you raise a good point or

issue. the president has talked about this saying that there is a bigger issue here, which is the fact that the united states does not or should noten gauge in interrogatory techniques that is pretty well widely agreed to constitute torture. he's made that very clear in a number of press conferences, trying to turn a page in our country's history. again, this issue comes back to the fact that republicans are very strongly trying to distinguish themselves from that line in saying that actually the larger issue is the safety of this country and the national security issues we face everyday. the ends do justify the means

is their argument. >> if you want to read more of jar red allen's argument, you can find it on the hill.com and at c-span .org. houston, texas on the line for republicans. go ahead. >> what's going on. i appreciate you having this topic on discussion. i put dick cheney and nancy pelosi on blast. i'm tired that every time i call into c-span, something happens with my credit card account. i want to thanchingt f.b.i. >> we'll move 0 on to daffen important, go ahead. hello. this is the first time i have ever gotten through. i was really glad to hear the

lady from ethiopia call. she mae a very important statement. it is too bad that the people in this country haven't gone through what she's gone through so that they can see what she says is the purpose mr. owe bomba >> my thoughts about how the information came out are, i'm not 100% sure -- it goes back to where we are everyday right now. no matter what is said on the democratic side, we have a fight on the republican side. should it ever come out, no. should it be public?

probably not. how many countries do we have that discuss their trobgations? >> you raised the question before about sackses and others who have shared their thoughts on the hearings. there are really two issues here. one is do they face any punishment from the committee? the democrats are in charge. they can remove people or go through the process of removing people from the committee if they feel like they violated the rules. again, we don't know if they are going to do that. the best indication we have is if they are talking about it and figure out the options. the other issue is whether in

fact anyone did reveal information that would somehow violate the national security act of is the 34. that's a non-committee matter. the department of justice is the final say as to whether or not the classification was shared. we haven't had an opportunity to speak about,é the department of justice yet. republicans again and the ranking republican on the subcommittee that held the hearing have both said that they believe he specifically who basically said more than anyone else did not violate the rules of the committee. i asked specifically if he believed that mr. cline shared

classified information. he answered again, i don't believe mr. klein violated the rules of the committee. i don't want to read too much of that he is speaking sort of to what is in his universe. we'll see as to how the democrats deal with the republicans on their committee and if the justice department decides if this is something they want to look into. the speaker of the house has been embroiled for weeks now about what you she has been told and what she did then in response to that. on may 14, she had a press conference in which she was

asked a number of questions about this issue and ended the conference by saying the c.i.a. essentially lied to her and that they do it all the time. she has not said anything further to explain that despite numerous republican calls for her to either prove what she claim $or prove to the democrats or in a difficult spot. i think republicans know that or are aware of this issue >> do you think this might have been a strategy to get the speaker reengaged in this debate or to troo to de-rail or alter what she had laid out as a pretty aggressive legislative

agenda. guest: i don't know if that was the specific intent. i will say i do think that this was part of a larger campaign to keep pressure on the democrats to release as much of this information as they can. i think it's fairly clear from what we've seen that republicans pretty squarely believe that thez# facts back them up. now maybe a situation where they know this information will never be released. host: jar red allen, a staff reporter for the hill. before coming to the hill, a state reporter for the national

report. back to the phones again, welcome to washington journal. caller: thank you for c-span. i have two questions for mr. allen. if you are accused of a crime and you are threatened to pull out your fingernails and toe nails, would you speak up? the other question is when i go to gas up, he can get my pin number and whatever he wants. guest: thank you. my father is a dentist.

i don't think he's taken anyone's credit card information while they are in the chair. again, if i understood your question correctly. you were alluding to the fact that when you for tur anyone, you are twoing to get them to say or interpret anything you want them to say. democrats are saying that essentially. there's another issue here in the 9/11s in a story this morning that president obama is looking into administration that would allow for prosecutors toñr take guilty pleas rather than have