ruppersberger about global terrorism. he is the ranking member of the house intelligence committee. then a look at proposed epa regulations with congressman lee terry, who is on the house energy and commerce committee. later, trevor aaronson of mother jones magazine wrote an article about how the fbi uses informants to get information about terrorist networks and learn about potential plots. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] host: a headlines splashed across most of the front pages -- poverty rate in the country climbs to 15%. the highest number in 52 years. good morning on this wednesday, september 14, 2011. we will begin with the new census numbers and get your take. call, email, or tweet with your

thoughts and you can also contribute through our facebook page as well. "the new york times" and how they framed the issue. here is "the wall street journal" with their head line --

then here inside "the washington post" this morning. blacks, hispanics, and women hardest hit by the economy. the rate for white children was reported as above 12%, and with their surging population hispanics accounted for 37% of the children in poverty, a share that increased substantially since the recession took hold in 2007, says a brookings institution demographer. that was actually a policy director at the children's defense fund -- we have seen an increase and the

children who live in extreme poverty. for instance, a family of four living on $30 a day -- this is "the washington post" this morning. and when they break down the numbers by race and gender, this is what "the washington post" reports. th asian-americans, the rate statistically unchanged since 2009.

so, we want to get your take on that this morning. it just a few of the papers. "the new york times," "the wall street journal," and "the washington post." let's go to carol, a democrat from ohio. what do you think? caller: it doesn't surprise me that you read that women were working better because they are making less money. a but we went through a decade almost -- but we went through a decade almost or over a decade of republican policies. we have been having raced to the bottom ever since reagan. because without the good paying jobs and without -- when they have deregulation and a cut everything like the republicans like to do, that is what we get, poverty. host: here is "the wall street journal."

let me give you a little history on how poverty has been calculated in this country. in the early 1960's --

so, we want to get your opinion, your thoughts, your take on this this morning. danny, a democrat from west virginia. caller: well, i have been watching this whole thing for years. i've got a website, jobsfirst.org that deals with

the issues. all of this is the result of free trade. ross perot warned that it would drive down wages and force a lot of jobs offshore and workers here would lose their higher standard of living. this is just the beginning. our wages will have to equalize with the wages in china. at about $3,000 a year -- before we are competitive. republicans have been doing a wonderful jobs and taking care of the supply side but in the process they destroyed the demand side, the greatest strength of the american economy. host: george, independent from maryland. caller: i work at a soup kitchen and a couple mondays ago we set a new record, 128 meals, lots of children. and at the disparity between rich and poor in a state like maryland, one of the richest in the nation, is just jaw dropping. we are setting records for the

number -- from impoverished -- setting records for the number of cruise lines down to the caribbean but there is no upward mobility left. and the idea of american exception of wisdom is shrinking and fading. it is a real tragedy. of the world of the blue-collar people in the united states is becoming unfortunately bleecker and more cruel and there are now 50 million people at the minimum without any form of health insurance. it is a real tragedy. host: those are some of the numbers that came out of the census bureau yesterday. what are you seeing in the type of people showing up at the soup kitchen? how is it different? caller: a lot of them are veterans. a lot of them are working age -- between 25 and 40. host: men, women? caller: men and women.

there are children in the line. and this is carroll county. millionaires living all around the area. mansion's everywhere. and people who are able-bodied and willing to work can't find jobs and they are just stopped. i see the same faces a month after month after month. and their ability to earn their way out of the situation is tragically extremely limited in today's job market. host: educated people, not educated? caller: it is a mix. most of the people i have met our high-school graduates. if they are intelligent. they have a good vocabulary. they just don't have opportunity. that is the big problem we have today. lack of opportunity, lack of upward mobility. it is hard to see how the "job creators" driving past the soup kitchen in their bmw's really

care what is happening to the average blue-collar person. it is a tragedy. host: let's hear from john, a republican from new york. go ahead. caller: i wanted to point out one thing, some called in and said republicans are rick -- were responsible for the amount of poverty. if you ask most people they will say the poor people will vote for democrats, so just philosophically speaking, the more people can remain poor the more votes they had and that has been a strategy for years. we know that since the great society with johnson. one thing and want to point out that does not have to do the issue -- i notice in c-span when the people are talking, like when congressman speaking, people are text messaging behind them and i was there could be something said. this is so annoying when we watch because it is so rude.

host: referring to hearings? caller: it could be hearings. when they have congressman on, whether senators or representatives, speaking in session -- anybody speaking in session, when there are people in the background you can see them on camera and they are texting behind people who are speaking. host: you are refering to our coverage of the house and senate floors. we will take you to the house floor at 10:00 a.m. this morning and our coverage of the senate as well on c-span2. let me show you a tweet -- and then here is "the financial times with the headline --

it goes on to say this --

the "the financial times" says it is republican starting that but they also have a store in the paper saying president obama signal big cuts to health care costs. that is "the financial times" this morning. and then "the new york times" has this story about the present's plans for medicare and medicaid.

let's go back to phone calls. independent in amherst, massachusetts. go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. this study from the census department seems politically motivated. the heritage foundation study that came out a few weeks ago citing the poor people are not really so poor in america. and obviously what the census department and administration is intended to do is to redraw the party-line, so without actually helping people it will look like they helped people because fewer people will be below the poverty line. host: ok. democrat from philadelphia. what do you bring? caller: republicans, they love to talk about the percentage of debt compared to gdp. i never heard the figure of a percentage of payroll compared to gpa. in the year 2011. and also in the year 1980.

the percentage of payroll to gdp. and finally i would like to give a shout out to my friends in indiana. that is my comment. the percentage of payroll compared to gdp. host: a tweete -- a democrat from california. you are on the air. caller: are you listening? host: we are listening. caller: listen, i believe the stimulus is wrong and the reason why i believe it is wrong is because if we put it this stimulus into the people of the united states, we will spend all the money buying stuff from china and indonesia and places like that and all of the money will leave. i agree with your first caller

today who said that ross perot was right. we ought to ban these trade agreements and concentrate on putting factories in this country. you could put a factory out in the middle of the desert and you will have small businesses grow up around it. we could put a toy factory anywhere and you would have small business grow all around it and it will stimulate the economy. but just putting it into building stuff -- or, building up the road and the bridges, all that money is going to go -- i mean, you are going to put people to work for awhile but they will buy things off of china and all the money leaves the country. so, it doesn't matter. and another couple of years we will be exactly where we are now. host: a your post this on facebook --

if you want to put your comments on our facebook page go to the website. clinton, new jersey. frazier is a democrat. what do you think? caller: i believe that unity is strength. to much backbiting -- one comes up with a good idea and this one says it is not good and the other one comes up with an idea and the other one says it is not good. planting a tree in the earth and the other comes and pulls up. it cannot work out. somebody has to stand up so everybody can enjoy. that is all i have to say. host: john, independent in minnesota. good morning. caller: yes, i think it is the president of's policies making

it so bad. he said he wanted all of the energy go higher -- it is all of us that the shaft. if we start building 200 more power plants and put the coal miners back to work there would be jobs. but he will fight it tooth and nail. host: frontpage of "the boston globe" a story about elizabeth warren deciding to seek scott brown's senate seat. former head of the consumer protection bureau for a while during the obama administration.

she came out with a little video. >> middle-class families have been shipped act, hacked at, squeezed and hammered for a generation and i don't think washington gets it. washington is rigged for big corporations to hire armies of lobbyists. a big company like ge is nothing in taxes and we are asking college students to take on even more debt to get an education? telling seniors they have to live on less? it is not right and that is the reason i am running for the united states senate. host: an update on the race in new york, the ninth district, to fill the seat left by anthony weiner. here is "the new york times" --

let me show you how the huffington post raises it on their website. robert turner, wins the seat, republican from new york, and he is the representative-elect of the ninth district. let me also show you daily caller, tucker calls and's website. how they put it -- robert, a republican from alabama. good morning. caller: good morning. host: we are listening. what are your thoughts? caller: i wanted to agree with the guy from california earlier, the democrat. it is tell a book -- terrible to hear it but i view myself as more of a progressive. i really think that a lot of these senators still serving in

congress for 40 years, 30 years, they really don't have our interests at heart. they are more for their own gain now. host: louisiana. rosa, democratic caller. you are on the air. caller: thank you. good morning. the way i am seeing it now, it is just how it has affected me, myself. i am 59 years old and i was on unemployment three years ago and became disabled and on social security. and i was making so much more when i was on unemployment. i was making $1,000 a month.

now i only get like $600 on both checks -- social security and ssi. and i believe myself i am below poverty. then they want to take $115 from the two checks i get, a month only $600, for medicare. where does -- my rent is $525 a month. i have had to take a roommate that has caused me so much grievance in order for me to live. host: can you tell us how much you are living on for a week? caller: >> i am living on ssi and social security and together they add up to $625. host: that was rosa, a democrat from louisiana. i want to get updated on what has been happening on capitol

hill yesterday and what will be happening today. here is "the washington post." it says that in their first meeting the 12 members seemed hopeful but in this meeting most of them asked the current cbo director a version of an old washington question -- we covered that hearing. if you want to watch it go to

our website, c-span.org. i also want to read the last paragraph of this story. first let me know that speaker boehner -- new he was also part of our

contenders' series which kicked off this past friday. we were down in kentucky at his home and talked about him. "of the contenders" looks at those who ran for president, lost, but changed political history anywhere -- anyway. 8:00 p.m. eastern live every friday. treasure island, florida. judy, republican. caller: good morning. how are you? i just wanted to call and say i think it would help if the president wants so anti- business. if you have to have businesses here to promote employment. there could be 400,000 jobs right now if they lowered the percentage that the companies have to pay. i am not anti business.

they need to make money, the stock market people need to make money. if they can go to ireland and open all of their companies there, which they have, you could have 400,000 jobs right here because over there they only have to pay 15%. host: judy, let me get your reaction to this. this is a piece inside "the washington times." exports are up but jobs do not follow.

caller: whelk, we became a service industry is what we are, instead of manufacturing. and people in our own country would buy our own products. if they did not have to compete with the low labor costs. everything now is exported to us. even our baby formulas. host: how does that square with what you were just saying? caller: people are employed, they pay taxes. more money comes into the government. host: all right, let's hear from jim from omaha, nebraska. independent.

caller: i believe the problem is we raised our welfare amount to individuals to such a degree that we reduced the incentive for people to work. it does not take very much intelligence to understand that if i can get x amount of dollars and absolutely nothing, why should i go out and get a job? and if we reduce the amount of welfare, we force these people to go out and get jobs, then the numbers change. host: wanted to let you know about nevada's second congressional district race, one we talked about yesterday. as expected, republican chalked up a crushing victory according to "the las vegas sun." routing the democrat by 22%. let's go next to germany.

chris is joining us. caller: just to give you an idea how outsourcing worsen this country -- sprint, the telecommunications company, has outsourced more than 40,000 customer service jobs to the philippines where they pay $2.50 an hour and sprint's net income last year was $3 billion. a if sprint -- if sprint brought the jobs back to america and it paid an average of $40 an hour that would only cost them a little under $500 million and it would still have $2.50 billion in profit. it is all about greed. host: let's hear from a republican from homestead, florida. caller: good morning. it is a great show. just to see and hear how many people are concerned about what is going on in washington. needs to wake up, it

needs to lessen some of the policies, some of the regulations that hurt the industry as it is. icn my home town how va -- i can see in my home town hall the jobless economy, how the community has changed so much. a lot of foreclosures. my home is worth like $60,000 -- and i owe like to hundred and 39,000. not only that, every job i have had in the past -- closing down. i have to get unemployment. i put at least 12 job searches in a week. hopefully i will come out with a great job. i happen to talk to some people yesterday. but the point is, washington needs to wake up. the democrat party needs to wake up. look at the two seats that the

republican party were able to take because that shows the frustration that people are feeling. so, we got, washington. host: as senate appropriations defense subcommittee voted to freeze basic pentagon spending .ext year to 2011 levels it

that is "the washington post" this morning. also in "the washington post" -- and then also this morning in the papers, this is "the washington times" this morning. that is the latest on faa, disaster fund and pentagon spending.

the democratic caller from atlanta, georgia. it talking about the new census numbers that showed the poverty rate had climbed to 15%, and 46.2 million americans in poverty, the highest number in 52 years. what do you think? caller: i want to make a comment again to the american people that the economy is stalled. it is being stalled by the corporates that made money of a predatory loans, and yet the ceo's in wall street all tied in and in our government. they are stalling the economy and trying to keep this president from having any type of praises put to him toward making this economy run, like they are trying to stop any type of job flow or any type of job program that he approaches the

republicans in congress about. you know why they are doing that? they are trying to stop progress so they can get back into the oval office seat and raid the federal treasury like they did before. by the way, all you people will talk of about the people who are lazy and they are out of jobs, they are out of jobs because they lost their money and homes in a mortgage fiasco. a lot of poor people out in the street that put their money and had taken out second mortgage loans on their houses and they lost their homes and everything and there are foreclosures everywhere. they are the new party. those are the new middle-class who have sunk into the poverty level. host: you and others might be interested in the senate hearings today on new ideas for mortgage financing. live coverage at 2:00 p.m. on c- span 3. a senate hearing looking at the

role of fannie mae and freddie mac. also, on the house side, we will be covering a hearing before the house energy and commerce committee looking at a solar energy company that received one of the loan guarantees under the obama administration. this is what the associated press reported -- that will be live coverage at 9:30 a.m. this morning on c-span 3. let me show you what the papers had to say this morning about

that situation with the company. it says here, the front page of "the washington post." e-mails showing a rush to give loans to that solar firm. likely heated discussion before that hearing today. subcommittee chairman expects solyndra bankruptcy to be a first in a wave. and "usa today" editorial page. if uncle sam play venture capitalists? considered solyndra.

and the deputy secretary of energy defends what happened with solyndra in his opposing piece. let's go to lamar in jamaica. what do you make of the new census numbers on poverty? caller: it never looked good from the beginning. let's not just consider poverty in america, but consider poverty in the world. you understand? because if we don't look at this as a global issue, then there shall never be a solution. we can never ever solve any problems in this world unless we look at everybody's problems. money is problem for everybody. so that means what? we must remove the problems that

we have upon this earth. this is our earth. we must live free or die slaves. host: ed, republican from massachusetts. good morning, head. caller: how are you doing? host: what are your thoughts? caller: what bothers me most is the mentality that we are somehow and tighter to wealth and leisure in this country, because we are not. i was born poor. my dad died when i was a boy and my mother had to work. it has not been an easy life, but i did it. i did it through work. i served in the armed forces for 20 years. i've got a pretty good life. but it is not because it was handed to me. and i dislike the democratic party pricing on this idea of victimization and self pity.

i think people need to figure out that -- you are given an opportunity, but you are not given a guarantee. get out and lawns, whatever it takes. if you are not working 18 hours a day or seven days a week to better your life you have no right to complain and if there are no jobs, start your own company, just go to work. you can do something. nothing is beneath anybody in this country. but there is no guarantee. and this idea of self pity is only a self-destructive cycle that we need to get off of. host: independent from dallas, texas. caller: i want to agree but the previous callers who pointed out that because of free trade and the loss of manufacturing jobs to china, the middle-class has lost its ability to earn a good middle-class living.

you just can't take the millions and millions of blue-collar jobs away from americans and expect the economy not to suffer and poverty not to go up. host: some of the headlines from the front page of "the washington times." we will talk with the intelligence ranking member, dr. ruppersberger, and about five minutes. he was part of the joint committee on the house and senate side, an open hearing but david petreaus who recently took over at the cia. also another national security headline in "usa today." tsa screenings will change for kids -- all so, in 2012 politics, many

of you have seen the fallout from monday night's debate over this hpv vaccination and texas gov. rick perry's association with it. "the new york times" has this piece. michele bachmann said the order put young girls at risk. "the wall street journal" editorial-page ways in. -- weighs in.

let's go and hear from -- excuse me, help me with your name democrat from houston. what is your name? sorry about that. having trouble reading it. caller: the 15% -- the reason why it is deregulation. we have a lot of who are with that -- if you have to pay more with utilities, groceries, you are paying more out. our federal government, representatives, have elected to allow what we call a free rein on the corporations to make just astronomical numbers in profit. it is all about profit, what they can make, instead of, if they would rein in on what they

are making and regulate them, the people could keep their money. but the people need to start making our representatives more accountable. that 15% would come down. now you add another 9.2% of unemployment, america is in trouble and our representatives need to be held accountable. taxation without representation is against the law. host: here is an e-mail from a viewer -- karen is a republican from oklahoma city. what are your thoughts? caller: i was going to say that it is always so funny when the book call in and they are bashing republicans and corporations when they are the ones to pay taxes. i do not hear people calling and saying thank you rich people for feeding my kids, house and my

kids, my medical, giving me the $5,000 back on the earned income credit. if that did not by big screen tvs it -- the money would go more. nobody makes a woman have 11 kids. if poverty is so bad, why do they keep bringing kids into it? they want to cut the military, but at least our military guys get up and work every day. the government does not have their own money. it is of the tax payers that are giving people money and they ought to be appreciative of it and not cutting into people. host: a democrat from louisville, ky. caller: i would like to say that everyone seems to be focusing on different squares of a chessboard and most people do not even note chess is the game we are playing. what is going lawn, of the

societies like a free nation -- freemasons and be christian identity groups like the kkk run this country and they work at levels on the city and state government for globalization, which is just another day -- thing as saying they are colonizing the united states and contrary to popular opinion it is not outsourcing to third world countries that is losing jobs, it is prison slave labor. that is the primary source of outsourcing. host: democrat caller from kentucky. coming up about 45 minutes we will turn our attention to regulations and jobs. house republicans promised to take up several regulations. but up next, we will turn our attention to terrorist threats to the united states and we will have the top democrat on the house intelligence committee.

>> an election marred by moral stand -- scandal of local corruption, james g. blaine lost but he changed political history. he is one of the 14 men featured insisting that a new weekly series "the contenders." live from the james g. blaine house in augusta, maine. learn more about the series and the upcoming programs at c- span.org/the contenders. >> see what political reporters are saying and track the latest campaign contributions with cs then pausing website for campaign 2012. it easy to use, it helps you navigate the political landscape with twitter feeds and facebook updates from the campaigns, candidate bios, and the latest polling data, plus links to c- span media partners in the early primary and caucus states all at c-span.org/campaign2012. >> the c-span networks. we provide coverage of

politics, public affairs, nonfiction books from and american history. this month look for congress to continue federal spending into november, including funding for recent natural disasters. keep tabs on the deficit committee as they formulate a plan to lower the debt and follow the presidential candidates as they continue to campaign across the country. all available on television, radio, on line, and social media sites. certification, watch, and share any time with the c-span video library. and we are on the road with the c-span video bus and the local content vehicles. showing advance from around the country. it is washington your way. the c-span networks. created by cable and provided as a public service. >> follow what members of the deficit reduction committee are saying on twitter. it is easy, just use c-span's new dedicated list. from our twitter page, click on the list have under our profile and so at the list you want to

see. click the following button and get the latest tweets from members. c-span on twitter, follow us. "washington journal" continues. host: back at our table, congressman dutch ruppersberger, democrat from maryland and top democrat on the house intelligence committee. if you had the joint open hearing between the house and senate intelligence committees yesterday. one of many, i understand. with the new cia director david petreaus. i want to show our viewers what he had to say about the al-qaeda threat. >> the cia assesses 10 years after the 9/11 attacks, the united states continues to face a serious threat from outside and its worldwide network of affiliates and sympathizers. of significance, though, had a loss as to al qaeda's senior leadership. to have created an important window of vulnerability for the core al-qaeda organization and pakistan and afghanistan. exploiting that window will,

however, require a sustained, focus effort. moreover, as al-qaeda's core has been weakens the initiative has been shifting somewhat to al qaeda affiliate's and sympathizers and outside south asia. our nation faces a serious threat, particularly from groups based in yemen, home to al qaeda in the arabian peninsula, and other affiliates that present significant threats as well. host: congressman, what is the status of this threat? what was he talking about there? sustained effort, but where is it coming from? guest: as far as the terrorist organization especially al- qaeda, we have done a great job the past 10 years in taking out and bringing bin laden to justice. they are groups, but not as organized, splinter groups. the thing he was talking about as far as yemen is concern is an individual, an american who was educated here, very smart.

his role is really al qaeda in the arabian peninsula, located in yemen. yemen is a very unstable country. chairman rogers and i went to yet -- yemen a month and a half ago, trying to work with the cia and what our military and all of our intelligence people there to see what we can do to help them. remember, our job on the intelligence committee is oversight. what makes the situation so severe is the relation to the united states. al-awlaki's focus is the united states of the attack. he was the mastermind of -- in new york city, that that not go off. we have looked in there, too. ne was the mastermind of the recent attempt at attack on a ups airplane. his role, he does not believe that a major attack is his goal for the united states.

because any major attack, we have gotten so good. our intelligence officials and our resources -- that we will use the pick up, and if we don't, our allies. but when you have a lone wolf, a couple of individuals, and they can be recruited by al-awlaki and the yen in the area and these are individuals in the united states who want to go to war with us, who did not like us, and they can train them to set off a bomb, that is the focus of where they want to go. so, we have done a great job in the area of pakistan. we have taken out their leadership. but we have to continually be on the lookout for any attack on our country. host: the cia director offices al-qaeda it is weekend -- weakened. do you share this assessment? guest: i hope so. but i don't see the individuals throughout the world who have

been recruited and are extremists and very radical for different reasons. i think what he is talking about, though, is we've put so much pressure on al qaeda and to take out their leader and to take out their person recently, their number one operations person, i really give a lot of professional -- credit to our professionals. we always, throughout our entire life, will have to be on guard because extremists are out there and they do have people would give them money. and their focus is really not spending a lot of money, becoming experts in making bombs. just recently came out -- it was classified but not now -- trying to develop a bomb that they can implant in somebody's body and come into the united states that way. there will always be people out there. unfortunately we will have to be prepared to deal with that. host: how do we know al qaeda is weekend? what is the evidence?

caller: we have been locked in, probably one of the best operations i have seen. -- we had bin laden, probably one of the best operations i have seen. our friends and people throughout the world did not think we were as good as we said we were. what happened with bin laden, i have to give the president -- credit to the president, making decisions as to whether a lot to go after osama bin laden. and that situation he had advised not to go in at all, to bomb. when you go ahead and bomb you may not get dna for osama bin laden and he could go on as a spiritual leader for a long time for al-qaeda. and then we had all the intelligence agencies, together with great team work, using all the resources we had. and then in the end we had a military, our special operations. and all of this coming together -- all of us coming together as a team, and our resources, sources and methods, our trade craft, we were able to bring him to justice. that was important.

that hurt al qaeda a lot. also throughout the years we have been able to take their money. they have not been able to maneuver and go to different places throughout the world. it was interesting, though, when we got a lot of information, when we did the raid, we did not realize he was personally involved with operations -- as personally involved as we thought and his target was the united states of america and his target was the last weekend, the 9/11 attributes all over the united states. that was a very big issue. and to take out a week and a half later, the person really in charge of all of operations. we really have to, in my opinion, focus on yen in -- yemen. they can bring people to teach them how to make bombs. host: on bin laden, the intelligence that was gathered,

what can you tell us about? caller: the reason we cannot say a lot because we do not want our enemies to understand where we are and what we are doing. but i think we got a lot more information than we thought, a lot more active. he used carriers. we are so sophisticated now -- united states and some of our allies -- that if you have a cell phone or by a computer and we have an opportunity to hopefully get the intelligence from that. so, bin laden and al qaeda are very smart. there are a lot of smart people who are part of that operation. so they use careers. they get inflammation and maybe take it 100 miles away and disseminate the information that way. but the information that we got shows what their focus would be, but that is all i can talk about right now. >> is it helping us today? -- host: is it helping us today?

does it add to or confirm the statements that we heard from petreaus yesterday that al qaeda is weakened. guest: al qaeda is weakened when you take out of one person but also because we are stronger. if you look at where we have come from 9/11, we have come along way in terms of sophistication. we have some of the best professionals in the world and the united states intelligence community and they are now working as a team. i used to say this frazil lot -- when we were attacked, we had information but we did not disseminate that. we have information but we did not analyze it and get it out to the right people. so we have really worked, and those of us, put it in the bill to create the director of national intelligence. the whole purpose of that decision is a direct line to the president, someone who will coordinate all the agencies together. so you analyze the information and then you get it out. you collect, analyze it, and get

it out. we were to stovepiped before 9/11 -- now it is not need to know but the responsibility to share the information. that made a big difference. host: before we get to phone calls i want to show the viewers what the cia director had to say about what you touched on, that while al-qaeda is weakened we need to sustain a long run. >> increasingly we see signs of outside of's efforts to carry out the look of a smaller tax that would nonetheless generate fear and create the need for costly security improvements. indeed, we should not forget that one of al-qaeda's goals is to force the u.s. and our allies to adopt additional expense of security safeguards that would further burden our economy. in short, although we have made real progress in the campaign to disrupt, dismantle, and pete al qaeda, we need to recognize the need to be in this for the long haul.

host: congressman, what does the long haul mean to you? guest: we have to continue doing what we are doing. get the best people and use all the resources we need to get information. it is collecting. billions of conversation -- information, and working with our allies. we just have to be vigilant because i believe, my opinion is in our lifetime there will be radical groups out there who will have money and they want to kill us. looking at israel as an example -- it seems people continually want to attack them in their own backyard. generations and generations. host: how much will it cost? guest: let's just say this. chairman rogers and i agreed when we came in in leadership of the intelligence committee, boehner support rogers and nancy pelosi supports me -- we need to work together as a team. no room for politics, the stakes

are too high. so we work together. chairman rogers was former fbi agent and i was a former prosecutor and a joke with him a lot saying -- we trust each other and we work closely together. we traveled to yemen, adjusting the from pakistan, wherever we go. our job is also the oversight of money. and we do the funding. we put in we do the funding. when we came in leadership, we passed to the below bills in a row. we worked together. we work out our issues. we worked to make sure we come together for our intelligence community. we were in washington, for the earthquake, some of the few members of congress on the hill.

15 minutes before the earthquake, we agree on what the budget would be. when the earthquake came, everyone flow outside, and the media came up. hear now what happens when a republican and democrat can come to an agreement on the budget on the hill, the earth is going to shake, but this is the attitude now. we are working as a team. host: last year from air, a democrat in jonesboro, georgia. caller: thank you for taking my call. i have a comment and a couple of questions if you could bear with me. my comment is ron paul, the republican candidate, in the gop debate the other day, had a spat

with rick santorum about 9/11, and why we were attacked. my thought was it was because we have military bases in saudi arabia. he said this is why bin laden said he attacked us, and he was booed by the republicans in the audience. then, rick santorum slap them down, and said they dislike us because we are free. i wish c-span can show that to the american public. ron paul risked his life, his presidency to educate the american public. i think c-span should show that little debate. host: we have to get to your question. caller: representative, why you think an american citizen in what turned against us?

do you think the media has a conflict of interest with the american voters? but corporate media. host: you are breaking up. we will have to move on. mark, in fairfax, virginia. you are next. caller: i respect the technical ability to hunt down terrorists, but isn't terrorism associated with occupation? one term as a -- terrorism go down after we are all of our iraq and afghanistan? guest: there are a lot of different reasons why we have terrorists. there are groups out there that will continually disagree with us. they do not like the fact that we are free and open. a lot of the terrorist groups do not like the fact that israel is one of our key allies.

as a result of the terrorism that has been going on for a long while, we now have as an example, and i talk about before, an arabian peninsula, al qaeda. it is unfortunately an issue we will deal with. it might not be al-qaida. we of than a great job in bringing them to justice, but there are other groups out there. it is not just the united states. you have india and a lot of the different countries being attacked by terrorists. host: what happens if the taliban takeover afghanistan again after the drawdown? guest: i think the biggest mistake we made in iraq is one we got rid of their military. they have been fighting iran. they have no place to go. they have no jobs. al qaeda provided aid for 100,000 of those people. we did a good job of finding a

al qaeda's money. that helped to change the tide in iraq. it is where i think we are. host: is an open question? guest: it is an open question. h., maryland, chris, a democratic caller. caller: mr. dutch ruppersberger. i have been following your career. i'm a critic of yours because there is no military appropriation you do not vote for. we just heard from you and general petraeus is that you planned on doing the same thing again and again, and for an unlimited amount of time. is it not about time that we start doing some new things, that we are a little more creative rather than planning for endless warfare with muslim nations around the world?

guest: it is very unfortunate that we cannot communicate a lot of what we do. we have come along way. one of the highest priorities of any government is to be able to provide security, law, and ordered to your country. we were attacked on 9/11. we responded. we ultimately want to afghanistan because that is where -- went to afghanistan because that is where al-qaida was training. we had to go. then we went to iraq. that will be debated whether that was the right thing to do or not. we have so many smart people. we do so much research and development. we are planning to protect our citizens. i was an appropriate or. i will say this. i cannot give an exact number, but we have a deficit issue, and we have to prioritize and what we spend.

chairman rogers and die, and hopefully with senator -- and i, and hopefully senator chambliss, we have cut, and we are still at war with terrorists. some programs we cannot afford. what we do, we have to do 100% to protect the lives of our citizens, families, and communities. host: this question from twitter. guest: chairman rogers and i just came back from pakistan about one month ago. we met with the head of their intelligence. we basically gave a message to them that if they do not start cooperating with us, we will start pulling money that comes from the united states. you have a terrorism problem. we have to work together.

we have a problem in trust. they were concerned we came into their country without telling them. we said we could not trust because it was too important to the safety of our citizens not to do what we did. host: how much money are we talking about, and do you have the authority to say there is money set aside we are going to call? but guest: we do the money. we do the funding. we passed those bills. if you're talking about congress set large -- host: you are talking about congress at large? guest: we specialize. we oversee. the appropriators. host: how much money are we talking about? guest: i cannot get into how much money, but let me say this, as long as we are in

afghanistan, we need pakistan to get our equipment and supplies into afghanistan. they need us, we need them at this point, because that would put a set a disadvantage. host: how confident are you that pakistan is listening? guest: it is very serious peril we were playing the heavy, and secretary, -- serious. we were playing the heavy, secretary hillary clinton went over there. we had a raid. we work together as a team. we gave pakistan information to take out and arrest al qaeda members and they did it. it is working. there's information we will gain from that. host: robert is in poor rico, an independent scholar. -- pr, an independent caller. caller: this has cost us

basically $1 trillion. this has to be the most incompetent use of money because if we took out 100 liters, it would cost as $1 billion per liter. people forget we created al- qaida. everyone calls this left, right, republican, democrat paradigm. we are stuck in this football. people that get elected head should be elected by the people. corporations can always have their own pacts and stuff like that, but this farce s to end. guest: i will not get into the campaign issue because i think folks should be focused on intelligence. we have to be continued -- have to continue to be ready and have

the best technology to protect citizens. if you look a world history, if you do not have power, you will be taken over. it is extremely important that we help control the skies. where the most powerful country in the world because we control the skies. we were the first to go to the moon. if people do not realize how important our satellites are. if there is money that we have to cut, it is what we cut, and i think we have done a good job to make sure we do not in any way interfere with the mission to protect citizens from being attacked. on the other hand, you can not back away from that. it is the balance of power. china and russia are spending a lot of money trying to take a sober as far as the strength of the military. -- take us over as the strength of the military. host: this question from twitter, the consider the usa to

protect the entire world from terrorism? guest: it has to be a team more approach. that is what is happening in the libya conflict. we were able to make sure that the air power could not be used. we have the ability to do that. we did not put boots on the ground. we need to focus on those areas that are going to the fact us directly. we cannot go all over the world and be the share of host: -- sheriff's. it's called is libya the model for how things could work in the future? -- host: is will be the model for how things could work in the future? guest: nothing could be a model, but the president made a good decision in libya. no votes on the ground. we are still a long way off. i have met with gaddafi. he is a bad person. who is coming in afterwards.

there are some radical groups tried to take advantage in libya and egypt that want to get involved and use their extreme, radical approach. so, it would be like another iran or other countries. host: what is the role of the cia in libya? guest: intelligence gathering, getting information to the right group, and that is what we do. host: on the ground? because i'm not going to talk about what -- guest: i am not want to talk about what the cia does. what they do helps to protect but ies and communities - cannot get into strategy is. caller: this call is for you. when will you bring on programs that have to do with what is going on in the united states of

america -- and the incompetency of elected officials? we have 46 million americans living in poverty, and since 9/11 started, or 50% of your programs have been on security. when will you start talking about what is happening on the united states of america. host: you must have missed the first 45 minutes of the show because we talked about the new census numbers on poverty, and we listen to your calls, and read your e-mails. guest: he does raise a good point about jobs. we need to focus on jobs. people need to work to provide for families and their communities. we have to borrow -- we have to grow three jobs. -- through jobs. but we need to focus on what we can cut and what we need to move forward. host: the next call comes from

rockville, maryland. independent caller. caller: i have a question for the congressman and the rest of the u.s.. i want to know how long we have to raise our guard against people that we do not even know who they are? it creates a mistrust. whenever you walked in, it is like nobody trusts anybody anymore. it is not a humanity world anymore. guest: i think that is a good point. people are concerned. i think the muslim community has on necessarily been discriminated against because we were attacked by muslims, and 99.9% of all of the islamic community but do not want to

attack us or kill people. that is not what the koran says. it is something we have to work on as a country. on the other hand, intelligence is the best defense against terrorism. there is another issue. the media is nonstop, 24/7. there is a lot of negativity. it is interesting, and it sells. as a result, i think we have created a situation where there is a situation in this country where there has been a lot of negativity, not just about intelligence. if you have a different point of view, you should except the fact that somebody else had a different point of view. it seems a lot of people in this country dislike you or hate you because you think one way or another way. i traveled to a lot of different countries. all of our citizens who travel to most of the countries where i

go and chairman rogers go, when i come back to the united states, i want to kiss the ground. we have the best country in the world. we do not want to realize it. these are not places you want to live. >> i want to get your thoughts on what the situation is in iran. here's an update from the associated press. it says iran planted judiciary is reviewing plans. guest: first thing, iran is a dangerous country. they helped some of our enemies right now, there seems to be a battle going on between the

supreme leader and, in a shot. -- and who knows how that will play out. iran is using americans who just went to the wrong place at the wrong time, and they're being used as leverage. we, in the united states, secretary clinton, and other people, are doing what they can to get these people released. host: how closely compared to other countries is the intelligence community watching the iran? guest: i think we can feel very good about all of our intelligence committees. we have the ability to collect information that nobody else has. host: manassas, virginia. kim, an independent. caller: i had a comment and a question. it seems to me we are under more

terrorism threats now then when we actually went into the middle east. my question is what is the difference if we pull troops out now, or 2014? it seems like we need to work on our country, and not so much others. we need to work on intelligence we are able to obtain and deal with that. guest: that is a good question. the first thing, the reason we went to afghanistan was that was where the individuals who attacked us were trained. if we leave right now, we could have situations where afghanistan could be an open area like a place used like yemen. our goal working in iran and iraq right now is to train their military and police to provide their own security.

we will always be involved as far as helping them, consulting with them, helping to train them, and getting intelligence they can use to protect them, but we feel there are areas like yemen, certain areas in pakistan, where al qaeda would have been open season to train people and attacked us. the united states and israel are probably the two highest targets for al qaeda and other extreme groups. host: another tweet -- guest: pakistan as a little different because the military controls pakistan. they're not as strong politically as we would like to see. we of the great system of government with our checks and balances. host: i want to get your reaction to the "washington

post" coverage of the hearing yesterday. host: do you agree that drone attacks are working? guest: i will not get into that, but let me say the programs we are using are working well. if you want to kill a snake, you cut its head off. what we have done there has been very effective host: the washington post goes on to say critics have questioned whether david petraeus sue recently retired could offer impartial analysis. do you feel like you are getting the best analysis from him? guest: first thing, he just started. i think he is a tremendous leader.

we should be very pleased he is in the position he is. he is well qualified. he knows iraq, he knows afghanistan. he worked very closely with intelligence agencies while he was there. we worked very closely with the general alexander, general clapper. we have a good team. host: and jean is a democrat in waldorf, maryland. caller: good morning, and thank you to the congressman for coming on this morning. i agree that there have been some extraordinary successes with this new set up with more of cia involvement. i have two questions for your reflecting back on the 10 years since 9/11. do you think we have become more effective in going after the financiers of terrorism, and

what kind of disadvantage and do you think that we had on 9/11? i do not think we realized how much internal dissension within saudi arabia there was. i think it put us at a disadvantage. i would just like for you to comment on the progress that has been made as far as rounding up some of this terrorism financing. thank you, sir. guest: as far as finance, we have been effective to the last 10 years through our intelligence department and other agencies in following the money. we worked closely with the united nations. we could literally stopped anyone that we find that gives money.

without money, it is difficult. al-qaida and terrorists do not need a lot of money. they're not building ships, but they're mostly building bombs. the other part of the question was where have we done, and what is going on? we have come a long bin laden was the could across from where we are. -- we have come a long way. teamwork is so important. these agencies come together, they collect, and they analyzed. the -- says the best defense against terrorism is intelligence. in the old days, people were not sharing. it is not need to know as it relates to terrorism. it is the responsibility to share information that can be acted upon. that is one of the main reasons we have not had an attack in the

united states. i am concerned that the way it is now, one small attack would have any effect on our country because of the 24/7 media. just look at last weekend when it got out to the media that there could be a possible attack. it was all over all television and radio stations. host: was the helpful or hurtful? guest: we have situations like this all the time. we had a credible source. the source did not give the information. the source got it from someone else that was not credible. so, what happened, it was funny -- we sent brennan, the top adviser, and he briefed the chairman and die, and what happened was -- and i, and what happened was he said we're going to send this out because we need

tips to get information. within five minutes, it was all over the news. that is why we have the intelligence community and the need to know, and why i cannot say a lot of things that i know on this air because we cannot give out our sources. unfortunately, after bin laden, so much came out that hurts us in the future because they will find out what we do. host: can you answer this question -- how big is the al qaeda? he says please, we need to hear this, how big is there are made? guest: al qaeda is recruiting of the time. they do not need to be big, they have to be good. they have smart, intelligent people. their focus our attacks. they will never win the war, but they will win the battles. look at how our lives have

changed since 9/11. look at the airport. that is unfortunate. another thing, too, we did not see al qaeda coming. we cut the intelligence community after the wall came down, and we didn't see it coming. now, we cannot make that mistake again. we have to be focused on the mission. our bill that we just test will have cut close to $1 billion. -- past will have cut close to $1 billion. host: we're talking about a joint hearing between the two intelligence committees yesterday, and i understand you have more open hearings. guest: we think it is important that we have more open hearings. we of a member on our committee who feels very strongly about open committees.

when you are a leader, you want to listen to the people that served on your committee, what they're priorities are turned -- are. some of the comments here like we are spending too much money, and we never caught, that is not the case at all if -- at all. if we had an attack, that would now be appropriate at all. these open hearings are an analysis of our intelligence community, and what we can do better to make sure people feel secure in their homes. host: this is cq -- the ranking member said he would oppose any fiscal 2012 legislation reauthorize in spy agencies unless it included his provisions requiring more disclosure about the guantanamo

bay detention facility. host: debt has been a controversial issue. -- guest: that as been a controversial issue. i think we have resolved the work that issue out because we need to have a bill. host: so, there will not be in there, but you will be getting information on the loss of the guantanamo bay? guest: there are different points of view, but we will continue to review. there were a lot of issues that we worked out. then we had the earthquake. those were part of our negotiations. host: one last phone call. lee is a republican in waldorf, maryland. caller: i would like to talk about a real terrorist threat. when is the last time we discussed our supporters and how open there are?

guest: it is a good point. i am concerned about our mexican border, very concerned about mexico and the impact these drug cartels have, and they have relations to certain people within al-qaida? we need to do more in those areas, but mexico is a sovereign country. they want to do a lot with themselves. they're not always wanting us to come into their country. there have the resources that have been put up, and we have to do better. we've spent so much time and effort in the middle east, i think we turned our back on the southern hemisphere. host: in our last caller this morning, we will be talking about a recent cover story from "mother jones" magazine and they pose this question -- the fbi has built a massive network of spies to prevent another domestic attack, but are they combusting terrorist plots, or are they leaving them?

if talk about these informants the fbi is using to weed out possible terrorists, and leading them to a possible terrorist attack? guest: i think you'll have to resources, informants, what everyone to call them. that is where you get a lot of information. -- what ever you want to call them. that is where you get a lot of information. the best defense is the information. host: some of these folks are getting paid $100,000. is that money well spent? >> i do not know. i'm not sure what information they have, and who gets it. a lot that goes on internally, we cannot talk about. it is important to protect our country, and that is with good management is about. i have confidence in all of our directors. it is extremely important that we continue to provide safety. our is part of what

government is about. because we have a free and open society, it makes a small marble. i think we are on and get -- on our -- vulnerable. i think we are on our game. what keeps you off that night? when you are in intelligence, you hear about what is going on all over the world. part of it is weapons of mass destruction, and the other is cyber attacks. i am as concerned about cyber attacks as anything. north korea just attacked south korea put the banking system, and that would create a. -- that would create a chaos in this country. when russia want to attend georgia, they shut down their communications. nsa is the best in the world what they do, but 80% of the

network is the private sector. if we need to educate our country, and put more rescissions -- we need to educate our country, and put more resources into defending against cyber attacks. we are being hacked by other countries. that is for another program, maybe, but i'm worried that al- qaida will hire a great actor who could cyber attack us. that could be effected. host: thank you for being with us this morning. we will be talking about this cover story on "the mother jones" magazine. first, coming up next, we will be talking about epa regulations in jobs with lee terry, a representative from the breast. >> an update on the attack

yesterday in kabul. speaking earlier today, the u.s. ambassador to afghanistan says the pakistani base network is responsible for the coordinated attack against an american embassy in nato headquarters. the fighting would not effect the transfer of securities to the afghan forces. foreign forces are to completely withdraw their tom becker -- troops by the end of 2014. the causes of the bp or oil spill in the gulf of mexico might be learned today. a report comes after one year of hearings by the u.s. coast guard and the agency that regulates offshore oil drilling. in financial news, stocks overseas have been higher today despite the downgrade by moody's of two of the biggest banks in france. traders hoping for some

progress on the greece's debt crisis. ahead of the opening bell, thou futures are up about 50 points. -- dell futures are up about 50 points. >> this weekend on american history tv, celibate constitution day with actor richard dreyfuss. on american artifacts, during the civil war 25% of the union war effort was financed by california gold. find out why and how. from "oral histories" recruiting women for high-level jobs. >> any given night in america, more than 640,000 men, women, and children are without housing. >> you or i, if we have a problem, we have a family,

probably a network, a network of friends, a church, or school. we will have people who will hold us up if we fall down to a homeless person has lost all of those contacts. >> i think a common stereotype is folks are homeless because they're not trying hard, they're lazy. >> so, should the federal government spend our tax money to help these people? >> i think there is an important role for the government to play in ending poverty and homelessness. some people think that the government should stay out of social service work, and the churches should be doing more, or people should be on their own, and i do not believe that. >> that is one of the winners from last year's studentcam competition. this year's is under way toyota

the topic is the constitution and you. get -- under way. the topic is the constitution and you. "washington journal" continues. host: we are back with a representative lee terry. he's a member of the energy and commerce committee, who passed a couple of deals -- bills dealing with the epa regulation. i want to show viewers what "roll call" had to say about one of them -- segment suddenly is a sexy issue. host: what was the regulation, and why do republicans think it was a bad one? guest: it moves the goalpost on contractors. when you raise the price, or put

new regulations on top of the old ones, it will increase the price, it will close down some of the cement manufacturers at a time when even republicans, democrats, and the president, we all agree that we need to improve our infrastructure. so, it seems high to us that we're going to have to double the price, import cement from china to meet our infrastructure needs. all we are asking for is what the epa originally asked for reaching a 15-month delay to review the rules and make sure they are achievable. because right now, they're not achievable for the cement manufacturers. host: water the job numbers? -- what are the job numbers? guest: it could be several thousands. there are tens of thousands of people in that industry, and they could lose as much as 20% of their workforce.

host: some other rules that republicans are looking a -- cross-state air pollution rule? guest: this is one of the multiple roles that are focused which the majority of our, electricity is generated from. but when you have multiple roles, that is when you're in a vicious float across state lines -- when your emissions slowed across state lines. host: what does it say about the electrical grid? guest: that is a good question, and that is the hearing that we have today. if there had been 14 studies done, including the epa and first, who will be in front of our committee. they say that 25%, up to 50% of coal plants have to be shut down without any plan to replace

those megawatts, which means you have to rely on your transmissions, your transmission lines, and we do not have any knowledge, no study, of the reliability of that. can you oil new electricity into that area? can you rely on that? those are not answered. the rules could be in place in a matter of weeks. host: what are some of the other regulations republicans are high in? guest: they are focused on the electrical generation right now, at least in our committee. there are four other rules. one is on the utility max, then again looks at the emissions, moving the field goal further away. it is not rolling back, it is just trying to prevent deeper cuts. cold residuals. they're trying to make the residuals from burning coal toxic matter, and changing how

you dispose of it. the cooling plants want to redo the regulations for those, making it tougher, and then just looking at all new sources of emissions, which will effect all ability to generate electricity. i just worry that when you put all of these together, they have not been studied in their totality, and it is called the train wreck, that we just do not know what the real impact is going to be. host: republican leaders have promised to put these bills that you are talking about to either stop, the light, streamline, or eliminate these regulations on the floor throughout the fall. the newspapers say this is not likely to pass in the senate. this will go nowhere. so, when americans are looking for something done on jobs, is this a good use of the house for time? guest: well, this is about jobs. we're trying to save the jobs in these regulations will

eliminate. there is no argument we are going to lose jobs. the issue is whether the health benefits, which i do not think have been verified or defined, out with the job loss. so, this is about jobs. host: we're talking to congressman lee terry about the epa regulations and jobs. i want to get your takes on this. you can e-mail us, or call. you can send us a twitter message. we will take your phone calls as well. carolina's first parish is a republican in philadelphia. -- caroline is first. she is a republican in philadelphia. caller: it seems the epa is working for china. they make rules for companies cannot abide by without losing money, and they have seized let

people off, and the off shot is the business goes to china because they cannot afford to make it here. workingt the epa just for china? guest: i did not think they are working for china, but there is no doubt, for example, the cement rule, that is now sexy, we would have to import chinese cement to fulfil the infrastructure of jobs that we want to create. so, there is no doubt there as we ratchet down, that means more jobs will go to china. electrical rates will be higher for manufacturers, which is just another burden, and an additional cost. they can go to china and get free electricity, free plans, as aggressive as china is. so, there is no doubt there will

be a transfer of jobs. host: throughout the next 20 minutes or so with the congressman, our c-span campaign 2012 bus is visiting plymouth, new hampshire, and 12 students from the university will be participating in the program from the bus. the university was founded in 1871. we want to give our thanks to time warner cable for selecting the university. our first student is jen. go on with your question. >> within our region, a biomedical energy is a promising part of our energy. federal policy tends to focus on corn-based fuel, without

giving much attention to the resources that exist in the forest. is it possible to a imagine that policies and incentives to make sustainability tools more possible? guest: that is a great question. i did to hear a lot about woody biomass. i come from the cornhuskers state, so we would like to find additional uses for the product, but the point you make is we have regional advances -- advantages. you have one in the northeast with sustainable, renewable forest. woody biomass is a clean energy and we should consent that type of fuel. host: ted, a democrat in

massachusetts. good morning. caller: i'm calling about the crossing state lines with the epa. was it not a few years back that the trees were being destroyed by pollution from coal-fired plants going across country? guest: the initial rules were put in place because of acid rain in the northeast that were killing the lakes. that is when the initial particular emission standards were put in the clean air act, and that has been successful in cleaning our air, and preventing particulars from destroying the lakes. the issue is, now they want to wretched down to what i think could be an unproductive --

where now, the balance switches from cleaning up the air to a standard that might not be achievable and just closes down plants. host: the ranking democrat henry waxman has created a new web republicans the the most anti-environment house in history. here is a look at it. host: what is your reaction? guest: hyper-partisanship. the rhetoric that henry espouses does not match reality. we are not talking about attacking the epa. what we are trying to prevent or it least discussed is the merits and the balance of the jobs that

will be lost by the new standards set they want to implement with these new rules. it is not a ratcheting back at all. all we are asking for is do not ratchet down the numbers even further until we better understand them. host: we will hear from roger, an independent in florida. good morning. caller: hello. host: please go ahead with your question or comment. caller: i think the epa is running amok. it appears it the epa is starting to do the country more harm than good. it started out doing some good, but now it appears like we need to basically put a leash on the epa. guest: that dovetails back into what i want to say from ted's

question, too. you have an epa producing six different rules on the ozone, and the president stepped back and said that is two -- to devastating, and cold that back. that is one of six rules. there is a perception but they have run amok. maybe they're even working against the white house right now. when they are proposing that many rules, and we are the committee of oversight and jurisdiction over the epa, i think we have an obligation to review each rule individually and the totality effected host: another question from a plymouth state university student. go ahead. >> good morning, as a student at a public university i was disappointed that i could not find any information on your

stance on education and your website. i was wondering what your stance on the lack of a federal funding for education. guest: the lack of funding? i would suggest that if you look if funding, whether it was republicans or democrats in charge, for the last 10 years it has nearly doubled. we always hear from every entity the receives one federal dollar that they receive more. i think at a time when we have 1.5 trillion dollars of the deficit, asking for more is not possible at this time. host: and republicans in florida. caller: bid morning. i support jon huntsman for president. he says we need to look at epa regulation, and china is

heading toward controlling our financial system, and since he was the ambassador to china, is the only one to control that situation. "the wall street journal" has endorsed his plan. can i ask you to endorse him? guest: you can ask me. i have not chosen at a presidential candidate yet. i am looking for the one with the best energy plan, and will make us energy independent, and understands the rules, and what effect they have on our ability to meet electricity needs. host: bob is next, a democrat in fishkill, new york. caller: the epa ought to work in conjunction with the trade department, which in a perfect world should work in conjunction with the justice department and bring the world standard up, not

down. you cannot do away with clean water and clean air. if we have higher standards in this country that other countries do not have, and therefore can operate and do business on the cheaper, the trade department ought to be able to step in the trade deals, we know from ross perot, they are weak. we are at a competitive disadvantage. the epa ought to work in conjunction with the trade department to make us stronger, and not weaker. host: let me add to those comments. here is a tweet. guest: well, why don't we just prevent the bad ones from being implemented in the first place? why don't we take the time to

dissect the proposed rules and decide if there are appropriate, or on balance, inappropriate. host: let me add this e-mail -- guest: well, there is a rule that allows the epa to look and a new sources. if there is a new source producing it, usually it is not a new source, it is just a source that has not been heavily regulated yet, i would say we have to look at these in balance of how they effect the economy, with jobs, under the health requirement. host: back to our students in new hampshire at plymouth state university. morgan riley. >> good morning, as a newly appointed member on the cyber

security task force, how you plan to work on the issues of keeping the united states free of foreign and domestic cyber attacks? guest: that is a good question, and i enjoyed being on the task force. what we are looking at doing is how to protect the critical infrastructure. we could take this with electricity as we keep on a theme here. obviously, you want to protect the electricity that goes to critical infrastructure -- our hospitals, financials, military. how do we protect those from state-sponsored attacks, because those are usually the most sophisticated? part of it goes into their operations on intelligence and security within our own military. the other thing is in the private sector that is not critical, but important to our

economy, they will have different standards to adhere to. we are working through this. we are interviewing everyone that is part of cyber security. i think we will come out with a good bill. we will not be able to prevent the hacking. we can make it harder for hackers that want to just cause disruption and have fun, but our critical infrastructure has to have a level of state-sponsored attack protection. host: joseph ramirez says do you agree with those of said the epa should be abolished? guest: i did not. i think there is a purpose, but i agree that they seem to be running amok right now. they are producing so many rules that appear to go too far in producing new standards that cannot be met -- not you have to

force them to be met, but the technology does not even exist. host: let me show you want a recent guest had to say, talking about the research done on regulations and the epa. guest: pushing back on the epa generally is mostly about top -- helping electric utilities. you can see that in the data on who is the lobbying and the amount of resources committed to that fight. it is a repackaging. it is just a rhetoric around how to give major corporations what they want. right now, the economy is bad. they say it will improve the economy to be regulated in these areas. it is really wrong. you did not grow the economy by making the air more dirty, or by refusing to clean the air. and sex, you can grow the

economy by requiring cleaner air if you require power plants to clean up their emissions. oftentimes, new technologies have to be developed. host: there are two issues there. guest: there is a great comedy routine. he worked it out well with henry waxman on the rhetoric that is not based in reality. we are not rolling back anything. we are trying to prevent the goal line from being moved. that is with the epa is doing. when they start using rhetoric, they lose our credibility with me. host: what about creating jobs when u.s. companies to come up with new technology to prevent pollution? guest: we hire someone. they implement it. the companies have spent billions to comply with that, to be able to generate may be less electricity now. and what that does, and the point he did not make, is the impact on the consumers, the

impact on the users of that electricity, the reliability to the grid when you are removing power from the grid -- all of those things calculate. this you want me to say to my constituents that i am going to support raising you're allowed to graze on your monthly bill? if this he wanted to tell my manufacturers that employs several hundred people -- does he want me to tell my manufacturers that employs several hundred people that i am going to raise the rates? that is the focus we have, and that is a deeply cynical, and misplaced view because a donation was made from an electric -- electra company, and that is how -- we are each cow towing to. host: next we have another comment he never system.

>> we have a project similar to that of the keystone pipeline project in your part of the country. in the case of the northern test, -- [unintelligible] did you favor these types of projects aeronaut popular alexei here, in the state of new hampshire? -- popular in the states, like here, in new hampshire? guest: there has to be some level of federal ability to help setting. we need to have a transcontinental transmission ability. so, if you have one area that would prevent that from happening -- if there is no alternative routes, then what do we do? we need states involved. we need their sagging abilities. they need to be part of the team. host: geraldine, an independent

in pennsylvania. caller: good morning. i have a big problem with the epa and the congress. to me, the epa is a bunch of faceless bureaucrats sitting around, making rules and regulations to keep their jobs, to keep that going. the congress makes i think congress complete falls down on running roughshod over a bunch of faceless bureaucrats. i don't get it. caller: yes. i have a problem with ethanol. i've spent more money repairing lawn mowers and small engines because they don't run. i have to buy high octane. get worse mileage in my vehicles by running with ethanol.

how many acres of corn does it take to make a gallon of ethanol? guest: i wish i had the exact -- how many acres its six to make a gallon of ethanol. i'm sure is less than an acre. ethanol has not established itself. the subsidy that they have is probably going to go away by the end of the year and they will have to live on their merits. those that want to be able to use the biofuels, and not produced overseas, should have that option. we will continue to look at other biofuels. host: let's go back up to new

hampshire aboard the bus. our next student. caller: hi. the united kingdom is debating a bill that could curtail the nature of cell phone -- due to the rise in london. do you think that legislation could come across the sea? we also have large rights in different cities. would you support that? guest: that is a fair question. there has been no discussion of a bill like that in the united states congress. i have not heard it would be appropriate on this side, and i cringed when i read the articles about interfering with freedom of speech, even if it is inviting people to a rigot.

rioting is illegal. interfering with free speech, that crosses the line. caller: one of my first question would be to ask c-span to present a program on nonstop removal mining. in west virginia, where the number of two coal producer in the united states. i support coal. west virginia has been destroyed by now on top removal -- mountaintop removal. all the mining companies are currently -- violating water discharges in the state of west virginia. they pay a monthly fine to proceed with the mining process.

mountaintop removal, you are 50% more likely to develop an exotic cantor such as brain cancer or colon cancer -- you are more likely to develop an exotic cancer. host: what is your question? caller: what is he asking to repeal regulations when the current loss in west virginia better being enforced by the state agencies are not being followed? every one of these companies went in and pleaded guilty. host: i have to leave that there. guest: we are not rolling back anything. god bless them for doing that.

rationing down -- ratcheting down. the people of west virginia will have a chance of success working with your state regulators that the federal regulators. host: 1 more student aboard the c-span bus. caller: good morning. i am -- i am concerned about the medicaid budget. in new hampshire, cuts have been made causing extreme distress to various populations and people with disabilities as well as the aging population. i am assuming that new hampshire is not alone in that. i wonder how when nebraska you are dealing with cuts to health

care and people with mental and how you're addressing people with mental and physical disabilities and what programs are you proposing to put in place as these cuts are being made? guest: nebraska struggled just as new hampshire. health care costs are double digit inflation every year while the dollars have been static. that forces some tough choices by the governors. we feel the local governments of the best ones on the ground dealing with the patients. we have struggled with mental health. the community-based effort of getting them out of institutions and into homes works for some people but not all people. we have to give those kinds of options. host: thank you for being here.

we know you have to go. there is a hearing today on electric reliability and you are giving opening statements. thank you for being here. guest: thank you. host: we will keep taking phone calls. the congressman is leaving. he needs to go back up to capitol hill. what are your thoughts? caller: this morning there's a hearing in reference to the five letter million dollar loan that is defaulting -- $500 million loan. doubling our electric rates. $2.5 billion, making that looks like a small pie.

buying everything from denmark and china for parts. if allowed to be built, they will use a denmark insulation company. this is the same kind of company that went on before. the project has not been allowed to go forward because of 14 lawsuits. could this be inquired on at the hearing this morning in reference to this? this project is so large and it will double our electric rates and make that look like small time. this is another project that we refer to as the dirty politics of clean power. but if it could be looked at, we appreciate that. host: that will get underway in about 20 minutes. we will have live coverage on c- span3.

there received a $535 million government loan or recent laid off 1100 workers and filed for bankruptcy. live coverage on c-span3 if you are interested in watching that. roger is an independent. what were you planning to ask about epa regulations and jobs. caller: the epa wants to go to clean energy. florida has abandoned all the clean energy renewable sources that have been installed by a florida residents, and they're not supporting what they had problems to support with -- they are basically -- they are not supporting solar energy at all.

host: barry, a democratic caller from texas. caller: i wanted to talk with the congressman. a lady said the epa -- is said it was dick cheney and his energy policies that initiated that. that is why these supposed jobs were created were going overseas. that's basic economics. i'm and gas land. the sad part about it is we had 1/3 of the operations of chesapeake oil is chinese investors. what is all this, drill, baby drill?

are we going to keep them here in the states or some overseas? everybody blames president obama for being in cahoots with the chinese. it was dick cheney and his cronies for opening the door. host: we're running at a time. i want to thank the students who participated. the plymouth state university has over 7000 students. we want to thank time warner cable for selecting the university today. a big thanks to the students and teachers. we want to turn our attention to the "mother jones cover story mother -- we want to turn our attention to the cover story of

"mother jones." >> number some the commerce depart show consumers spent less on clothing and furniture last month. retail sales were unchanged for august. demand was weaker than first thought. also prices remained unchanged in august -- wholesale prices remained unchanged. nasa released a new design for that will cost rocket about $35 billion. test wanting to begin in six years -- test launching to begin in six years. armed pilots afforded a tanker.

pirates took over the vessel and sale to an unknown location. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> the c-span networks. we provide coverage of politics, public affairs, nonfiction books, and american history. this month, look for congress to continue federal spending into november, including funding for recent natural disasters. keep tabs on the deficit committee as they formulate a plan to lower the debt. and follow the presidential candidates as they continue to campaign across the country. it's all available to you on television, radio, online, and on social media sites. search, watch, and share all our programs anytime with c- span's video library. and we're on the road with our c-span digital bus and local content vehicles, bringing our resources to local communities and showing events from around the country. it's washington your way. the c-span networks. created by cable, provided as a public service.>> every weekend

it's "american history tv" on c- span3. starting saturday mornings, 48 hours of people and events telling the american story. watch personal interviews about historic events on "oral histories." our "history bookshelf" features some of the best-known history writers. revisit key figures, battles, and events during the 150th anniversary of the civil war. visit college classrooms across the country during lectures in history. go behind the scenes at museums and historic sites on "american artifacts." and "the presidency" looks at the policies and legacies of past american presidents. get our complete schedule at c- span.org/history and sign up to have it e-mailed to you by pressing the c-span alert button. >> "washington journal" continues. host: every wednesday we're going to be taking a look at recent magazines, spotlight on

magazines and book it recent cover stories. today is the "mother jones" on the use of fbi informants to prevent lone wolf attacks. trevor aaronson, let me begin with this part of your story. "counter-terrorism is the fbi's top priority." why so many informants? how are they being used, and why? guest: the fbi does not believe a coordinated attack is possible. they fear someone who is in a community somewhere in the united states and is inspired to commit some kind of actor terrorism on their own. the fbi believes this is the primary way of identifying them.

informants can go into the community centers and talk to people and figure out who these people would ba and then alle fr them the opportunity to move forward -- figure out who these people would be. host: who are these informants? what do they look like? guest: they could be your neighbors, a store clerk. they run the gamut from the community. in some cases they are criminals. they were caught doing some kind of crime and they are working off the crime by serving as an informant for the fbi. in some cases, they could be immigrants and the fbi used that as a leverage to get them to

cooperate. host: you say a network of about 15,000 informants. how does the fbi to determine where to put these informants across the country? guest: the use a program called domaine management -- they use a program called domain management. it allows the fbi to create demographic maps of the country and divide the country to the use of commercially available data. they are able to say that we believe these communities pose the greatest risk. the use domain management -- they use demesne management to

find the people who seem the most willing to commit some act of terrorism. host: give us some examples. guest: in the case of a man in illinois, a man the fbi identified. the fbi began to realize he was interested in committing some act of terrorism. the fbi sent another informant to him that offered him a place to live. he goes analyst with the informant. over some weeks, they talked about committing some act of terror, that he wanted to assassinate a judge. but he was broke and did not have a car. the informant introduced him to an arms dealer who could provide him with the means to commit this act of terrorism.

the arms dealer exchange in trade some speakers to provide him with the grenades. there were able to prosecute him. an obvious question in a case like that is whether he could have committed that crime were not for the fbi provided him with the means and opportunity. host: that is a question you posed at the beginning of your piece. why do ask if they are leading them? guest: we looked at more than 500 defendants in terrorism prosecution says 9/11. half of them in vault informants. -- half of them

involved informants. in the case of 49 defendants, the informant acted in a much larger role. he provided the means and the opportunity for the target of the investigation to move forward in a terrorist plot that he otherwise would not have the means to do. in some cases the informant provided the actual target and the plan and the dummy bombs that they would use. these are people that evans did not suggest they would have any capacity to commit these crimes. host: what was the outcome of those court cases? guest: and from that has been used in a number of trials and has been unsuccessful -- entrapment has been used in a

number of trials. men were economically depressed. an informant offered them $250,000. the offer to buy the main defendants, james cromitie, a barber shop, seemingly inducing these people to commit this crime. they received 35 years in prison. the defense attorney at talk to explain that meeting the bar of entrapment is difficult in federal court. this is different from what the federal court see as entrapment. entrapment has not been an effective defense. host: 240 of the cases were

charged with terrorism. what does that say about our national security laws? guest: the 500 cases we identified we did so in terms of how terrorism was to find. the first type is someone trying to hijack an airplane or someone trying to use a weapon of mass destruction. that is type one. type two is when someone commits charged with a crime such as money-laundering. but the defendant has some kind of links to international terrorism. in some cases, the department of justice is not able to prove the terrorism case and so they settled for lesser case, like money laundering.

the number of cases that pose significant threat to property or people's lives were very few. the public came to mind were 90 -- najibullah zazi and faisal shahzad. but those types of cases are by far the minority of cases that the government prosecutes. these were not five order cases that in our view were threats to your life or national security. host: you have a map in your story showing cases have been filed in 36 states and in washington, d.c. viewers can get an idea about where these cases are being filed. the majority are along the east coast. the use of informants by the fbi

is nothing new. how did the fbi responded to what you found? guest: the explosion of informants that we of seen since 9/11. there were 5000 informants. today there are 15,000 -- there were 1500 informants. today there are 15,000. the fbi says that the use of informants is necessary to find people who are planning or willing to do some sort of a violent act within the united states. informants are highly effective. the average fbi agent cannot go

into a community and build relationships and gather information the same way someone from that community can. the fbi relies on them to gather information. this is critical to the efforts to use these informants to gather this kind of information. host: how much are these informant being paid? guest: in some cases substantial amounts. shahed hussain was paid $100,000 for one case. in other cases, the informants are motivated by things other than money. sometimes immigration violations are a big reason why people cooperate. shahed hussain was motivated by money and an immigration violation. the fbi has dual leverage over

him. host: did you talk to these informants? guest: in some cases the informants do not want to talk. shahed hussain did not cooperate. another informant in orange county blew the whistle when he alleges he had to spy on the community as well as gather information on other would-be informants. he says the fbi knew there were abusing first amendment rights. sending informants into mosques without a clear reason that these were up to some kind of criminal activity. host: our first phone call from

tacoma, washington. caller: i want to discuss the current technological landscape in a slightly different light. i want to argue that the benefits outweigh the cost in this current landscape. there is the convenience factor alone. you want to an up-to-date market report, keep tabs on stocks, sign up for paypal. not just convenience alone. i think this is disruptive. digital facebook was developed in a dorm by to make checks -- in a dorm room by two naked

chicks? caller: it appears to me that your guest is proposing is that those who wish to protect us in this country should be denied the very access to those people who are trying to do us harm. these people who are angry or frustrated in life, these are the ones who are being sought out by those who wish to do us harm. i think it's a good thing to be able to identify these weak spots. guest: that is true that people caught in these are disgruntled and have their own problems. that was a theme in the sting operations. these people tend to be poor and desperate and in many cases

there were recent converts to islam. to move them along, to see that something is in the careekoran. i'm not proposing that the fbi investigate terrorism and not the best to get muslim communities when a police they are harboring a terrorists -- when they believe they are harboring a terrorist. the people involved would have had the capacity to commit the crimes were not for the fbi providing the means to do so. somebody can be angry to say they bought a building but few people have the means to do so. the fbi found people who said they were angry but lacked those means of the fbi provided those made to commit the crime.

host: who else worked on the peace? -- piece? guest: "mother jones" and the university at berkeley. caller: we get the legal aspects and get this people on the page to try to stay legal and everything like that. we got enough democrats and republicans. the surprise to courts -- they're all corrupt. we got to give back to the basics and make people start abiding by the law. host: let me ask you about the court system and what you found when these sting operations took

place. how much time are some of these folks servant who were lured into action by an fbi informant? guest: the average tends to be about 35 years in a sting operation. in some cases the fbi spends a year or more with the target and moves them along through the plot. we also found that oftentimes missing.ople go some things are not recorded and so no one knows what was said. that is a critical period for defense attorneys to try to prove entrapment. no one knows what was said during the early investigations. these informants are not the

most credible of people. host: what did you find out? guest: in some cases the fbi says they cannot record because it is not safe to. when an informant is going through a committee looking for targets, it doesn't make a lot of sense to record every single conversation. at some point it becomes clear that this person is a target and still recordings are not made. that raises a significant question of why the fbi chooses not to record these conversations. in many cases this is a matter of convenience for the fbi. it makes the job easier not to record the conversations. there was one case in baltimore where a man was involved in a

sting operation where he was plotting with an fbi informant to bomb a military recruiting station. there was another sting operation going on in portland, oregon. that made national news for some reason. it was a well-publicized case. the man in baltimore hears about this case and things he is in a sting operation, too, and begins to back out of the plot. the informant ranges a meeting to bring him back into the plot . in that case, the meeting was not recorded due to a recording malfunction. as a result, antonio martinez did move forward with a plot and has been indicted with using a

weapon of mass destruction. caller: greta -- host: john, are you there? kim is a democrat in new york. caller: i think this program is nothing more than a replacement for the cointelpro programs that were in place in the 1970's. you'll find there are thousands of law-abiding americans that are being surveiled by the fbi. people who love committed no crimes -- who have committed no crimes, committing no crimes at all. host: trevor aaronson. guest: that is true. there have been abuses that have

been documented. a year ago, the inspector general's office cannot with a reported showed the fbi was targeting political activists on the left that it did not reason to believe were involved in criminal activity. host: the caller mentioned a term of entrapment. she broad up cointelpro -- she brought up cointelpro. host: how has it changed since then? guest: the significant difference between cointelpro an will we see today is this is less of a counter intelligence program. cointelpro was involved in

disruption of organizations. at the time of the communist party in the united states, 80% of its membership. the fbi was supporting the communist party as a way of getting into the communist party and disrupting it from inside. a host of organizations on both sides of the political spectrum. what the fbi says they are trying to prevent the next terrorist attack. they are less interested in disrupting organizations and more interested in disrupting significant threats to our safety. someone willing to use it weapon of mass destruction of some sort. this is basically the rules the

fbi uses for its undercover operations. it is currently going through a revision, which has been criticized by a group from the left. it allows for the fbi to go through your trash to look for information on you. they could find some embarrassing information on you and use that against you, to the to cooperate as an informant. that is not to say that that hasn't happened in the past. it gives a set of rules for how the fbi can behave and how we can handle informants and the ways in which it can't recruit informants. we have never seen the full version. it has been redacted. host: bill from fort lauderdale. caller: i wanted to ask you if

you are familiar with are familiar"shock doctrine," and how that relates with what she is mentioned in her books in the bigger picture. guest: i have not read that book. if you could explain her theory to me. host: are you still there? caller: she is creating brushstrokes about interrogation and going back to milton friedman's economic picture that we kind of protected around the world. i'm in the early parts of the book, relating to 9/11. 973 was the coup in chile and how the cia was involved in that -- 1973.

i just was wondering -- she has written quite a bit about -- host: what are some of the ethical situations that the fbi informants, and come into? trevor? guest: as far as the legal use of informants, there isn't a problem with illegal use. whether theoning tactics that the fbi is using it are properly or ethical. the recruitment of informants within the muslim community is difficult for the fbi. there are many people who choose to spy on their communities. the fbi is using tactics that are legal but questionable.

the idea of using immigration against someone is very new as a means of recruiting informants. other means they use are finding someone who has some sort of extramarital affair. the fbi can go to them and say we know you're going through an extramarital affair. corporate with us and will not tell your wife -- quapaw right with us and we will not tell your wife. host: do you think it'll be higher? guest: absolutely. informants are a critical part on how the fbi operates. we looked at these 500 cases. the number of sting operations -- we've seen an increase since

obama took office. the has been an increase in informant-led sting operations. i think it is fair to say the use of informants will continue and increase. the fbi has made a number of measures to accommodate this. they have a program that assigns agents to help maintain the credibility of informants. the have invested millions of dollars in a computer system that tracks informants. they may need an informant that speaks is certain language. these are all investors that the fbi has made.

ost: you say that agents' annual performance are based in part on their recruiting efforts. guest: that is right. agents for effective at recruiting are assigned to that task full time or will go into communities and recruit informants. the get them registered and it will then bill the not too informants working drug cases or counter terrorism case or white- collar cases. host: mary is a republican in california. caller: good morning. i have a question for trevor. it seems to me that when informants are looking in the community for people that have a propensity for committing a crime, if an informant with a

passed on that individual -- to see if he can develop the tendency -- what he assumed that later on, a year, five years, the gentleman or the woman would improve and he would -- i find it somewhat childish that just because he is calling it entrapment that people whether a propensity for this -- [inaudible] someone who would want to protect this country would be trying to do to seek out people who would do us harm. little suspect.suspec

i don't know much about "mother jones." motivation for bringing this article. is "mother jones" doing harm to this country with informants that are helping us. strongarm -- 15,000 -- host: i think we got your point . guest: the fbi says when someone says i would like to blow up a building or lay grenades in a shopping mall, will we do have us do -- what would you have us do?

i think that is something we can empathize with. if you come across someone who says he wants to commit this crime, you do not want to say this guy does not have the capacity and will mature so let's ignore him and you find six months later he did commit this crime. nobody wants to be that fbi agent. we're asking that in these cases, even though someone says they want to commit a crime, you need the capacity and the means to commit that crime. the fbi is providing the means. they can provide the means for the person to commit the crime and then prosecute them with the theory that in a couple of years, maybe someone would have provided them with a bomb. whenever found an example of that, were some was willing to commit this type of crime and

the fbi passed on him and then somehow summoned connected to al qaeda or international terror provided him with the means to do that. i don't think it is easy for people to get access to these types of weapons. as far as whether we're doing any sort of danger, one of the purposes of journalism is to look at how the government behaves and questioned that. we're using interviews with fbi agents and available court records. every informant with identified in this investigation was named in a court record or named in an affidavit. we're not releasing any confidential material. whether we're doing any harm, i don't think so. host: did you receive any

requests from the fbi for clarification? guest: no. we tried to articulate their view. i interviewed dozens of fbi agents as part of this investigation. some are quoted throughout the paiece. what the policies are behind the sting operations and that was incredibly important to us. host: brine from chicago -- brian from chicago. caller: you said the contract that defense has not been successful in most of these cases. i wonder if you could say something about the liberty city 7, one of the first of these cases several years ago, where a young man living in a housing

project in miami was set up in a sting operation in an individual posing as a representative of al qaeda who administered in al qaeda oath of allegiance to him. these were young men who had a steady group. they had a security patrol in the project. my understanding is that all but one of those seven were exonerated. host: trevor aaronson? guest: these are people who lived in a poor section of miami and a fault a religion blended elements of christianity and judaism.

they have a committee control the was like the guardian angels. there were seven people indicted. they drop the charges against one person. they get three trials before they gained convictions on five of the six. five are currently in prison. that was an example of the use of the day informant with a checkered past. he had lied on a polygraph test, which should have excluded him. he was then assigned to enter into this group posing as an al qaeda operative. the primary evidence was he had a camera to case the office of the fbi as part of a plot to bomb that office. they had a recording of him administering to al qaeda at the

members of this group, and that was enough to convict them. these are men who trouble getting up in the morning let alone commit some act of terrorism. the fbi through this informant with the means to move forward with this plot that involved bombing the sears tower in chicago and the miami office of the fbi. they were able to get convictions on five of the seven. the seventh one was deported to haiti based on evidence from the case. host: our informants ever trained -- are informants ever trained? guest: they go through role-

playing and they're standing policies and manuals and the law to make sure they're not violent constitutional rights. in informs, there's not any kind of informants school where they send them to. they basically instruct them. e, gosay, here's your wir talk to them. they're supposed to have specific instructions as to what they are supposed to do in the undercover operation as lost record the meetings and record as many of the meetings as possible. but there's no training for this. that is why there is a lot of questions about whether these people are being entrapped or whether the actions of the informants are overly aggressive. host: "mother jones" encourages

you to dig deeper. go to motherjones.com. you can watch surveillance video. second-guess the feds. decide how much of a threat. c which cases were tried in your state -- see which cases were tried your state. host: motherjones.com for more. lou is next. good morning. what is your question or comments? caller: the judgment uses the term wmd quite loosely.

we invaded by iraq and wmd refer to as nukes. do you define wmd. guest: i agree the definition is very loose. this can be something like use of a car bomb. the fbi has provided the target with a van or a car that they have lead the target to believe has explosives in it. in one case, a man drove the van in the crotch of a downtown skyscraper and walked away, across the street, and dialed a soulful that he believed would activate the bomb and destroy

the building. for purposes of federal prosecution, the definition is not limited to what you might think like a chemical bomb or a chemical weapon or some kind of nuclear material. it can be something as simple as a car bomb. caller: good morning. i have three things i would like to comment on. this project is well needed. to defend the fbi, there was a caller earlier who said they were wrongfully arresting an accusing people. the ku klux klan and mlk and things like that. the fbi has grown along with the

country. when i was in college, by will then go it into the stages and going to the trials and tribulations. the fbi represents the problems we have today. back then it represented those problems. it wasn't always justice. there were racial issues. we have grown since then. i would like to know how these would-be terrorists are prosecuted when they are found to be a would-be terrorist. are they 20 years, 30 years? a life sentence? guest: they have statutory minimums for sentencing. in many of these cases, 35

years is the statutory minimum. if the person was found guilty, the judge has to send them to at least 35 years. in most of these cases, the judges are sentencing to the minimum. in one case, the judge said she was skeptical of the case and believe the definition of terrorism has been extended to an enormous and extenextent. the target said he wanted to bomb a synagogue. the fbi informant made that possible. yearsfinding that 35 tends to be the sentence. host: 240 were charged with terrorism.

192 of those cases was providing material support to terrorists. 36 were charged with funding terrorists. an independent caller from texas. caller: good morning. i am a jamaican student and the states. the, you made about the challenges and using entrapment as a defense in court piqued my interest. i remember one case. he was tried in the u.s. he carried the drugs and so forth. everyone thought this was entrapment. they lost the case.

i can appreciate the lehmann's perception of law -- the perception.erceptioman's guest: first of all, winning a case built on a contract requires the jury to agree that the person has been entrapped. that requires sympathy. the jury has to be sympathetic to the suspect. defense attorneys find that -- this does not instill that sympathy. in the terrorism cases. these people will say hateful things about americans wanted to do violence to the united states. things that when you hear, it

makes you not want to like the person. that affects the ability of the jury to find entrapment. was the person predisposed to committing the crime were not for the fbi providing the means to do so? that is what the real question is. people say they want to commit these crimes, but they lack the means to commit these crimes. if the person says he wants to do, then the department of justice is able to meet that predisposition bar. mitt romney cases -- entrapment exclusives is not a to terrorism. it is difficult to win an