in the wake of some of that outrage, members of congress from both sides of the aisle announcing plans for overhauling the v.a.. of the senate brokered a deal last week. that story leading the weekend edition of usa today. was brokered by bernie sanders, the chairman of the senate veterans affairs mccain,e and by john republican of arizona. here's a bit of bernie sanders talking about that deal. [video clip] compromise atot people look at the world

differently. senator john mccain of arizona and i have tried our best to come forward with an agreement. he is not what hundred percent happy about it and i can fully assure you i am not 100% happy about it. veryld have written a different bill. what i want to say now in thinking senator harry reid for his strong support for this , i hope that we will be back on the floor to continue the effort to deal with the many unknown met needs -- unmet needs of the veterans. to my mind the absence of the learneds that we have ,n many parts of this country veterans cannot get the time that a need. they can get the treatment

that they need. in a significant way, begins to address that important issue. sanders senator bernie on the floor of the senate. here to break down the bill for , aon the washington journal politico defense reporter, good morning to you. componentse key that were brokered between mccain and sanders? guest: this came from 30 separate sent bills. from three separate senate bills. it authorizes $500 million for the hiring of new v.a. doctors and nurses. those are the parts that came from sanders bill. it ought arises the new v.a. secretary to have an easier time being able to fire senior executives for mismanagement and getlso allows veterans to

private care if they live more than 40 miles from a v.a. facility or experience long wait times. they are hoping that will get something to stick and passed the senate. that statement about it being a compromise bill, not a bill that he would come to the floor with, what was left out of these negotiations? guest: the senator's bill did come to the floor earlier in the year, i believe it was in february. that was a bill that was over $20 billion of new initiatives. fromew objections republicans who ended up filibustering the bill because he thought it was too big of a pill and they did not have a chance to offer amendments. did notbill and they have a chance to offer amendments.

this includes the provision. an employee feels if they were accused wrongly, they can appeal and get that overturned. host: what is the latest on when this bill might get a flu -- get this was the last thing that happened before they left town. they wanted to have it in a legislative language by monday and they were hoping to get it on the floor as soon as this week. senator harry reid did not make any promises that would happen. i think they want to move as quickly as they can't move this forward. this is still in the public eye and they're waiting to see. i think we could see it this week. they're going to have to start figuring out the amendment process. think wean do that i can see action very quickly. if itp if it is --host:

is passed in the senate, what are the prospects in the house -- in the house? have some house will concerns over the cost. a little over $200 million to pay for emergencies and appropriations. if you do get an overwhelming vote in the senate you are going to see action in the house. because the house already passed its accountability bill for firing executives, they may take this to a formal conference committee. host: one hot topic of debate that has come up in recent months. of sexual assault in the military in general. it how does the sanders mccain legislation deal with some of those issues? guest: the bill makes it easier

for veterans to get care for sexual assault. originals part of the -- this was part of the original bernie sanders bill. as you heardo -- there are a lot of things in his bill he would still like to see the v.a. address at some point. in addition to the sexual assault language there are also expanded benefits for the veterans and surviving spouse of the veterans that are killed. herb hummel we appreciate you -- jeremy herb, we appreciate you joining us. took to the sunday address or weakened address, the republicans weekly address, and talked about the steps he wanted to see changed at the veterans affairs department. here is what he had to say. [video clip] gratefulans are a

people. we reject the idea of letting our own people down. to see all this deception and, -- and incompetence at the v.a. with no accountability and no action, it is more than just a shame, it is a national disgrace. we asked the president to take three immediate steps. we asked the president to support a bill that the house has already passed, that makes it easier to fire senior v.a. executives who refuse to do their jobs. no more slaps on the wrist. the only right those contributed to this scandal should have is the right to be shown the door. the president to order the v.a. to fully cooperate with the committees that are investigating this matter. v.a. is currently sitting on 111 requests alone. it has become a case study. the president to back reforms that would require the department to offer private

care to any veteran faced with the prospect of unacceptable waits for treatment. host: house republican jeff miller in the weekly republican address. we are asking our viewers if you have lost trust in the v.a. system. you can participate on the conversation on twitter, on our facebook page. several comments this morning. anthony writes -- you can participate on the conversation. on twitter --

our phone lines are open this morning as we talk about this. have you lost trust in the v.a.? if so, what does the v.a. need to do to earn back that trust? we have that special line for veterans. we will go to our independent line first. and he is waiting in flint, michigan. i have offered an idea to my representatives in washington dc. we have high schools sitting all over the country. everything in the high schools are ready made for our veteran. we just need to put some beds in there, do some rewiring for them to accept hospital equipment. we have great hospitals locally.

the veterans could be triaged at a major va hospital and sent to their hometown or as close as possible if these high schools were refund rushed and made into smaller local va hospital's. the buildings are sitting there. they have exercise in the auditorium. you see this as a short-term immediate fix until more facilities, more permanent --ilities are built he echo are built he echo -- are built? them home where they can be close to their families, their friends, and has people take care of them that they know. be housed in their own high school building. cafeteria,y have the the bathrooms, the elevators, the swimming pool, the

gymnasium, the showers. everything is there. that is annie in flint, michigan. michael is in florida. good morning. caller: good morning. this is a disgrace. this is not how you treat veterans that laid their lives on the line for our country. inan't even imagine what's store for us once obamacare kicks in. what can the v.a. do to regain your trust c echo it seems like you have lost trust. caller: it is not so much the v.a. but the government. turn it over to the private sector. host: that special line for

veterans, henry is waiting in calling in from california. caller: there is nothing anyone can do to correct anything that is going on in the v.a.. the v.a. is corrupt at every level, just as every government job is. the they are all gaming the system from the lowest level to the highest level. in order to correct anything at all would be to simply turn it over. but that will not eliminate corruption because that is what the government is. host: can i ask you for a couple of examples of that? where the ucd corruption? -- where do you see corruption? their: the veteran is in

to get the rehabilitation, the --gs, and also the freebies i am a little bit stuck here. the next one is at the professional level, the volunteers are all gaming the system. for example, the volunteer is there to receive freeman -- receive free care. the next one is the professional. assistance, they are gaining no variety. they volunteer -- gaining notoriety. host: you are a veteran.

how much do you use the v.a. system? 465 years i was a 46 -- foreteran -- i was a disabled veteran. when i went to volunteer for the v.a. i discovered the system from the bottom to the top. if the entire system is corrupt -- you can't condemn it because that is the natural thing about g jobs. i am now 90% disabled. 90% after 65 the years of waiting. talking about his experiences. michael writes wrightson on our

twitter page -- -- writes in on our twitter page -- stay on this topic for the next half hour or so. we also want to show you some headlines from other papers around the country today. here is the lead story in "the new york times" talking about sergeant bo bergdahl and his treatment while he was a prisoner of the taliban. bowe bergdahl's release is sure to be a topic of the sunday shows. with a deeper look on what is going on later this morning is c-span radio. >> on today's sunday tv talk shows, some of the topics include the release of sergeant bergdahl from the taliban. also the president posture to europe and the 70th anniversary of d-day and the v.a. health system.

you can hear rebroadcasts of the program on c-span radio beginning at 1 p.m. with nbc's "meet the press," preempted by the french open. hillary clinton will be a guest, author of the book "hard choices." also mike rogers, chairperson of the house intelligence committee. it is "fox news sunday." guest includes retired general jack keane, it at military thatst, and mother of first class matthew martine it. at 3 p.m., john kerry and john mccain. at 4 p.m. it is "face the nation" from cbs. on the program is the chairman and vice-chairman of the senate intelligence committee, senator dianne feinstein from california and saxby chalice of georgia.

the sunday talk shows are brought to you as a public service by c-span. they begin at 1 p.m. with abc's "this week," at 3 p.m. it is "state of the union," and at 4 p.m. it is "face the nation." crossan listen to them a the country on xm satellite radio. you can download our free app for your smart phone or go online to www.c-span.org. host: we are asking our viewers if you lost trust in the v.a. system. if the answer is yes, how can the v.a. go about restoring that trust? another story in "the washington post" in the search of new of thehip in the wake

resignation of eric shinseki. this potential v.a. nominee withdraws his name, is the headline. we have our phone lines open. our special line for veterans in -- we will start in maryland on our line for democrats. george, good morning. i have a reverse of what everyone has been saying. my father served in world war ii. he had a stroke later in his

life. he was 87 when he had a stroke. we put him in manor care in richmond virginia where he developed stage for bedsores. we had to have a doctor force to force a -- we had to doctor to take him by ambulance to the hospital. of my father would have died in the private -- my father would have died in the so-called glorified private medical system, but the v.a. nursed my father back to health to live another year and a half. he had a private room at the v.a. and around-the-clock care. -- he would not have survived if he did not leave the medical care. -- leave the manor care. host: what has been your reaction to the secret wait list?

people you have so many coming back, a flood of people coming back from iraq and iran. the main concern was take care of posttraumatic stress syndrome. i know you have a flood of people that are coming into the v.a. system here. i also know the v.a. through the secret waiting list -- there is a number of challenges of people going to the v.a. prior to both prior to obama. it is a bipartisan situation. it has escalated because you have more peoplereturning. you have a flood. you have to get doctors hired and make sure you can pay them. a competitive system.

host: we appreciate your thoughts on the topic. george was talking about understanding the veteran's population and the different issues, different veterans -- the different issues different veterans from different generations are facing. he was a bit of what he has to say. [video clip] >> we have an aging veteran population from world war ii. -- god bless them them, they are still with us. that is an aging veteran population and requires a thanrent kind of care those of iraq and afghanistan. frank, a lot of that is geriatric care created to be frank geriatric care is expensive. -- geriatric care. geriatric care is

expensive. we have to understand iraq and afghanistan war veterans and what their needs are. our planning has not been very impressive to me. host: we are getting thoughts and comments as we ask if you have lost trust in the v.a. system. on our twitter page -- we will go to coleman waiting in tulsa, oklahoma. good morning. the solution is competition and the democrats and the unions have joined together, and that is well known, to eliminate any competition. they have done it in the schools, it is in the v.a.. once you have the unions in control and the democrats

support -- you have a combination there that people do not have choice. competition are the solution and the vouchers is one way. we see it in the public schools, we see it in the v.a.. obamacare will not allow competition or choice. this is the basic problem. people do not have the freedom to make choices, so they are forced into a corrupt system. once government unions -- the: can i ask you about v.a. deal that was struck between sanders and mccain -- is there anything about that deal that you like? more money to address immediate needs, plus a veterans who live 40 miles away from v.a. care can seek treatment at other facilities as well.

is there anything about that you like? commonsense solutions are out there. that very thing allows more choice. if you prevent people from having an alternative -- you are put on a corrupt wait list you die. politicians are coming forward with the choice. the corruption between the democrats and the union and not allowing people freedom of choice. let's stay in tulsa oklahoma on our line for veterans.

caller: i have been in the v.a.. i have seen them improve a lot. the problem starts from the very beginning. it is the timing. this new bill. it is not even the -- even enough. facilities are a lot more advanced and expensive than they think. a matter of more funding or better leadership or both? caller: both. host: is there any thoughts of

who you would like to see as the next head of the department? veteran,t has to be a somebody who is experienced three somebody who has experienced the system, going through the system. host: dennis michael in tulsa, oklahoma. on our twitter page -- some of those same sentiments expressed by the founder of the national veterans foundation in his piece for "the huffington post." he writes --

let's go to rhonda waiting in wichita, kansas on our line for independents. caller: thank you for taking my call. i would like to see the vad centralized. v.a.ld like to see -- the decentralized. i think there are too many wayle managers who are paid too much and who appeared to be accountable to no one. the they certainly don't seem to come forward to speak to the media, at least at the local level. of i have seen excellent work in

some v.a. facilities, horrific outcomes and others. i think decentralization and rather thanormance rising up through the ranks of government bureaucracy might solve part of our problem. to kathleen in saint augustine, florida on our line for republicans. caller: good morning. veterannd was a korean and was cared for in the v.a. system. i think the biggest flaw they have is the unions. i think civil service gives enough people -- gives people enough protection. of the only thing i saw there were a lot of people doing a lot of nothing, a lot of wasted time and wasted facilities. i think the intent of the v.a. is good.

i think every hospital -- if the director finds faulty work they need to get rid of it. this idea that the union steps in with another layer of protection on top of civil service, i don't think that is good. host: what would be the role of the v.a., the head of the v.a. under the scenario that you laid out? i think the way it would be most effective would be to -- maybe have boards that are like stained cabinets where the oversight would be a lot more localized than it is right now. that is the biggest problem we saw.

at one point my husband's records had gotten lost. it had taken years and years to find them and get them back and to be able to be served in the system. i think things like that need to be done away with. host: on twitter -- we want to hear your thoughts. have you lost trust in the v.a. system? if so, how does the government go out -- go about gaining that trust back? onwant to keep you updated other headlines going on around the country. in virginia yesterday, ed easily won his party's

nomination to take on senator mark warner -- this story according to " the richmond times dispatch." formerespie is a chairman of the republican national committee. democrats right now hold 55 of the 100 seats, including two independent seats. the richmond times dispatch defending republicans 21 of the 36 seats on the ballot on november 4, we will talk in thehe senate field next segment. several stories in today's papers about hillary clinton's upcoming book, being released on tuesday. the review in "the new york

times" -- we will talk more about that book with jonathan allen, a -- a co-authort of a book about larry clinton. about hillary clinton. a new poll from "the washington " about hillary clinton's job approval. 59% approving as of june this year. the washington post poll also if you're caucus was being held, who would you vote? hillary clinton gets 69% of that vote. on newsmakers this week c-span

hosted john barrasso, republican from wyoming. he is a republican policy committee chair. how republicans can beat hillary clinton if she is the candidates in the 2016 election. here's what he had to say. [video clip] >> i think there are about a dozen of them and whoever we nominate, we have a number of governors looking at it. we have a number of activists and former officeholders. i think we will have a lot of opportunity between now and 2016 . foreign policy will be a part of that discussion if hillary is the nominee. host: you can see that entire interview with republican policy committee chair john barrasso today at 10 a.m. and 6 p.m. on c-span. you can also hear it on c-span radio and newsmakers is available online at www.c-span.org.

we want to get your comments in on this question we asked this morning, have you lost trust in the v.a. system? sarah has been waiting in tucson, arizona on our line for independents. good morning. because i have followed politics for so long i have not lost trust. of there was a time when veterans -- there was a time when veterans came back from the war and they had ptsd or different things wrong with them and they were not getting the mental health care that they needed. that barack obama has to go to get that mental health care. passed a bill to get that mental health care. of there are things this administration has implemented as well. i think the biggest thing with americans is they don't understand how bills work. they don't understand the veterans bill that mccain and bernie sanders put together.

money, a lott of of hands in the cookie jar. a lot of corporations have their hand in their. there were three bills that merged into one. republicans through a hundred different amendments in their. you have to realize it comes from both sides and people need to realize there is a problem with the v.a. being able to fix it. it is not just one person problem -- one person's problem, it is a huge greedy industry. host: there have been some calls to privatize the v.a. or open it up to private businesses. on our twitter page -- the debate happening on whether

to privatize the v.a. or not, your thoughts? think it is silly. my dad is a veteran, he is a republican. he worked hard for this country. my mom is a democrat. it is not about what side of the party you stand on. he had his knee surgery done at the v.a. and they took care of him. he has never had a problem with them ever. i think this is just silly. -- our prison system has been privatized. we have to fix the system. privatizing isn't the answer. it is human beings working together to create a better environment. host: sam is in tampa, florida on our line for democrats. caller: good morning. veteran. if i didn't get my health services i wouldn't have any

health insurance. i am in tampa florida. what i find is that we have so many older veterans in the system, people who are already on medicare who could be getting their services from the private sector. i deal with the private sector. i don't think anyone can get equal to or better than services at the v.a.. i would like to have my checkups every three months. i have not been able to do that. my last checkup appointment was eight months ago. i got pretty good health. why haven't you been able

to do that he echo you said you would like to have them sooner. -- do that? you said you would like to have it done sooner. i could have told them i want my services -- i want a check up every three months. i did not press it. in july, i'mntment going to ask for that. when i go, that there are a whole bunch of people. i know most of them are on medicare. why can't we get those people off the v.a. echo -- off the v.a. and they can get their services from the private sector? i think that takes care of half of the all veterans right there. on this question --

i want to give you a few other headlines, some news that happened right here on capitol hill yesterday. this is according to "roll call." one other story making news this weekend --

we will keep track of that news as it develops. a few more of your calls. from new kensington, pennsylvania on our line for republicans. trust in the v.a. system? i think one of the

comment threads is the union that runs it. i think the government unions, you have to have an into these government unions. with government unions. i think it restricts freedom of choice. there are so many good employees in the v.a. who are dedicated. one politician, i can't remember who it was, recommended that only vets should be employees at the v.a. because they have a call to serve their vets. you have to encourage competition and decentralization. decentralize the v.a. host: if you made a requirement that everybody who worked in the v.a. was a veteran, would that encourage competition? good point. is a i agree, that is something i thought of that you really should have.

people who have a calling to do that, just as the parochial schools, so many dedicated teachers are teaching not because of money. i know so many people at v.a.'s debt at the v.a.'s are doing gods work. -- at the v.a.'s are doing gods work. n awful lot of people that really think that these veterans deserve better. host: let's hear from one of those veterans. freddie is calling in from indianapolis, indiana. good morning. caller: i am a veteran. not only am i a veteran but i am also a volunteer at my local va hospital. hearing from people who have no idea what is going on. host: tell us your experience.

caller: great, marvelous. i have no complaints whatsoever. the v.a. health care system is one of the best health care systems. privatizing it will not improve it one bit. most of the hospitals, if not you hear talkl's, about sending patients out. that is occurring right now. patients are being sent out. i had to have it procedure done. goingave me the choice of outside to have it done, which i did. that took me another 30 days once i signed a contract. host: do you think the system could use an infusion of cast -- of cash? caller: what we need is more

employees coming into the system. that is what is going on. we don't have the personnel on hand. i had a talk with my director at my hospital and i had a one-on-one talk. this -- let meas back up a minute. i am also a representative at my hospital. a representative of the committee. those committees advise the director and director keeps us informed as to what is going on. i informed my director last week , we need to work together. there was no reason for the

director of that arizona hospital to be in trouble the way she was in. she could have come to the committee and explained her .ituation arizona would be screaming to their congas person. there is a culture there that would disallow upper management to come to the people. host: how do you fix that culture? caller: you can't fix the culture. what you can do, raise their problems to the committee. if he or she brings their problems to the committee the committee will see that our congress people do the right thing. the problem is not the unions. the problem is that this culture -- it is just like everyone wants to protect their jobs. calling in from

indiana, he will be the last in this segment. duffy joinedifer us as we look at the battle for control of the u.s. senate. later bloomberg business news bureau chief jonathan allen is here to discuss heller clinton's new book. we feature the history and literary life of salt lake city. our booktv and american history networks will be showing that coming up today at 2 p.m. we will show all of our salt .ake history offerings >> brigham young led a group of children to the valley. they were a vanguard.

they were paving the way, they refining the best route. there were sent here to find a way and get things started. once they established a fort and got family settled, brigham young and many of the men turned around and went back to the missouri river because there peopleproximately 11,000 there waiting to come. he helped organize the rest of this massive migration, which is going to come more than a thousand miles to the salt lake valley. the ultimate goal was to establish what the latter-day states -- latter day saints referred to as a sign. this was planned to be an ideal community. it was a utopian community that was meant to be a religious city. it was meant to have equality and justice.

and peace and harmony and love. -- in order toat do that they felt like they needed to lay out their town in this order the system that joseph smith had established, where the streets are uniform according to the points of the compass with the spiritual core of that community. core at the heart of that community. >> we bring public affairs from washington directly to you, putting you in the room at congressional hearings, white house events, readings, and conferences. and offering gavel-to-gavel coverage of the u.s. house. we are c-span, created by the cable tv industry 35 years ago and brought to you as a public service by your local cable or satellite provider. watch us in hd, like us on facebook, and follow us on twitter.

"washington journal" continues. topic ofurned to the the 2014 election. joining us again to put a spotlight on the u.s. senate races that could determine control of that chamber is jennifer duffy, senior editor of the cook political report. after tuesday's primary conference we will be half with through the season. do you see enough to make a prediction? guest: it is a 50-50 proposition at this point. one event can change things. we do still have a couple of more primaries to go. we now have a runoff in mississippi that may have some impact on the overall picture. think about when the cycle started in the past for republicans was very narrow -- you can do it but it was very narrow. everything had to go right.

what republicans have done is expanded the playing field. now that they have a little bit of room for error they don't need that perfect game. you have 15 republicans but 21 democrats. democrats are defending more seats. more important is where they are defending those seats. that the eight states democrats have to defend that mitt romney one. won.tt romney areeally is where the races more than how many there are. host: we are showing the map from the cook political report. the states in great are listed as the tossup races.

of the the key battles cycle, louisiana, arkansas, north carolina, kentucky, michigan. we will be talking about all of those over the course of the next 45 minutes. the latest news on the senate races coming out of virginia, where republicans now have a candidate after yesterday's convention. ed gillespie is on the table for virginia. guest: whether virginia gets to the point of what we would call a tossup or lean democrat, it will depend on the local environment. i think virginia is still very much a swing state. it is very easy to see how gillespie gets to 46%. those last couple of points are but the be a challenge

convention was unlike last year's gubernatorial. this year was pretty free of drama. host: no big surprises. guest: they did it on the first after acclamation of the only competitor to drop out. they were worried at the beginning. turnout was much lighter. when you had ew jackson, the lieutenant governor nominee who ando controversial, get up -- there washill about an hour of conservative --

it blew over. let's be got over 60% of the vote. llespie got over 60% of the vote. host: we are halfway to the primary season. what you want to see in the second half before you can make an actual prediction? i want to see what happens in mississippi. i think i have a good idea but let's see how close it is. what happens in south carolina on tuesday. south carolina is another runoff state. the threshold for that is 50% of the vote. north carolina is 40% better. lindsey graham has six opponents. that 50% might be a little bit challenging. becomest is a runoff it

a completely different race. the tea party is divided between two or three tea party candidates. in a runoff there is a possibility that they unite. graham has been a target of the tea party since before the tea party. he has always had a primaries. he has always got through them. by tuesday he aims for 50%. pat robertson has a tea party challenger, who has been somewhat controversial. august is a long way away. i remember 2010 when we thought that the tea party was done after the early primaries and they decided they would go to alaska. lisa murkowski ended up losing that primary and then she was a

write-in. we are always watching. of the other thing to remember is -- the other thing to bad candidatee can be a problem in every senate race. we saw that with todd akin, with richard murdoch in indiana back in 2012. democrats effectively use them against other republican candidates to pretty great effect, especially given the controversial nature of their comments. have oneuse you candidates does not mean that one candidate cannot be a big problem. host: if you have questions or comments about the senate race is going on, our four month are open. -- our phone lines are open.

happy to take your calls and comments. we talked about the runoffs going on. thefrom one of republicans in that race, going after john kingston. [video clip] >> he is the one who has made a mess. he chewed on business. he took a $1 million bonus. it also millions more from obama's stimulus. and he has no problems with common core standards that nationalize schools, eating away at local control. david purdue, something does not smell right. >> i approved this message. kingston, one of the two candidates in that runoff.

guest: the runoff is july 22. it is a very long time between the primary and runoff. south carolina is only two weeks. mississippi is three weeks. it is like nine or 10 weeks in georgia. it is a long time to have a very big fight, which i think you are going to have. fight continuing in david purdue's response to jack kingston. let's show that. [video clip] >> jack kingston has been in georgia for more than two decades. bigvoters do not want more spending experience. what is jack kingston to do? what all politicians do. he lashed out falsely at david purdue. the truth is david purdue has saved and created thousands of jobs. we don't need more washington bid we need a conservative outsider. >> i am david purdue, and i approved this message. host: jennifer duffy from the

cook political report, what does this mean for the runoff race in november? becauses interesting this is one place or republicans got something that that either f whom they would be happy with in a general election. it is interesting to see this republican establishment has seemed to rally around kingston a little. he has gotten some endorsements, the chamber of commerce has been up with an ad for him. i thought that maybe they would stay out, but that isn't the case. i think purdue made a couple of mistakes in the primary, that worries republican strategists some. veryis going to be a interesting race, david purdue has a lot of money and is willing to invest it. we also have several vulnerabilities. you sought in the beginning of kingston's at, he went into companies and tried to fix them.

that usually ends up costing jobs. some someven king fodder. i haven't seen any polling here yet, it will be interesting to see the first round and how they are doing. who is the democrat waiting for this? guest: michelle nunn. she is ceo of the largest volunteer organization in america, and the daughter of former senator sam nunn. longtime senator, moderate democrat. she is running as a moderate, an outsider. she has done very well so far. this race isat very close, she has gotten the gift of this republican primary runoff. this general election will not start until late july. host: jennifer duffy is here to

take your questions. barbara is calling in from bridgeport, connecticut. caller: i think what disturbs me so much is that the republicans seem to like to cheat all the time. they never want to win anything fairly. they also lies so much, it is so disturbing. sometimes i have to turn off the tv because when you listen to them, they don't tell the truth. i'm africanating -- american, and it bothers me. the cheating at all of the different states to win, they are switching around the voting districts. gerrymandering, i think that's the word for it. they are trying to take away our voting rights. why don't they just try to win fairly? they know they won't win if they do it fairly, so they resort to cheating. host: jennifer duffy, on this

cheating issue that barber brings up. guest: it's interesting. gerrymandering, i suppose if you are on the losing end of that process you call it cheating, but it's really the way the system is set up. the party in control in each state gets to draw the lines. what needs to happen, if they want less of that, is states need to redraw their districts differently. look at california. democrats control the processing california for decades, and republicans got the very short end of the stick there. they have gone now to a nonpartisan citizens commission, and they -- they also went to a top two primary, which means everyone runs in the same ballot, the top two candidates regardless of party moved to the general election. for that reason, we are seeing a more competitive house races in

california than ever. iowa is another good example. nonpartisan commission, there are always competitive house races in iowa as a result. they are drawn fairly evenly. i understand why the caller wants to blame republicans, but really, you're to blame the system. host: you brought up senator lindsey graham, this is from twitter. graham hasn't in a foreign he wants to avoid. foreign affairs issues an issue in this primary? not really. it's whether or not graham is conservative enough. you have to understand the graham -- his committee assignments lends itself to getting involved in those kinds of issues. john mccain,t with they'd travel a lot. he is on the armed services --

he actually has an ad up with some servicepeople thanking them for getting him the right equipment in afghanistan. committees lend itself to that, so yes, he gets involved a lot. meddling, i'm not sure i'd use the word meddling. are having a were just tuesday, we talking about iowa being a state with competitive house races. also a state with a competitive senate races well. iowa, on our line for democrats. caller: it's michigan. host: sorry. also competitive race in michigan. caller: i was wondering two things, one, what is the effect of the koch brothers spending and americans for prosperity? money in been spending this race.

recently, the republican flopped at theof mackinac center, she had problems dealing with a press conference. is the co-brother money going to be a big effect in michigan and another senate races? host: before jennifer duffy johnson on that, let's show what you are talking about. here is an americans for prosperity ad from late may, going after democrat gary peters. [video clip] >> everything seems to cost more these days. middle-class families are struggling. conversely gary peters is making things worse. voting for obama care, driving up our health premiums by nearly 40%. putting even more pressure on family budgets. can your family afford to pay more? in michigan families pay more?

tell contributors to stop supporting obamacare. guest: americans for prosperity has spent millions, tens of millions of dollars not just in michigan, but in most of these competitive senate races. they have focused largely on obamacare. i think what they have done is sort have -- sort of kept the playing field level. i don't think we will see any democratic candidates get outspent because of this money. earlier, i think the big winners here are tv stations. in spendingook at by race, use the democratic groups start to catch up. i don't think the scale will be out of whack. host: before we leave michigan, here is an ad from the senate

majority pack. guest: the senate majority pack supportsper pac that democrats, both incumbents and challengers. the head of it is harry reid, he raises a lot of money for it. but they are sort of the unofficial arm, so to speak. host: here's the senate majority pac in michigan. [video clip] would outlaw abortions for victims of rape nss. >> i can't afford it her. >> if the billionaires bankrolling her make -- make it bigger tax breaks. >> michigan women cannot afford her. jennifer duffy, is this an

effective ad? guest: it's very effective. i'm not sure all of it is true. -- it is interesting the use it is interesting these two ads you chose. they are at the heart of this race, his war on women. i haven't really used it much against women candidates. their campaign is fighting back on this issue. did and't add -- she add a month ago where the kicker line was i think i know more about women than gary peters. it was a fairly effective bad. -- it was a fairly effective add. republicane more women fighting back on this charge that they are waging a war on women. ast: south carolina has

primary this tuesday, let's go to david in south carolina on our line for republicans. i am hoping the people down here will wake up this time . lindsey graham needs to go. [indiscernible] republicans found out what he was doing and got rid of him, democrats wouldn't hire him. we vote with the democrats against him, he needs to go. needs to leave the tv on a longer, and see who is doing the lying and cheating. host: david, one of the voters that might give lindsey graham out on tuesday. is a: it's funny, but that common theme we hear, that grandma votes -- that lindsey graham votes too much with

democrats. not the most conservative member of the senate, but he is also not the most moderate. he is in the middle of the pack. south carolina, that is not what they want to see. they want somebody like tim very down the line conservative. int: let's go to mariano florida, on our line for republicans. when is the republican party going to work on getting their message out? they seem to always have a problem with getting a consistent message. i was a democrat for over 45 years. but i recently switched parties,

i got tired of the democrats prevaricating. thenlaying politics, and trying to give away everything to everyone. and then not taking responsibility for anything. --as the republicans, whereas the republicans seem very earnest. the problem they have is that they don't know how to get their ideas -- their fundamental beliefs, which is their strength. they don't seem to be able to convey that. they want to play the same game the democrats are playing. but their fundamental philosophy doesn't really go along with that type of thinking. jennifer duffy, some of the issues that mari otto brings

up, do they get lost in the primaries? guest: i think that they do get a little bit lost because, when you spend so much time and effort, and money on primaries that pivot to the general election can be really tough. not every candidate does it. also tend to provide democrats with a lot of fodder. themaller talked about playing the same game, they don't have much of a choice. one of the fundamental rules of politics is you don't let an attack go unanswered. does the message get lost, maybe. other problems that exist here is that republicans do not have the white house. head of the a party, a national figure like obama, like the president, or even like harry reid who feels

that -- who articulates the message day after day. if there is no one who has that role in the republican party, i understand why the caller doesn't feel like he is hearing the republican message. host: john boehner isn't in that role, or mitch mcconnell? guest: john boehner is not particularly well suited for that role. he knows it. he tries. but he has a good dose of honesty, he will tell you exactly what he is thinking. it may not always be on message. mitch mcconnell right now doesn't have that role, because he is up for reelection. he has to focus on kentucky. they need somebody to fill that vacuum. odds on a party is at few big issues.

immigration being one of them. so that gets in the way of the message. host: kentucky is one of the races that seems to be a tossup race this year. north carolina, we have john in north carolina who seems to take some issue with that. i think it will be close, john writes. i think maybe he was at the republican convention this weekend. why do i have it is a tossup? that's what the polls say. this is a margin of error rates. one of the things that benefits is. tellis -- till that'ss in the low 40's, a bad place to be as an incumbent. hery has been spent against on things like health care reform, that is a particularly tough issue in north carolina.

very bighit with premium increases right off the bat. this is really a tight race. it is going to be one of the closest. obamacare in north carolina in -- obama carried north carolina in 2008. romney carried it in 2012. it is very purple. host: harold in pennsylvania, good morning. caller: i totally agree with the woman from connecticut 100%. are almostlicans acting like domestic terrorists. they are belligerent, they're arrogant, they have no respect. they shut the government down last year. they are hurting a lot of people in this country. host: jennifer duffy, the

government shutdown that harold brings up -- how is that playing in the 2014 election? , it has see it in ads come up and adds that so-and-so voted to shut down the government. realolks are paying attention to it. voters have moved on, they are concerned about other things. i think of any candidate got up and said flat out, one of my objectives here is to shut down the government if we don't balance the budget, then that is an issue. but by and large, they are avoiding it. our: another response to caller from connecticut. host: we're talking with jennifer duffy from the cook political report. lots of calls from south carolina this morning. pat is waiting on our line from republicans. caller: good morning.

and thank you for taking my call. lindsey graham -- the problem with lindsey graham is that he has been up there too long. we need term limits. he loves to give our money to every country in this world, when we need it over here. we need term limits, i don't care what party is, they do not stay up there 20 years keeping us at heart. thank you. host: pat, and south carolina. in south carolina. you said it was a tough year in senate races, i want to play and add it from american crossroads about the senate race going on in arkansas against senator mark pryor. it tries to tie mark prior to president obama. [video clip] prior. next word is

>> may have the definition? pryor is the deciding vote for obama care. obama.r, >> close enough. does obama play in places like arkansas? guest: i think he is a huge issue in some of the states. he is very unpopular in arkansas. has a fairly moderate voting record, but he has 95% plus the president on key votes that have been selected. part ofans believe that

their path to victory is to link him to obama as much as possible. especially since he voted for health care reform. you will see a lot of bad like that in a number of states. from thee is an ad mark pryor camp talking about the republican candidate. [video clip] >> i mark pryor, and i approved this message. he voted five times to turn medicare over to the insurance companies. >> the national committee to preserve social security and medicare said cotton's care is expensive. >> it removes the care of of health coverage. >> tom cotton is running from his record. medicare, health issues. guest: yes. arkansas tends to be an older state.

are aiming this at seniors, they are aiming this at their base. we have seen democrats talk about medicare and social security. in every cycle i can remember since 1986. here, but thell cotton campaign hit back. with the congressional record that showed back in 2011, mark pryor talks about the possibility of having to raise the retirement age. host: we're talking with jennifer duffy of the cook political report, for the next 10 minutes or so as we go through the key battles of 2014. david in michigan, for our line on democrats. caller: good morning. thank you so much for c-span and for taking my call. ads inh brothers

michigan, everyone of them have gotten debunked. terri lynn land it was our secretary of state, all she is known for is cutting. they make her out to be a hero for the automotive. itwas gary peters that saved along with president obama. is getting their ads debunked. if republicans don't cheat, they can't win. as far as gerrymandering, democrats have never gerrymandered like these republicans have. michigan is really paying the price for republican rule. host: jennifer duffy. not right about democrats never gerrymandering, of course they have. that is the name of the game. drawing districts has gotten much more sophisticated.

it used to be a bunch of people in a room with maps and magic ,arkers, now we have technology it can take you down to individual blocks. or individual neighborhoods in cities and towns. that sort of the point of gerrymandering. the automotive industry, the bailout he brings up a good point. terri lynn land did not vote on that. democrats are the using. given its michigan, they may use that to great effect. democratic senatorial campaign, the national republican senatorial campaign committee, one of these groups? -- what are these groups? guest: these are committees that are established by each party, their job is to protect their incumbents. and second, to recruit challengers.

they do everything from independent spend insurers -- expenditures, and both committees have been out there buying television time for the fall. ,hey give advice to campaigns they do some polling, they do a lot of research. they raise money both for themselves, for their operating expenses, and to help a senate candidate. the committees have evolved. my boss will tell me the stories late -- as recently as the 1970's, they didn't need their own building. they have gotten that big. they shared office space with the senate, but they have gotten so big now that they have moved out on their own. host: and raising quite a bit of money this cycle. the democratic committee has

come as of the end of april, $25 million in cash on hand. point 3fter raising six million dollars in april. the republican counterpart has $22 million on hand at the end of april, after raising $6 million that month. you talk about reserving tv time, they give viewers a sense of where these committees want to play. play int: they are going to the races that are closest, they have been reserving time in places like alaska. alaska is going to see more political advertising in the senate race the cycle than they have ever seen. i was told by somebody in alaska that the tv stations don't quite know what to do, they are getting so many requests. millions of dollars there, you will see them spent in arkansas, louisiana, north carolina, michigan. they will spend money in all these places. up alaska, ang

story in the new york times, outdoor -- outside money floods alaska. we are with jennifer duffy for a few more minutes. sandra is in virginia, on our line for independents. caller: good morning. i would like ask your guest about what she thinks about the race with eric cantor. his competitors running on a platform of being against amnesty for illegals? guest: i don't think the cancer has much of her problem. i was looking at the ad spending in that race the other day, he doesn't really have the resources to do it. takes nothing for granted, he spent a lot in ads.

and getting his troops ready. the one thing we are seeing in the house is that some incumbents, and i don't think you do need to republicans, are underreporting -- under performing. they are winning, but not by as much as they should be. i think it is voters -- voter unhappiness. and women work in an institution with a 12% recruiting -- approval rating. cantor's race happening this tuesday. saw theenate side, we convention happening. we are talking with jennifer duffy of the cook political report, you can check that out kpolitical.com.

let's go to herman, in illinois, for for democrats. caller: good morning. my comment is, the american people -- do they really realize republicans tried to shut down the government? they did shut down the government. other comment is about dick durbin, is the number two, and why it's even majority leader if harry lead -- harry reid if the democrats keep the senate? actually, that is a good question. aout whether there is leadership change if democrats lose their majority. not outside the possibility, it is certainly the subject of much speculation around washington. there are two people who would be considered to be the next

leader. is ups dick durbin, who for reelection. and the other is from new york. i think you talk to members, no one wants to see that race. both are well-liked, well respected. quite an interesting battle, if it comes to that. beuspect that some deal will reached before it ever comes to that. host: dick durbin listed as a solid democratic seat by the cook political report. you can click around and find information about each race and candidates. in their last election, dick durbin got 68% of the vote. you can see it the full map on cookpolitical.com . caller: good morning. just a couple quick comments.

congress, they are there to serve the people. the biggest problem is they have gotten away from serving the people. they are now self-serving. i believe that it was dead wrong for the bailout in michigan. for my get bailed out negligence, irresponsible spending. neither should they. i was for the government shutdown, because the lesson can be learned if there is constant hampering, bailing out, changing the rules of the spending ceiling and stuff like that. that's all i had to say, thank you. host: greg, expressing this anti-incumbent sentiment that we have heard about.

to be. incumbents need concerned, especially about the sort of feelings? guest: i think very concerned. a lot of democratic incumbents in the senate are feeling that dissatisfaction that people want a little bit of a change. outsiders are tending to do pretty well, at least in primaries. it is interesting. this is what i love about politics, the gentleman from michigan was very supportive of the bailout. it,ar as he's concerned that is government working for the people. the gentleman in virginia, very opposed to it, and in his mind, the shutdown was working for the people. that's what makes this so much fun. host: jennifer duffy is the senior editor at the cook political report. thank you for coming by this morning. up next, jonathan allen will join us to talk about hillary memoir, hard

choices. later, carol rosenberg joins us to discuss the status of prisoners at guantánamo bay. we will be right back. ♪ >> the reason we are trying to focus on the speaker is because it is the speaker, with the full majesty and weight of his position, who yesterday made certain allegations -- at this point, he has not yet answered to. i will yield to you. >> you have an argument -- an audience, you don't normally have that. , thenteresting fact is

whole tenor of your remarks and 1972, to 1970 taking out of context. you are there for one purpose alone, in my opinion, and that was to imply that members of the side were un-american in their activities. waited, when you responded, you knew there was nobody there. you knew there was nobody here. >> cam scam. -- give us your perspective. >> steve o'neill was really a giant. he knew the politics of the house. he knew the politics of the house, and he kept much of it to himself, in terms of other members. he obviously received a great amount of intelligence all day long for members, what was going on in different places. he always believed that politics was the art of the possible.

nobody got their way all the time, and he was a broker within the democratic caucus, and within the house. you saw was newt gingrich, who made a conscious decision that they would always be in the minority because they worked with the majority. so we started attacking bob michael, the leader, and john rhodes, and everybody on that side. and his own party. because he said, the only avenue to the majority is through confrontation. and we're going to take them down, this was an argument about the misuse of tv, now coming to the floor. you asked these rhetorical questions, make these charges, and he knew in fact the chamber was empty. but at that time, the camera was very tight on the speaker peter -- the rule came to show the chamber either had people in it or, that changes the holden amex. that was the process that now,

many years later, has torn this institution apart. paralyzed the institution. >> garbagemen george miller, tonight at 8:00 on c-span q&a. >> washington journal continues. hillary clinton's memoir as her years of secretary of state is said to be released on tuesday. excerpts from that book hard choices are ready finding their way into news reports. jonathan allen, co-allen of the new york times best-selling book, hrc secrets, and the rebirth of hillary clinton. we know hillary clinton has been contemplating a potential presidential bid. how does this book fit into that process? guest: it is a big milestone on her path to running for president. she has been running all along, but the question is whether she

will stop not whether she will start. this is her take on the four years she had at the state department, a little bit of her take on the 2008 presidential campaign and what wrong there. withhat the relationship president obama was like. i think it is an effort by her to move past that as well, to start pivoting towards the future. hopefully being able talk about what her vision for 2016 is. rather than talking about the past. unfortunately for her, people like to talk about the past. , a is given 600 plus pages reason for people to ask questions about the book, about what she said in that, about what she didn't say in it. for a little while, it will be hard to move onto the next phase. is team hillary looking at the reception the book will receive, or is this more her staking out positions on various issues? hert: i'm not sure it is

staking out positions, or at least not the kind that would rally people around her cause. the book is not meant to be a campaign platform, it is not cryt to create a rallying for some sort of issue. will be watching what the reaction is, more than watching what the reaction is, they will take that reaction and portray it as a positive and the reason for her to jump into the presidential campaign. whatever metrics say use, book sold, box ships -- books shipped. they will say there is the tremendous cry for you to run, you should do that. in my book, we have for talking about what would bring her into a presidential campaign, and what brought her into campaigns in the past. time,s been drafted every which we found a little hard to take. as if she was an ambitious enough, or didn't want to do it on her own.

her view is that she has been willed, i think this book be used by her people to convince her and others that there is a big cry for her to run. host: some excerpts from her new book already coming out in various news stories, from cbs news last week from simon & schuster who are publishing her book. what is interested you the most? guest: difficult to she will have his dissing herself from president obama on things that have been unpopular. what ends up happening is a little bit of a model, which is why you have that title, hard choices. she is trying to explain how you could be on one side of an issue, and it might be right, or look right, and be on the other right at one look moment. these are complex choices. just ae was in denver,

week ago, she said that people in government shouldn't be judged on these hard choices that they are making. i thought that was fascinating. i don't think that claim goes over well with voters, the idea that if you are in a tough spot, you make a choice, it shouldn't come back to haunt you. i think most voters want to judge their elected officials on the decisions they make. host: one of the interesting excerpts coming up in the book is her talking about her first meeting with president obama before the 2008 convention. she writes, this courtesy of cbs news, we stared at each other like two teenagers on awkward first date. host: surprising? to see theuld like

video of him getting in the corsage on her. the idea that she doesn't care what people thinks about her is hard to swallow. i do think she showed the state department a new willingness to pay more attention to what she thought she should be doing, and less attention to what she thought was the politically expedient thing to do. of that liberation of the state department, her aides talk about that a lot. she seemed to be more liberated, a little less like she had to play a particular role. host: we are talking with jonathan allen, talking about hillary clinton's memoir hard choices set to be released on tuesday. here to take your questions and comments as we talk about

hillary clinton. republicans --republicans, call (202) 585-3881, democrats, call (202) 585-3880, independents, call (202) 585-3882. jack, good morning. caller: i'm calling concerning hillary clinton's ties to wall street. for businessidate now. -- ik on wall street worked on wall street. you know, a lot of people don't seem to -- they want to talk about this. the business interest on wall they knew that. they love the republicans. either way, they went out. it's what you call a hedge.

-- and inderstand why have done well. people don't support -- he is very bright, i've seen them on tv -- ryan sweitzer. that?e you smiling like he has the money coming as the brains, the iraq war, he has a point. she supported that, and i don't think he did. -- i don't agree with, but i like him a lot, senator sanders. he is unapologetic, i don't agree with him, but he is honest, i'm in a principal, he is not a hater. host: i want to let jonathan the potential candidates he brings up. hert: one of the issues for , its outlook a story, the hillary hedge.

one of the issue she has the democrats is that they feel like she has to do closely -- she is too closely tied to wall street. companies30 dow jones had given money to either the clinton foundation or the state department when hillary clinton was at state and raising money for private entities for the shanghai world's fair of 2010. i think there is a real strong argument on that side for democrats that want to make it, that she is close to wall street. people who support her would say that she is someone you can work with. business,t works of nonprofits, colleges, the government to try and bring people together for solutions to major world problems. it is a double-edged sword, something you hear a lot more on that populist and, for being too close to wall street. so far, i haven't seen brian sweitzer.

it's not clear he is going to run, it's not clear whose constituency would be in the democratic primary. i haven't seen a candidate they could take advantage of the fuehrer on the populace and to mount a primary. post thisington morning giving hillary clinton 69% of the vote in a potential primary. who would be her biggest challenge of the primary were held today? people writing in someone else's name, 69% of primary is really prohibitive as a favorite. host: do others have a clinton fatigue? guest: yes. the race is so defined by her at this point that, it is really her, or not her. and those are in the not her camp could rally around a particular candidate if there was one.

probablymalley is going to run, if for no other reason than in case she doesn't. vice president joe biden would make the decision to run whether or not she runs. he does not currently have the support of the president of the united states, who is black -- who has twice cap tim to be vice president. this unification of the party behind hillary, 69%. in 2008, front runner i'm not saying something couldn't come out of the woodwork and blindside her, but we don't see what we saw last time, which is a candidate who could do it. barack obama from 2004 on, he gave a great speech -- much better than john kerry's speech at the convention. there is no parallel right now on who could challenge her. davie, callingto in from new york on our line for

republicans. allen, on with jonathan from bloomberg news and co-author of the book hrc. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call, and thank you for c-span. first of all, regarding the last callers plugging of brian , i remember when he called the united states the saudi arabia of coal. coal, het the war on has been absolutely silent. he is allowed this administration, this democrat administration, to destroy the coal industry. regarding hillary clinton, i believe with 30% of the democrats not for her, combined with whoever wins the republican party primary nomination, will

have a united party. with 30% of the democrats say it will i would be away for republican victory should she win the nomination. she is not automatically electable as so many in the liberal media say she is. i say she can easily be defeated. host: jonathan allen. guest: i think she could be easily defeated in a general election, after eight years of barack obama. there are a lot of people who will want to move in a different direction. one of the challenges for her will be to define how she is different from president obama, presuming his approval numbers don't skyrocket between now and then. any open seat presidential contest will be competitive. about how she is the field of

democrats. just because 30% of people aren't for her now, doesn't mean they won't vote for her in a general election. in terms of democrats, i think most of them would. but there is a lot of race to be run. we don't knew who the republican nominee is, we don't know who the democratic nominee is. someright, this is not summer election to a half years out. host: coming out on tuesday, hillary clinton's memoir hard choices. you wrote the book hrc, are there any excerpts you have seen that you wished you had known for your book? guest: the big one is the awkward first date, the two of them meeting after the primary right around them at -- right around the denver convention. we had a bunch of one-on-one between them, but that is not one we knew about.

i would've loved to have that. it is a good part of the story arc. explain, forlps some people who had trouble sort of getting it, why they were able to come together. we have a scene at the end of our book, they are on air force one in this private cabin. he asks her to stay for the second term. notshe tells him she is going to do it, and he asked again, and she says she is not going to do it. the thing that was revealing was the degree that they have come together. people were suspicious of this idea that the two of them could actually get along. by the time she left his cap, the president looked at her as more loyal and capable people in his cabinet. he had tim geithner leaving, he really wanted to have some continuity. she wanted to start on her philanthropy and her book, and

presumably her presidential run. host: one issue that is making headlines is the release of wergeant oberg all -- bo bergdahl. talking about the authorizations withhe release of bergdahl the taliban. fate of its fighters being held at guantánamo bay. in every discussion, we demanded his release. knowledged that opening the door to negotiation with the taliban and would be hard to swallow for many americans after so many years of war. when she proven right? -- was she proven right? guest: the book was written before most of us were paying attention to him.

i -- it is strange, she has this position in her book that she was against -- she was for swapping in theory, but against the specific one under the conditions -- without condition she wanted lay down. now the president has made the swap without the condition she wanted, and she has been approving of that as well. looking for a hard choice in her book, i think this is one of them. she has to try and figure out how to not undercut the president right after he has made the swap, even though she makes the claim in her book that she wouldn't have done what he wants to do, or what he just did. this is going to be a competition for going forward, trying to distance herself from the president at the same time remain loyal and keep his base with her. but tell people that she is not just a continuation of him. this, as anain on

author, you write a book and then something changes before it actually comes the publication. maybe you would've written it a little bit differently if you had the opportunity. jonathan allen is the author of hrc, let's go to tony in st. petersburg, florida on our line for democrats. good morning. i am one of those democrats -- i am older than hillary. i just might consider staying home if she is the nominee, not voting. of 40 years of the democratic party capitulating all the time. [indiscernible] is a good example. we need a good progressive input, maybe we should lose an when theor two,

democratic party took on the progressives and the populist programs. clinton doesry represent wall street, and she has no program for restoring the middle class in this country that i have seen. host: jonathan allen. remember -- there are a lot of democrats that feel that way. if she's the nominee, they want to stay home. people who say that, who are interested enough to say that, generally vote with their party at the end of the day. they will become so disenchanted with the other side that they will come out and or anger.fit of pique you would see the democratic party behind her if she becomes the nominee. she doesm twitter, if run, what do you think her issues will be? guest: that's the big question heading into 2016.

health care was a big part of that, interestingly, that was an election where reform policy particularly the iraq war vote. that might not be such a big deal in 2016 democratic primary, we have had eight years past, a lot has changed. i do think that is a challenge vision, andefine a tell people how they can get to that vision. i think one of the things she ought to be doing is sit down with her aides and try and figure out what are these issues going forward. the one issue that she was most readily identified with in 2000 eight, health care, and health care reform effort, it's something that president obama put into law. if she is elected president, her job will be to preserve his law, not to write that law. i think she has some work out of her. host: let's go to tony, in

augusta, georgia. on our line for independents. african-american, -- and i'm an independent. we definitely believe we have a society now that is not ,ethodical in going to the core actually investigating these people, researching people that we put in power. she wrote a book called hard choices, but she was to separate that from the years that she has -- underr obama's this president. i don't see duty, honor, country, trust, and loyalty about these people anymore. we have a society sitting there putting these people in power, and we are constantly being deceived by them. talking about researching people in power. is there much more research to

be done on hillary clinton after a previous presidential run, the time as secretary of state, time is a senator? easy. sure, it's just not it's not easy to get access, not easy to find things that are not necessarily out there. fortunately, there are a lot of reporters working on that case already. we have been following her for quite a while now, maybe not every day writing stories, but certainly on the beat. i think that is a positive that you have all these reporters on that trail. little bits will come out here and there, you will get a fuller picture. there are more things to be learned about her going forward. what she is going to present herself as to the american public, and how that comports with what she is done in the past. the whole hard choices idea, which he said in denver the other night, seems to suggest that the complexities of the choices that leaders make

shouldn't be scrutinized to the degree that they are. i think voters will have no problem with that. it's too easy to say trust me, i have been here before. and not something i think voters want to hear. this is from twitter, one can only imagine how nasty the anti-twitter -- the anti-hillary attacks will become as we approach 2016. -- questions about her health have come up. guest: there are some legitimate points of view. criticisms tend to blend in. the idea that she is brain-damaged from her fall and concussion a year and a half ago, is ridiculous. i am not her doctor, nor is call

rove. -- carl rove. we see her doing these speeches, traveling the country. she is functioning at a very high level. that said, questions about her age -- that is a little bit of a metaphor and has blended in. they will become more legitimate if you start to see her feel the where of campaigning -- feel the wear of campaigning. there is a tendency for people in politics to bill a nice people they don't like, to say the nastiest possible thing. more legitimate questions and make them less legitimate. i think what karl rove was trying to do was to set it up so they can get hillary clinton fighting.

maker partisan, not above the partisan fray as she has been trying to be. it worked, her people responded directly about whether she had suffered a brain injury. it was the first time i had seen that, where they went right back at him it. all of a sudden, she was partisan and political again. host: how closely will this book tour be watched, media tour as well. sawyer,y, diane tuesday, nbc cynthia mcfadden interview, next sunday, cbs interview, cnn following that. how closely will she be watched as she does run this country on this tour? guest: i think she will be extremely closely followed. said, people are going to want to shut off their televisions. even hillary clinton may find that there is a hillary clinton saturation point. host: today's story in the

washington post, are you ready for hillary? get off the internet, never look at your twitter feed, avoid facebook, stay out of bookstores. let's go to william in florida on the line for republicans. caller: good morning. i keep hearing about the attacks. let's remember what president clinton's remark about jesse jackson. , they jumpedhat off her bandwagon. have a joe biden. she is the one who stumbled up on what baseball team.

this is going to be her problem. on the role that bill clinton plays. guest: he is an x factor. if he is something that she can use effectively. he heard her in the 2000 election. we can see the many phases of them post-presidency. fromre distanced himself bill clinton and many democrats thought that was a mistake. and his approval rating was in very good shape. gore distance himself and loses. people thought that was a mistake. not try tollary did

rein him in. he said a lot of things off-the-cuff that did not work for her. in 2012, barack obama used him in a very focused way. he raised money and went out as a surrogate on the campaign trail. he did not use them to talk to the media. he did not let him go out in an uncontrolled environment. i think bill clinton was a very effective spokesperson for barack obama. bill clintonse like barack obama used to bill clinton, it will be an advantage. host: on some of the same topic, how will hillary combat the anti-dynasty attitude customer guest: i think it is a problem for her. one of the things and she did

not do in 2008 was she did not embrace her historic nature as a candidate. first -- could've been the first female president of the united states. you have to state what it is that is fresh and new about you. i think that is true about anybody of the same party trailing a president of eight years. she needs to communicate the idea that she has fresh ideas or her own fresh brand or she brings something new to the american public. be key to herto winning the presidency. i think her people understand that at least intellectually. i don't know if it has permeated that they really need to find new andembrace the articulate the new and try to not let the past be something that she is focused on.

she is going to be dragged into that past. the question is how she handles it and detaches from it and turns the questions around. is part of the reason why she hasn't announced yet to put off some of those fights for as long as possible? guest: i will give her the benefit of the doubt that she hasn't made up her mind. host: it is another hard choice that she faces. guest: i think that as you suggest the best reason to not announce yet, most candidates would not have announced at this we are stillcycle, in the midterms. that -- for her, the

idea of putting off an announcement for as long as possible has a lot of advantages. she is touring the country right now. she is on a book tour and has been in the lecture circuit. she has been raising money for the clinton foundation. she is talking to voters and supporters and raising money. these are things you do on a political campaign. she has three super pac's. the obama super pac has been inverted for hillary clinton. she is doing the things you you would do to campaign except she is not a candidate. this allows her to remain above the partisan fray. happen, thatat can

is better for her. i think there are other reasons as well. the scrutiny and questions and demands will change the second she announces. she will have to start putting out a schedule in a way that she doesn't have to now. i think she would like to put that off as long as possible. democratsocks other from getting in. there are a lot of donors and supporters waiting to see which he does. let's go to tim in littleton, colorado. caller: good morning. i am one of those who believe that the democrats have an advantage on a national election. i don't believe anybody can challenge hillary. i think she will be the nominee. my question is around addressing the issue of the base not really coming in as hard for her as they might.

a progressive candidate like elizabeth warren being on that ticket or another progressive? is that too dangerous for the center of the united states? i am curious about the running mate. it is a little too early to figure out who that candidate is going to be. she has a primary before she gets there. i think she would like to have as many options available as possible. if not, there are different ways to go. i think some candidates will reinforce their message to the running mate. bill clinton did that with al gore. some will try to address a

weakness. barack obama picking joe biden gave him a feel of somebody who had a lot of foreign-policy experience. we saw john mccain pick somebody who was younger and more vibrant . i think that pic backfired on him. the vice president shall pick is not what it used to be. it used to be pick somebody from a state you need to win. now you are aiming to avoid a canstrophe and see if you say something about the message. i think for her, it will take a while to figure out what she can use. electing the next nominee. host: let's get some perspective from overseas.

james is calling from manchester, england. caller: thank you. this is a two-part question. america's economy dollar which is tied into the saudi arabia ends. arabians. the you think any female has a shot at your highest office? females areart is not restricted in combat roles, they are restricted as to what units they can go into. how do you think the military would feel about a female being the commander-in-chief and handing them orders?

host: i will let you take those two questions. i think number one the event states is never going to pick its president based on who saudi arabia once or would accept. we have had female secretaries of state. i don't think that is a particular problem. in the military, your job is to do at the commander-in-chief says. comfortableis not with that should not be wearing a uniform. people ine be some the military who would have a potential problem with women in leadership roles? we have seen that. i think that is a minority.

military is sohe important. order is so important. solowing your leadership is important. everybody gets that in the military. i don't think she would have a problem as commander-in-chief. on the health questions that she faces, is there a double standard going on gender wise? guest: i don't. 2008 some sexism reared said. the political candidates play on things and themes they think will resonate with voters. wanderes those themes into sexist areas. she were a male candidate at 67 years old and having had a fall, i think you would hear the same things from

republicans. host: robert is in massachusetts. clintoni find hillary not presidential material. as secretary of state she traveled the world and accomplished nothing. biggest event was the benghazi affair. she was not present for duty. she wouldnt i think see a major event and have a headache and have to take to her bed. she is just not qualified. issue,n the benghazi this is one of those excerpts from her book "hard choices." there will never be perfect clarity on everything that happened. it is unlikely that there will ever be a free -- full agreement on what happened that night.

this should not be confused with a lack of effort to discover the truth or the -- to share it with the american people. guest: this is a tough issue for her. she has decided the best way to deal with it is to accuse i think there are legitimate questions. i picked her questions about u.s. foreign-policy. they will make the argument that the president. there are depomed to make that argument. those are legitimate questions.

anybody who questions this is partisan. host: she writes that she won't be part of it. difficulthink it is to foresee people giving up on that entirely. i think there are legitimate questions that need to be asked of her and will be asked of her. the caller said she was not resin for duty and that is not true. she was at the state department when the attack happened. she was there through the night and was on conference calls. she called david petraeus to ask what assets were available. the idea that she was not there and she was not doing her job that night is far-fetched. it is not among the legitimate questions surrounding and ghazi.

-- benghazi. the president and secretary of state have not talked about it. host: one more call from lou. he is in massachusetts. as a potential commander in chief, i can't understand how anybody who has ever served in the military really consider her as a president of the united states. it boggles my mind. i voted for obama the first term. i vote according to the candidate. i don't see anybody with a sieve in the military voting for this lady. host: explain that a little bit more. thatr: she talks in a book there are unanswered questions. if she was in the war room she has the answers.

the benghazi incident specifically? that concerns you question mark caller: it does. and now with this trading of for theseberghdal five people. i think we are losing our status in the world as the number one superpower. think we are still the number one superpower. the idea that american power is diminished is legitimate. affect our ability to world of fence has diminished. part of that is the diffusion of power. the rise of nonstate actors, social media is disruptive to government in general.

it is disruptive to our dominance in the world. we are struggling to figure out how to be influential and more influential than we are now. washington bureau chief at bloomberg news, i appreciate you joining us. guest: good to see you. host: up next, carol rosenberg joins us to talk about detainees at guantanamo bay. first, a look at what is coming up on the sunday shows on c-span radio. networks, some of the topics include the release of sergeant bowe berghdal from the taliban and. you can you rebroadcast on c-span radio

beginning at 1:00 p.m. eastern. isay, meet the press preempted by the french open. abc's this week with hillary clinton. rogers andive mike admiring, the mayor of seattle. jackel mukasey and general brandis. cheryl cnn's state of the union follows with john kerry and john mccain. at 4:00, face the nation from cbs. the chair and vice chair of the senate intelligence committee, senator dianne feinstein and sexy chambliss. the sunday network talk shows are on c-span and they are

brought to you as a public service. 1:00 p.m. today at eastern with this week. at 3:00, cnn's state of the union and at 4:00, face the nation from cbs. listen to the mall on c-span radio. -- them all on c-span radio. you can find this on channel 120 on satellite radio. at can listen online c-span.org. host: if you wait until the thing shows up, that is the worst of the cheaper alternatives. it is not worse. it is less expensive and better. in the case of our navigation, like tom tomies and magellan. they knew the smartphone was taking off.

couldnew google or apple launch a navigation app. they did not see any threat yet. they will respond what shows up. within months, millions of people said this is better and cheaper. by then, it was too late for them to respond. of any kind need to start looking at much earlier into the lifecycle of new technology. product,re there is a there are experiments going on. they allow you to see that people are playing with new technology. that is the moment when you should get worried. >> how technology is changing .he way companies do business

monday on the communicators. >> "washington journal" continues. there is no attention on guantanamo bay. carol rosenberg from the miami herald joins us. on the five men who released in the deal, they were indefinite date t knees -- detainees. what does that mean? the obama administration created a task force to go through the intelligence files of the 240 detainees who were there at the time and sort them. to figure out which ones shouldn't be there or which ones were candidates for trial and were toos this group dangerous to release but ineligible for trial.

they hadn't done anything that constituted a war crime or were alleged. the evidence wasn't clean enough to take them to trial. these men ended up in the category of indefinite taint he. they were the forever prisoners. there were 48 of them back then. with these five men, they are down to 38. five have been re-categorized and to died. >> how many people were ahead of these guys in the queue to be released? these five had no chance of being released before the deal. guest: the deal is what released them. that is correct. what has happened since the task sorting, they moved from people back and forth between the categories.

on hundred8 of the 49 detainees on the list for transfer. it means they should be sent back to their own countries. they would be monitored. in other instances, we would like them put on trial or locked up elsewhere. in many instances, we are seeking through the department of state to find nations to resettle them and get a new start somewhere else with new identities. by oneionalities, one because the stigma of having spent a dozen years at guantanamo is too much for them to go back to normal life or because the administration doesn't want to send them back to countries where there is too turmoil andal violence. al qaeda is there in some franchise in the post 9/11

world. they are still out there. what they are doing is trying to find countries to take in these men who should've been released years ago. of these 78 men, the vast majority were on a list compiled by the bush administration for the same thing. viewers want to know more about the five men that were released. the five for referred to as high-value detainees. were there any more high-value targets or detainees at guantánamo bay the these five? guest: they were not high-value detainees. that is a misunderstanding. wereigh-value detainees the men taken off to the cia. horribly about 100 of them. there are 15 of

them at guantanamo. they arrived in 2006. they are high-value detainees. they were kept in a separate facility out of the sight of anybody who gets a tour of the center. three of these five men were known as the worst of the worst detainees. if you closed your eyes and january 2002s of when that picture was put out of in pentagon of 20 men shackles and blindfolds, those were the first 20 men who arrived in the open the detention center in 2002. the commander at the time referred to the first 20 as the worst of the worst. they are sending us the worst of the worst, he said.

they were at one point called the worst of the worst. what time has taught us is the worst of the worst what? -- eight only left left of that 20. the worst of the worst were the first 20 and. life as am is serving propagandist for al qaeda. he made recruiting films. another is david hicks who was sent back to australia. he is appealing his conviction. many of them were released and sent back to their initial countries. what i think the reason they were considered high-value is that they were taliban.

they were not al qaeda. the taliban and traded for them. there should be no doubt about what they are. they are taliban officials. was an interior minister. staff. an army chief of one came from intelligence. fairly early profiles of the taliban. we are talking about the detainees in guantánamo bay. this deal went down for sergeant bowe berghdal. detainees are from yemen. carol rosenberg has been to the

prison. how many times have you reported down there? it is not possible for me to cap. there used to be a pretty liberal policy for reporters to be there. in the early years, the military really wanted me down there. they were very open to it. you could be there for long periods of time. now it is more controlled. the trips are shorter. it is highly choreographed. monthk i have spent a down there on average since it opened. the longest day was 41 night in a tent. the shortest stay was one night for a change of command ceremony. host: we will give viewers some stats on guantanamo bay. the number of pentagon forces 2268.ed is

2127 and 2013. 300 of them are civilians and mostly contractors. carol rosenberg is here to take your calls on guantanamo bay. john is online for democrats. caller: i'm concerned about guantánamo, the precedent that we are setting for future wars and pows. people are terrorists. due a specific state or country. is a war where we do go

into combat against other nations and other armies, is that setting a precedent that they can hold our detainees without trial indefinitely forever as we plan to do with these prisoners? why isn't that the argument that should be made for closing that question mark guest: you waited into the thick of it. the people who are big fans of guantánamo and would keep it don'tr say that the enemy honor the geneva conventions anyway. why would we for this category of war prisoner give them the pow status? on the other side of it, you have people saying the united states needs to put its money

where its mouth is. to beexpect our detainees treated a certain way, we should the people we capture in that way. in terms of the precedent for future wars, this is a war like no other. even president obama has acknowledged that by creating this category of indefinite caney. a surrender isn't or a negotiation of prisoners. what they have created is a new paradigm. the president has said he would like to get out of this business. he has argued that guantánamo has served as a recruiting symbol for al qaeda around the world.

touches the edges of both sides of this. what is guantánamo? when does it end? how does it end? the president has said he wants to close it. what they seek to do is move some of these indefinite date team -- detainees to the united states. that isn't really closing guantánamo. moving guantanamo and calling it something else somewhere else. host: neck offers his take on twitter. treat them humanely and try them or free them. close gitmo asap. the navy base is 45 square miles. prison camp has had 13 admirals and generals since 2002.

20.number of captives was we are talking with carol rosenberg who has covered the prison camp for well over 12 years. let's go to fran in ran very, new jersey. good morning. caller: good morning. like to know is who is supporting them when they get released? who is supporting these five detainees? --st: these five sis specific man, it is the governor of qatar taking responsibility for them for the next year. will we be paying them some sort of money to pay rent or food, i

suspect not. i don't think this is something they would need. question is ofr the 500 detainees that the bush list ration -- administration has released, where their side tols to certain countries undertake resettlement initiatives? i think we understand that artain countries took them as humanitarian release. they got aid packages for theseing else. negotiations were part of a larger conversation that the department of state does provide aid to. host: the washington post and other newspapers on friday were talking about the limits put in the free detainees.

subject to bans from fundraising that would pose a danger to the bennett states. they are under a one-year travel ban. they will then be able to travel. are these restrictions unusual for prisoners that are released from guantanamo? almost any country that nots these men in our giving them travel documents for at least a year. that is not unusual. ist i would like to know whether or not there is a gag order on them. do they agree not to talk to reporters like me or do interviews. there are detainees who have been asked to sign documents saying they would not speak to the press about their experience

at guantanamo. as someone who's covered this story, i would love to talk to them about their view of it. this is a bit of a zagat, people heldot know that they were in many of their years medium security confinement. they were the cooperative captives. when you would go on these visits to the detention center when there were far more transparent, you would see these , they recreation yards would be with other detainees were they could do sports together or pray together or take meals together. they were not profiled by the prison as the dangerous prisoners. on if they were profiled as potentially dangerous on their release, they

were seen as cooperative captives. they did not even hunger strike. they are in their 30's. to call them elders is a misstatement. they were seen as people who would function like pows. they were spending their days in medium confinement waiting for the trade that ultimately came to be sentrghdal home. they were not the difficult detainees that clash with the guards or that the guards are fearful of. they were seen as people who understood the rules of the camp and abided by them. host: patricia is calling from minneapolis on the line for republicans. you are on with carol rosenberg. is she aware that one of

the detainees is wanted for war crimes by the united nations? this was a capitulation. and,o you let the taliban they can pick those five. who mayack a deserter even have collaborated. this is the worst thing. this is the biggest scandal yet. guest: a couple of points. it is true that they did choose these men. they did ask for them as part of the exchange. we had seen three or four of these men as negotiations for years. anybody who has been following issue shouldion

not a been surprised that these five men were the ones let go. in terms of the allegation of rights watchuman has identified two of these men to atrocities prior to september 1998 during the civil war in which the taliban and were attacking shia prisoners in the sharif area. thousands of civilians died. they were in the taliban at the time. there has been an effort to try to get them to face some sort of justice. the way the bush administration constructed the military commissions at guantanamo and

the way the obama administration reform them, they were not inrged with civil war crimes afghanistan prior to september 11. i don't think there is a suggestion that these men don't have ties to the taliban am and , the quality of the trade is something the congress is going to debate for some time to come. to suggest that people did not go into this with eyes wide open and understand who they were was naïve i think. host: you are talking about congress debating this trade and what it means for future deals, what is the reaction from members of congress? that is the big unknown

question hanging over this thing. ,here are people in the shoot there are active negotiations and efforts to get some of these 78 cleared for transfer out of there. we have read in the press about one man that germany may take. there are six men that might go to uruguay. there are a dozen afghans at gitmo still. four of them are cleared for release. i don't think the allegation is that they are taliban. these are the kinds of people who could be subject to resettlement or repatriation if congress doesn't throw up further hurdles. the administration is supposed to notify congress and sent over the findings as to why they have

concluded that it is a reasonable risk to release or transfer this person. whether which ones are in the pipeline are how many, we have been told they are still negotiating and they intend to send more out. aside fromss will do , whether theyally will go public with some of these potential transfers, i just don't know. this is a very heated issue right now. ted cruz has said he intends to draft legislation to hold off on further transfers. this is the miami herald story.

we have about 15 minutes left. we have lewis on the line for democrats. are these guys more laden?han bin what is their reason for living? he was concerned about the threat that these pose. about some of the places in the prison where the worst of the worst were held. guest: i think one of the questions is why weren't they

killed on the spot. one of these men walked into a base where the americans were thinking he was going to be collaborating with them. forces have consider themselves bound by the humane treatment of prisoners. i don't think killing prisoners on the spot has ever been an option. in terms of them getting their in 2002, they were brought there. they were brought there more for their intelligence value as .eople they could potentially be questioned by u.s. military intelligence. invadedicans had just afghanistan some months before. these men knew the territory.

they knew the ground. they were looking for osama bin laden. intoca was just getting the intelligence interrogation does this with the opening of the guantanamo attention center. i think these men were seen as candidates for people to provide what they used to call actionable intelligence, information that light -- might help find osama bin laden. they wanted to find the remnants of al qaeda. these were local officials in the government that the u.s. was disrupting by invading. as residents, they were seen to have a different value than necessarily someone. they were brought in as the worst of the worst. that was the slogan of the time.

they were brought there for very specific reasons. valerie is in california on the republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i have one question. close it necessary to guantánamo since we are still in the middle of this war with the taliban am and all over the world. in the north korean award, there were two defectors. they defected and walked across the dmz and we never tried to get those people back. different? we need to guantanamo, the president has made that a value. the congress wants to keep it forever. that is the debate that the americans are engaging in.

i cannot answer the question except that the president has decided that guantanamo is at odds with american values. it is not helpful in our ability to get past this forever war on terror. the other question about bowe berghdal, i am waiting for what proceeding and investigates his circumstances. i know it is easy to say he has a deserter because he did apparently walk away from his base. the pentagon never labeled him a deserter. believed heclearly should come home and wanted to come home. i don't believe it is as as american gis held

in korea who made it known that they did not want to come home. i am not sure this is the same thing. we will find out in a deliberate way. the military will figure out the circumstances of his departure from his unit. what his status was during all those years that he was held by the taliban. host: we are talking about the guantanamo bay prison camp. here are some stats from the miami herald. 102 visits from the red cross. offering,ly calorie 4500 calories.

how much does it cost to keep a -- dk need-- dt there for a year? guest: that is a good question. numbers from the pentagon last , troops are brought in on a rotating basis. they provide every possible service. they are kept down there. it is not like a traditional detention center environment where correctional officers live in their own homes. the troops that are down there are part of the expense. they took all sorts of things and through into the bundle. at that stage, they catch you later the figure at $2.7 million

per year per prisoner. if you use that with the departure of these five men, you are talking about $3 million year per prisoner. if you look for a more conservative cost, if you separate out things that might be attributed to the government beother settings or might not directly attributed to the detention center, the price might come down to $800,000 or $1 million a year. it deals with the bucket that you use. kelly does not agree with congress on that number. he thinks that is the way inflation. the miami herald has a helpful chart comparing it to other prison systems.

it costs about one $8,000 year for the federal prisoners. we've got a few more minutes left with carol rosenberg. barbara is in missouri. one question is about the taliban and. just wantingn am the united states out of afghanistan? where did this 30 day rule requiring the president to look to congress decided on releasing people from guantanamo bay exist ? did exist for george bush? congress created that

after president obama decided that he wanted to close guantánamo. belabor the point, in the bush it ministration they let more than 500 people go from guantanamo in giant lane loads. -- giant planeloads. we sent people back to their countries in europe and pakistan and afghanistan. the rule was created by congress. it is the law. the president signed into law. his people argued after the alabama transfer that he was using executive authority with powerxchange and had the to ignore this 30 day notification. i think we will see hearings about that for some time to come. the taliban was the elected a government in afghanistan.

they were the ruling government in afghanistan at the time of the september 11 attacks. when we invaded that country it was to bring down the taliban and as well as find osama bin laden and destroy al qaeda. time that thehe taliban made themselves a target of this war by granting safe haven to -- to al qaeda. taliban am are a political entity in afghanistan. is karzaianding wanted at least one of these five men released so that he could be a partner in

negotiations inside afghanistan as they try to work out their own politics in that country. that theno doubt taliban was the enemy in 2002. they supported and helped hide al qaeda. 12 years ago, they were an enemy of the united states. host: do you think the next president want to keep guantanamo open? there are people in congress who love guantanamo. they like the optics. they think it sends a good message to the rest of the world. i am not sure about what the next commander-in-chief will want. the larger question is will congress go along with it? the house recently put money

into one of its appropriation bills to build a new prison down there. the defense department nor the executive asked funding for it. i don't know the answer. will dependsident on if there is a feasible way to close it. the long answer is i don't know. host: frederick is in maryland. caller: good morning. i am a lawyer. lawnt to say that since the required 30 days advance notice, since the supreme court has not ruled that law unconstitutional, since the president is not all three branches rolled up into one, it seems there was no authority in the action he took. given that there was no

authority, he acted as a private person. that constitutes a conspiracy for the escape of people from gitmo.-- get mo -- they are co-conspirators from an online full rate from jail. guest: i understand that that is your analysis. what i recall through the years is that the president find it into law. he had a signing statement saying he believed that in certain national security emergencies he believed he had aspectsority to ignore of the guantanamo certification requirements. you are the attorney.

i am sure that is an analysis that is out there. host: in the minute or two we have left tom a i want to ask you about the other prisoners at guantanamo. do they know about this swap? or have they reacted to this the release of other prisoners in the past? great op-ed in a the new york times. they are aware of it. i think there is a level of frustration over the fact that there were people in the queue approved for release and these men jumped the queue. i don't know the have an opinion on whether these five men should have stayed are gone. what is interesting about that question is there was a time when you could ask a spokesman down there what the reaction was

and you could get an idea. thee was a time when military hung the transfer announcements in the recreation yard to try to communicate to the detainees that this was not -- there was a process in the system for letting them go. process now has been to be the opposite of transparent. they are not helpful in understanding what is going on inside their. we get glimpses. live in communal captivity. they still have tvs. they did not shut down the tv inside the cell block during that time.

the detention center was at one point providing. word spread and they probably all know. how much they know and how they know what they know, i hope to get down there in the next couple of weeks and do some reporting. host: we will look for your reporting on that. you can follow her work on the miami herald. you can follow her on twitter. thank you so much for joining us. that is our show for june 8. be sure to tune in tomorrow for "washington journal." will get an overview of the week ahead in congress. about a new survey that finds only 2.9 million americans are still waiting for their applications to be

processed. we will talk about redundant programs. thank you so much for joining us. we will see you back here at 7:00 a.m. eastern. ♪ >> coming up on c-span, newsmakers with wyoming senator and republican policy committee chair john barrasso. gina mccarthy announcing the new proposals to cut carbon emissions. on later, a senate hearing the impact climate change on wildlife in our cult