john bradshaw of the national security network. later, we will discuss the government funding deadline, the government funding pipeline and more. you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. ♪ >> good morning everyone, this is wednesday, december 10, 2014. the talk of cia interrogation techniques dominates the headlines this morning. somer cia officials and republicans refute bad and save some of it to saved american lives and releasing it now could put it at americans overseas at risk. we will talk about that this morning.

also, join the conversation on c-span wj is our handle. you can also send us e-mails. we will get to your thoughts in just one minute. joining us is candidate delaney. he is here to take your questions about this intelligent report. when you begin with what dianne feinstein had to say. she talks about the findings of this report. we have 20 findings and conclusions which fall into four general categories. first, the cia's and enhanced interrogation techniques were not an effective way to get a better intelligence information. second, the cia provided extensive amounts of inaccurate information about the program a

end its effectiveness to the white house, the department of justice, congress, the cia inspector general, and the american public. third, the cia's management of the program was in adequate and deeply flawed. fourth, the cia program was far more neutral billion people were led to believe. >> what did we learn from this report? about theknown a lot basics of what was done to al qaeda detainees after 9/11. there has been a lot of reporting on the techniques, on waterboarding, things that have been pretty shocking. in this report, we learned about new techniques that we have never heard of before. thingsty -- unpleasant like rectal feeding, death threats. werearned the techniques

used in combination of rate. of days and seem to be far more brutal and gruesome than previously understood. we also learned there is a case to be made, whether that is otherwise or useful, was notable information gained through these techniques. ex did we learn who, that, and when? >>'s they did not have access to white house information. there were some records in there about white house conversations, but for example, the records show the cia did not brief president in detail. secretarys

condoleezza but believed him, is debatable. he knew some of the details, if not all of the details. if the records show who knew what went within the cia, of course many people in the cia are not named in this report because they are undercover work over. when did this report take place, into did it? >> it took race in so-called countriess in certain like poland and thailand. the other thing interesting about this report is it sheds light on the extent to which this program was run by contractors. psychologists. are notbeen known, they named. they are under pseudonyms. we learn in this report the cia paid the company run of the psychologists 81 million

dollars. these two men were really driving get the program. with the of helped techniques and the application of techniques. they were not u.s. government employees. expert happened to the contract? when did it end? are these folks still with the cia? is a stub with the government? >> it ended in two thousand nine been the u.s. government and these product -- these projects. bills are paid as part of this thing. one of them gave an interview to the guardian. know, these guys have become wealthy and they are retired now. be for this program ended, before 2009 before obama and did with an executive order -- >> what they mean is the brutal

to inques that happened this report in a large amount happened after 9/11. waterboarding that was ended soon after that. i do not have the numbers right in front of me. after 2006.off >> we are taking your comments about this. the majority of democrats on the panel, and me give you the numbers. , democrats, independents. we have an intelligence writer with us this morning and he will be able to answer most of your questions about this report. it is over 400 pages. that is the predicted version. what is the full version? >> it is 6000 pages.

we may not see it for over 25 years. the executive summary could a couple hundred pages. >> lets you about the majority committee had to say it yesterday. it was led by a retired republican from georgia. here he is on the senate floor. >> putting this report out today is going to have significant consequences. addition to opening old wounds internationally and domestically, it could be used to incite unrest and even attacks against our service members and international partners. report could also stoke a additional mistreatment or death of american or other captives overseas. it will and dangerous cia personnel, sources, and future intelligence operations.

will damage our relationship with several significant international counterterrorism partners at a time when we can least afford it. factworse, despite the that the administration and many of the majority of these consequences, they have chosen to release the report today. the united states today is faced with a wide array of security challenges across the globe, including in afghanistan, pakistan, syria, yemen, north africa, ukraine, and the list goes on. instead of focusing on the problems right in front of us, the majority side of the intelligence committee has spent the last five years a lender over $40 million focused on a program that to effectively ended over eight years ago while the world around us burns.

>> why do this report? why release it now? >> this is the first official comprehensive public accounting of one of the darkest chapters in american history. the people who prepared this report think it is really important that the public learned that is done in their name. this is about accountability and oversight. it,e is no doubt about there is a intelligence assessments did say there is a risk of violence and american facilities because of this report. many feel it is a with basque -- many feel it is a risk worth taking. >> who did they interview? interview any of the participants and that has been a point of contention. the committee says there was also a criminal investigation by

the justice department. department, according to the committee, refused to work out a deal where they could bring in witnesses jeopardy.pose them to without that, no cia official code testify without the risk of coming under criminal investigation. so they decided it would be a documentary review. 6 million documents. including transcripts that with directors. there are interview transcripts that are called upon for this critics of this report have said, how do you really know what happened if you could not talk to the people who actually carried out the interrogations? no did they talk to the people who were allegedly tortured force data allegedly tortured. i remember hearing something

accusing someone of taking data of computers. the report get into the committee's interference with the investigation? >> i do not believe it does. not to the tide can recall.

would whose wroarl were

overstated but some of the people who received the worst treatment, nobody debates that, and, the head of the journalist, nobody is debating that he was a bad guy. the issue is, what. is this the kind of thing that the united states of america should be doing to anybody? let's go to the report or page 37, where, when this program begins, because they

returned this, on september 17, six days after the terrorist attacks, president george bush signed a notification, to author rise the director to capture and, detain persons, who post a continuing serious threat of violence or death of the u.s. persons, and interests and the committee says, that although the c.i.a. had been provided limited. yeah, that was another interesting thing. that was as secret finding. we had never seen that. and that was interesting thing that came out of the report, no mention of entire row

investigation, they had to go back to the justice department and, white house to get permission. wasn't like, they got legal permission, which we can get into later to do. of the things, not all of the things that they did, and that finding, you know, c.i.a. officials were criticizing this report, saying you have to consider the context of the time, nine 11 just happened and, we were sure that following attacks were coming and there was very little visibility about props within the inside and the surveillance tools, and, that we have now, were not in place, so there was, a feeling like, and that covert order was part of it, here's what we tbheed to do, to start cracking the next plot. what nita, good morning to you. caller: good morning, thank you for bringing this up, i do fully

believe, that we did nothing wrong, that we had to able to save our people over there and, these people will do anything, how many have lost their heads and, how many have gotten blown up and, new york, and my goodness. we're just getting so squishy, that we don't want to do anything, about war. and if we don't get with it, and win these wars, we'll be there forever. okay. to her point, will this practice continue? has it legally and by the president, by executive order been banned? by executive order which is reversible, by the next president and, mitt romney said he would consider using these techniques again. but, i mean, the practical answer is no, the c.i.a. has

been so seered by this experience, and, they have said as much, and, three directors, including the three directors have repute yated these techniques, the c.i.a. itself, crist sizing this report acknowledge serious mistakes in the program. and, several former c.i.a. officials acknowledge that some is indefensible, and it went beyond what they were allowed to do, so we had this combination, it was not well run and, so seconder i mean, nobody, very few people are saying that the agency is blameless here. the former c.i.a. officials, the directors, tenant, and, goes, and, haydon, and, john, and steven, all writing in today's washington -- wall street journal their response. they saved lives, is what they're saying, in therapies in

the wall street journal and, they take the senate report and, break it down and, refute certain claims within it, and they say, that by releasing this you can put more americans at risk. we'll go to maxine next. independent caller. caller: good morning, and thank you for taking my call. i just hope i can compose myself to explain, what i think about this report, being released. i was disgusted, and now i'm more disgusted with diane feinstein, there was no reason to release this report. all they have done, is stir up animosity, in the middle east, and, every military person that we have over there is in danger now. this is a totally political ploy by the democrats, and diane feinstein, i used to have

respect for her, i have lost all respect for her. she is, in my opinion, has taken her direction, from obama, and this is obama's getting even for the republican win in the last elections and i'm disgusted. to your point, let me show you what republican john mccain had to say, who was tortured by vietnamese and he was on the floor yesterday, and he talked about, he was the first republish xan to speak right after the senator, listen to what he had had to say about releasing this report. the truth is sometimes a hard pill to swallow. it causes us difficult tits at home and, abroad, it is sometimes used by our enemies in attempts to hurt us, but the american people are entitled had to it, nonetheless.

they put know when the values are disregarded, by our security policy says even those policies that are conducted in secret. they must be able to make informed judgements, about whether those policies and the personnel, who supported them, were justified and compromising our values. and whether they served the greater good, or whether, as i believe, they stayed in our national honor, did much harm, and also practical good. what were the policies? what was their purpose? did they achieve it? did they make us safer? less safe? or did they make no difference. what did they gain us? what did they cost us? the american people need the answers to these questions. yes, somethings must be kept from public dislow sure to

protect operations, sources and methods, and not the answers to these questions. by providing them, the committee has empower he had american people to come to their own decisions whether we should have employed such practices in the past, and consider permitting them in the future. he is in support of releasing report from the senate inever intelligence committee. so we're getting your thoughts and comments about the senate intelligence report, on entire row investigation techniques, and, ken, is an intelligence writer, and we'll go to jackie next. dem court reporter particular caller. caller: good morning. my comment is that, the united states always tries to present itself as the humanitarian nation, and nation of free

people, and, the american people had called for transparency. i'm -- in my opinion, this is another case, of the united states of america, presenting the rules, and, not abiding by them. them. okay. did they break the rules of international law? guest: well, i'm not a lawyer, so i'm probably not qualified toy opine on that question. which, what they argue, is that, these techniques were sanctioned by the justice department. the legal opinions, have been repute yated and criticized and that's one of the main reasons that they were not charged. there was a long criminal investigation into these cases and it was reexamined, and the

decision was made not to charge anyone and that's one of my major questions, i would like to see the legal reason, and understand what informs those cases when everyone is acknowledging that they exceeded the guidance, those memos, that approved some of these techniques, those were exceeded. and water boarding was not done the way the justice department laid out in the memos, that it should be done. and so, that is one of the big questions. international law, that's something i'm not qualified to discuss. is there an issue there with the lying to the congress, and lying to the white house officials. well, i mean, the report, has whole section's what they call misrepresentations and it is not clear, whether the miss representations were

inteptional. these, this program was working and producing good intelligence. in some cases that was mallish us and, there was false fabrications, that weren't learned about until later. so there's a whole thing at the end of the report, where haden is testifying and so, report has his testimony, and next to it, a -- what the report calls misrepprepare sensations and, his position is, this is what i was told, and i didn't run the program, and i didn't run it. and this is what records we're showing. so, whether people lied is an interesting open question. it's not resolved in this report. by the way, how this is playing out, let me show you some headlines, this is the guardian,

and, in washington, torture the stain on america, and then you also have some papers from the mid-east, this is the 'daily news', out of egypt, u.s. warned the heightened tensions. and then, this is from arab news, c.i.a. torture brutal and ineffective. and also, this from the u.a. e., c.i.a. lies and brutality exposed. so, those are on the front pages. arthur, a republican, you are next. caller: good morning. this sounds like a bunch of political correctness gone haywire, and, i think the main thing, is to go back to the

context of you know, things that were happening at the time. 9/11 and, such, and, excuse me, the c.i.a. perhaps was using methods that they thought were tried and true. all right. we'll go to bill. independent. you know, as a decorated disabled vietnam veteran, i'm appalled. as your guest stated, none of the c.i.a. drkters were interviewed, and none o of the participants, and this is like you base a person's alcohol lifl by going to the garbage can, and instead of asking them if they drank today. i think it any american,

overseas is harmed because of this report, this add minutestration, and diane feinstein should be held accountable. we are not under the gentlemagenevaconvention. so, compared to the bee heading that ises and offers have done, i just, i'm just so mad about this, that i can believe that the democratic party could be so vindictive to release this report, because they have sour grapes over losing the last election. let's talk about the first part of that. what do you make of it? i think that, while it would have been better, if they could have interviewed people, at the end of the day, the 6 million documents are so revealing and, they included, c.i.a. cables and e-mails, and sometimes, the

documents tell stories, and, that these things work, he may not know. the documents tell a story, and any journalists understand, it can tell a story, more valuable than interviews. there are reporting of what happened at the time. i think, i don't think that's a grounds on which to disbelieve this report. and this report, americans, would judge our standard by what the isis terrorists are doing. the former c.i.a. officials, under the bush administration have created a website, to to refeut this report, while the senator was on the floor speaking, and they went live with their website. and arry fresher tweeted out the

link, at the same time, with this. c.i.a. officers who worked there have set up a webpage with their side of the story, and it's called c.i.a. saved lives.com. who is behind this website? well, the former directors, and former c.i.a. officials have been gearing up for months. they knew it was coming, and they have a very sophisticated campaign and, interviews, and, so, they're setting, they're protecting their reputations and there's a heartfelt believe, that, i think, what's debatable here, did they work? that is the most debatable part of the report. and everyone thought, it's been known for months. that was the conclusion. that was always going to be a tough thing to prove. the report is comprehensive, and

makes a lot of detailed arguments. but it is going to be hard for those ever these people, they were trying to protect the united states after 9/11, and now they're being told that, they did this stuff, that a lot of people think is horrible and, it didn't work and they believe it did work. on that point, about the effectiveness of it, the minority part of the intelligence committee, they put out their own report and, in that, they write that the first faulty premise is that 7-39 did he taken niece, known to be enhanced produced no intelligence. if true, they write, they mean, 82%, subjected to enhanced, produced some intelligence. which is better than the 57.5%

effectiveness. well, that's a really important point to be clear about. the report does not argue that the detainees subjecked totor are torture is, produced no intelligence, and, they didn't produce unique life saving intelligence, and that's what the c.i.a. represented, to the justice department. that's why we need to do this stuff, because weeing get the information. and they could get it other ways, and some cases it was in their files and they gave it to them before they were subjected to these techniques and, how do you know? they were subjected to enhanced interrogations when they were taken to the site. how do we know whether they would have given up information without the techniques? did this lead to the capture, the death have been lad

den? that's a hotly debated thing. the report makes a detailed argument, that it didn't. in fact, the key to catching him, was catching the courier, who was sheltering him. the report shows all the information that the c.i.a. had about the courier, before any detainee gave him any information, and they gave crucial information, before they were subjected to brutal entire row investigations and the c.i.a., and they agree on this point, and, leon panetta, argues to this day, we got crucial information, after they were subjected to the techniques, and the thing about, the criticism, is that, you have the answer to the crossword puzzle and you're

reconstructing. that's one that's difficult to resolve. host: you can find ken's story, on the a.p., that is tweet, from the a.p. senate report, harsh tactics didn't net bin laden hi tom. caller: good morning. i'm greatful that the videotapes were destroyed, otherwise, they would have been streaming on the internet. both senator mccain and, senator feinstein, who i previously respect, i studied the trials and, both with their speeches mimic, at least in my mind, i was only following orders and i knew about it. thirdly, the

press, is never addressed this question, in years, with either senator feinstein or mccain, exspeaker pelosi or president candidate to be, former secretary of state clinton. so, again, i -- i think the releasing of the report, has had the desired effect of terribly weakening our security, and exposing americans, to death and destruction. host: to that point, he says, this report does not increase the chances, americans were targets long before it became public. josh. caller: it is flabbergasting,

and enhanced entire row investigation techniques and, it is torture, and we are on higher moral grounds, and we're supposedly god fearing people, and this is how we act. people who participate in this are no better than the people we're going after. we don't do this. we're not supposed to do this. yet, here we are, once again, showing what happens, whenever there is no oversight. what happens whenever there's no one watching, what the people who are supposed to be keeping us safe are doing and, it runs right into everything else that's going on in the world,. ferguson, and things happening in new york, and you have to have morals and if you don't, then this is what is going to happen. now people are all upset because it is coming out. it is being made public? it happens.

this is the truth. you can't beç afraid of the truth. all right. guest: i felt the previous caller was getting to a point, weren't some democrats in congress briefed, on this program? yes. it was a small circle. the gang of eight. so, it wasn't the full committees and, there's very little, in terms of records, about it, and this report is pretty light on what happened. but the c.i.a. officials insist, that they fully briefed those members of congress and, they had no problems and, they were cheering them on, to be tougher. and that's a really interesting point. there's been a dispute, pelosi, insists she wasn't told that water boarding was taking place and, they say that she was. so, you know, this report, focuses, on the c.i.a., and the

position is, we were doing what, the president told us to do and, we briefed the oversight committees. we have ten minutes left here. taking your questions and your comments. i do want to get to some other news, on the front page of the times, secretar secretary of stn kerry was up on capitol hill and he was seeking expannive powers, defeating islamic state requires troops. so if you missed it, go to c-span.org, where he asked congress to give congress the flexibility on isis. q.and while washington is all debating this report, there is some remaining work to do, and they have come to a deal, on the

trillion dollar spending bill, keep it funded through september 2015, it does do short-term funding for homeland, so they can come back in february and, stop the president on his executive action on immigration. so, they have come to a deal and, you will hear more reports, of what is in that trillion dollar spending bill. also, president barak obama, talking about his action, on immigration and, headline is, he says his successor won't undo reform because it would be a bad political move. so, some overhead lines. let's go onto jenny, go ahead listen to your phone not your t.v. all right, i'm going to pit on you hold. go to jed.

caller: yes, hello. i'm talking. please turn down your t.v. we got a little confusion here. if we can get dave, on the phone. dave? caller: yes. can you hear me? i feel as though benjamin franklin would have issues with what's going here. he once said, anyone willing to forsake freedom for security, will lose both. we'll go onto tammy. good morning. you know, in the last decade or so, i haven't found myself in agreement, with john mccain, but i have, and i think he is

someone who knows something about torture. i'm apauled at the behavior of my country. i think that sunlight is the best thing, and i am in favor of the release want report. the people have a right to and, know what is being carried out, in their name, and this is not what i would expect from my country, and i hope that, some day, someone, can be held responsible or at least there's no revisionist history about how patriotic these acts were. they werthey were depraifed. will somebody be held responsible? i think this report is the accountability. the justice department is done, president barak obama made the decision, to not pursue that kind of accountability.

to move on. his position was, c.i.a., people were patriotic and, they made mistakes and, we want to move forward. and this report is the accountability. host: what about the c.i.a., its power being diminished? it's reputation have been stained. guest: i think that's a real concern. what it is doing to more raul at the c.i.a. and, the officers will tell you, c.i.a. operatives, they gives them a feeling that the rugs are going to be told not to do it and they're doing operations now, drone strikes, against terrorists, in pakistan, that are very controversial, and they're worried, the president is telling us their legal, and

is somebody going for say they weren't legal. and sometimes, the c.i.a. gets criticized for risk reversed and this is the kind of thing. this is a concern, coming out of that report, it is not a reason not to do the report. it is one of the backlash issues. dave, in east or land maine, you're up. caller: i'd like somebody to discuss the nine people who were convicted for implementing these techniqueses. and what's the difference between them and the admit ever minstraight tors that created the programs? if somebody could address that, i would appreciate it? guest: i'm not an expert, on the military interrogations, and i don't think direct links, that you imply, have been quite established. and you know, in terms of why

people weren't convicted of crimes, that's because the justice department didn't file any charges. host: we'll hear next from calvin. hi, value i didn't. caller: yes, good morning. i believe that this is a systemic problem, that, has been going on for years, and years and years. first because of the way the american indian was done, and, the way that the c.i.a. approached martin luther king, and, illegal techniques towards him. the way that white america and black america is viewed across this country, it is affecting

the people. and i think it should be released and, be we can do something about this. this is the reaction, from capitol hill,. san not tor core nan treated out, john brennan, is rebutting the report, saying they saved lives, and, senator ron white, shows the c.i.a. torture did not work and brutal. and then you have, adam schiff, who serves on the intelligence committee, america did nottor sure, but america didtor sure, and it is vital that we never did so again. also, this from liz cheney, defending the bush administration. she ignored the request to release minority report along

with democrat report, des pickable. also, we have a couple other members of congress weighing in on this as well, saying they disagree, and tom prices, we need honest oversight, and the way this report has been compiled and, released doesn't meet that standard and, have you, the congressman, who says, liberal morals, we can't terror rise terrorists. q.do you think this is over? and. guest: no i think it is going to go on. the vote to initiate is was unanimous. the republicans pulled out when it was clear that they couldn't interview c.i.a. people. and there was as missed opportunity. there's a lot that is agreed. the c.i.a. acknowledged profound

mistakes. and, so, the issue on the efficacy question is, did it work? john brennan's ties, he was george tenet's number 3. he wasn't directly involved. this has all been looked at. he wasn't directly involved, he had a job, that was logistical. is he mentioned in this report? i don't believe so. q.floyd, republican. caller: good morning. i have a comment and a question there. the commenting is, i think, they done the right thing, by getting information from these people, and they should take the pictures, where they hung the soldiers off the bridges, and tortured them and, they don't mention that. and the other thing is,

democrats talk about morale, and then they support the murder of little babies and much i would like to ask ken what he thinks about that. host: ken is an intelligence reporter. that's not his beat. let's end this way, with, what comes next? well, you know, this is a 524 executive summarirks there's a lot that we have to digest. days of stories. host: why? what are you looking for in here? caller: there are whole chapters, there's a section on c.i.a. manipulating the media, and putting out false information, about what the program accomplished and, there's case studies in here, and different things that, we thought, terrorist attacks this weren't real.

q.ken, intelligence writer, he'll be writing. more stories about this. and by the way, if you want to read it, go he to our website. we have a link to it. thanks for having me. we'll continue this conversation coming up next, with john bradshaw, the director and she'll be hear to talk about the report. but, up on capitol hill, other news, cynthia, republican of wyoming was talking about, told a committee hearing, about her husband's dealings with the affordable care act, and this made some news out of that hearing, and we covered it, so go to c-span.org.

i'm on owe 'bama care and, we were told that we were enrolled in obamacare, and then we were told we were not, and then we got it straightened out, and he filed claims, and we were told once again, that we were not on obamacare. well, come to find out, my husband was having chest pains, at the time that he was told we were not enrolled in obamacare and, come to find out, he didn't have all of the tests, that he was advised by his physician to have. so, on october 24, the week before election, my husband went to sleep and, never woke up. he had a massive heart attack, in his sleep at age 65, a perfectly healthy man, and come do find out, in the

conversation, with his physician, he chose not to have one of the tests, the last test, his doctor told him to have. this happened to coincide with the time, that we were told that we were not covered by obamacare. i'm not telling you, that my husband died because of o'bama care, he died because he had a massive heart attack in your sleep, but i am telling you, that during the course of time, that he was having tests by a physician and, was told, we were not covered by obamacare, that he then decided not to have the last test, the doctor asked him to have. let me suggest, that there may be a decline in participation and, it may not be to the benefit of the american people. i want to suggest, that regardless, of what happened to

me, that,ok there have been so many glitches., in the passage and, implementation of obamacare, that have real life consequence's people's lives, and, the so-called glibness that has been referenced, today, have direct consequences for real american people. so, get over your damn gripness. if you missed the hearing, you can go to our website, to wacht whole thing there. joining us on our set, is john bradshaw, executive director of national security network here to continue our conversation, with the report. so, what stands out to you? well, i've been following these issues for a number of years. i used to work for physicians

for human rights and much of this stuff is familiar. one thing that came out more in the report than i think we had known about before was the effort that the c.i.a. put into deceiving the white house, and the administration, and the justice department, and the oversight committees to try to protect item selves, and prevent what they were doing. the timing of the release, critics say this could put americans at risk. so far, there's been no reaction, around the world, people are familiar with a lot of this stuff and the shock has worn off, if there are people protesting, they're protesting the underlyingtor sure, not the release of the report. committee is exercising oversight in a way they need to. it's their job.

i think it was fair. and reasonable for the u.s. facilities around the world, to increase their security. doesn't seem to be any kind of violent reaction. you call it torture, are there legal ramifications from using that word? going back to 2007, a you be inform organizations, put out reportings, showing that under u.s. criminal statutes they did rise to the legal of criminality. no one has been prosecuted and this administration, said they won't. so i think you can in a case, that there were war crimes committed, and other violations. however, at this point, it didn't look like anyone is going to pursue those charges. what would you point to as evidence? well, a lot of these

tactics, which cause incredible pain and suffering, to the detainees do meet the standards of those statutes, and the inflictsñr of serious pain, and suffering. and this is under international definition of torture, there's a huge amount of evidence, that has been gathered, and also, some organizations, including, physicians for human rights have done analysis where they have certain protocol, that show torture, you can see them, that shows that these men were tortured. he writes in the washington times,.

well, that's really an absurd comparison, the men that were subjected to this training, they were doing it, they knew that it was temporary, they were going to be water boarding, to teach them how to resist it, they had safe words and, they knew they were training. thethey were not put in a positn of helplessness. but it's a very different thing, to be subjected to to it, and believing that you might die. the idea that these techniques were approved by the justice department, what happens was as process, where lawyers, asked the interrogate force, asked if they were saws causing serious

pain and pain, and then they wrote that it was legal. it was ridiculous. and john knew, really poor legal reasoning, and then they later wrote the legal opinions. and so this is legally justified, is really, a. not a point that we can accept. what would you like to see done, so this doesn't happen again? well, you see, in the reaction, from the former directors, there's still not admitting that this was wrong. that's the first step. we have called for some kind of a truth commission or a commission that will look at this, and, make public, that, it is clear, it should never happen again. when you have so many officials saying, that there was nothing wrong with it, maybe there's some abuses but it's important, we haven't gotten to the point,

where this won't happen again. i think, a number of people involved, could be subject to prosecution. i don't think that's going to happen. universities getting clear in the public's mind, that this should never happen again. host: this isn't enough of a truth commission. they spent $40 million taxpayers dollars, 7 years of investigating. guest: well, one of the things that happens, is that the people that were involved come forward, and sometimes, granted immunity, and say what they did, and, acknowledge that it was wrong. there's some kind of reconciliation, with the victims. we doesn't see any of that. they are still maintaining they did nothing wrong. this may be the first step, and i see so far, the coverage, i think has been quite fair. if it becomes an act septembered

narrative, that this was excessive and, it is not the way americans operate we'll be starting on that path to resolve it. host: we'll go toe phillip, and, an independent. hi, go ahead. good morning. caller: i attended basic training, in fort jackson, and i was 19-years-old, and one of the things that made me proudest, to be in the army, and american, was that the training, in how we were supposed to treat prisoners of war, or anybody that we would capture, in a situation like that, was very clear, and there was no winging and nodding, about the fact that we were supposed to follow the gentleman new have a convention and act humanely. we were trained to be tough and

strong. but the thing that made me proud, was the way we were trained to follow the law, and the regulations. okay. guest: well, we've heard similar comments from. people in the military, from the lowest ranks some number of retired generals, who have been add mant in opposing this. it'sñr interesting that the military personnel refused to participate in it. and far from making our country safer, former directors contend, what happened there was a breakdown, in cooperation between the n.g. i., and the c.i.a., because they would not become involved. a lot of c.i.a. officers, also, felt the way your caller does. this is not something that the u.s. should be doing. i think, what your caller is saying, is interesting, how

deeply engrained it is. and this is something you don't do lot of help from some people in the american psychological

association, now doing an investigation into what happened, there were not clinical safeguards. this is not something that was done with a lot of economic background. these guys were making it up as they went along. they wanted to be paid $81 million by the cia. a rogueind of operation, and it is not the way we should be operating. what is the national security network? a think tank that links together security experts to come up with policy solutions, and we do an update about different issues. we will do one today about the issues that we disseminate around washington. mfnetwork.org is the website. william, you are up. caller: i would ask the guess if he was ever in the military, in combat. in vietnam we save lives -- we

saved lives, and i am positive this has saved american lives. guest: i served my country for a number of years overseas in the u.s. foreign service. i was not in combat but i was in dangerous situations. ofave worked with a lot military and cia people and i have a lot of respect for them. i know what they did and i know a lot of them were upset about the whole torture episode. i will leave it there. ron, westchester, you are on. caller: good morning. just by changing some wording around, it makes things that were previous illegal -- previously illegal legal. george bush and the republicans are great at changing the wording around. legalould have been a under the geneva convention -- .orture -- you change it around

since we did not declare war, torture is no legal for the united states -- is now legal for the united states to participate in. just a changing of the words. in 2008, towards bush allowed our economy to collapse, and just by changing a word, nobody is being held accountable. what should have been loansharking was suddenly turned into predatory loans. too fardon't want to go down that road, but lately will stick with the first comment. the reasoning behind the program was shoddy and legal experts have look at the memos that were written and find them to be completely unpersuasive. they were written after the fact to justify a lot of this. it is pretty clear-cut what kind of things are allowable and not, and the semantics that were used in the twisted logic, is one of

the key findings of the senate report. officials,the cia you have "the wall street journal" with their peace, directory former cia george tenet, porter goss, and debbie director john mclaughlin, and they write in there -- "the majority left out something credible -- something critical to understand the program context. it was formatted in the aftermath of the 3000 people on 9/11. this was a time when we had evidence that al qaeda was planning a second wave of attacks on the u.s., certain knowledge that osama bin laden had been meeting with scientists from pakistan and wanted nuclear weapons. hard evidence that al qaeda was trying to manufacture anthrax. it felt like the classic ticking time bomb scenario every single day." that timeemember

well. i was working as a senate staff member and we were all evacuated, and i remember the in -- the intense fear and concern that there would be another strike. so i understand what they were saying. that lasted for a short time. i think everyone else came to their senses and realized they had to operate legally and there were ways to get intelligence that did not require this kind of torture. it is interesting to read that "the wall street journal, that they never mentioned any techniques that were used. they do not even call it enhanced interrogation, they just call it interrogation. if there was something fine with it, why would they talk about those things? they want to put this aside and focus on saving lives. the senate report shows that a lot of the information they say they got through the enhanced interrogation program, they got by other means. some of these people gave a lot of information and then were tortured. others had been tortured.

they pieced together this information from a lot of different sources. it is possible that some of the information had some utility, but it could have been gotten by other means. this program was totally unnecessary, whether it had any effect or not. skilled interrogators from the fbi and the defense department and police interrogators know that you can get information from people by getting them to cooperate and treating them with some respect. you get better information and more reliable information than when torturing them. senator mccain said yesterday people will tell you anything to stop the torture. it is not a justifiable program. the weaknesses of that piece by the former cia director's -- it is quite evident if you read it carefully that they know that at the bottom something was very wrong with the program. the piece is in "the wall street journal." we go to pennsylvania.

ralph is next, an independent. caller: good morning, c-span. in no way that i am in favor of torture. but what i am thinking is, what about some young lady or a up on ther anyone 80th floor of the world trade center, having to decide whether they should burn up or jump out the window? that is major torture. i am just show up -- i am just throwing that in the mix. host: john bradshaw? guest: what happened on 9/11 is horrific. i am from new jersey, where most of the victims from -- were most of the victims are from, and i know how horrible it was. we have done much better with the agencies since then, and the military, trying to prevent another attack. trying to protect america is a big national security mission. enforces that,

but we do not condone torture. it is not necessary. there have been no similar attacks since then, and in the last few years under president obama, we have not had those attacks. other intelligence methods and the intelligence community that we have since 9/11 have prevented those kinds of attacks. host: president obama did speak about this, doing an interview on fusion tv. here is what he had to say. [video clip] report shows, we engaged in some brutal activity after 9/11. this is an accounting of some of the problems that the cia engaged in. that there are controversies in terms of some of the details, but what is not is the fact that we did some things that violated

who we are as a people. there have been concerns about the release of this report and the potential dangers it poses. we have taken precautionary measures in our and the seas and around the world. there is never a perfect time to release a report like this, but it was important for us to recognize that part of what sets us apart is when we do something wrong, we acknowledge it. host: i want to take what the president said last there, and that is what could happen because of the report. is a quote in today's "washington post" from a poor -- from a foreign-policy analyst. foris obviously very bad the u.s. moral standing in the world. this to get very wide play on russia today." yes, i think this does

damage are standing overseas and it has for the years this torture program has been known about. thathing that we can do will help improve our standing in the u.s. and with those countries is to have some measure of accountability, jamaica clear that this was not accepted and it will not happen again. -- to make it clear that this was not accepted and it will not happen again. i think trying to cover it up so that other countries will not be able to criticize us, that is not the way america operates. host: now to mississippi. james, a republican. caller: good morning. host: you are on the air. go ahead. my name is james, and i am a veteran. i do not agree with everything

that is done to protect the united states because i think that when you are in a war, you have to fight a war. if you are going to fight a war, you fight it to win at all costs. host: john bradshaw? guest: i do not disagree with that. there are ways to fight wars and win them and have a strong national defense without resorting to torture. , ahad the geneva conventions whole body of international law that has been agreed upon that outlawed these kinds of barbaric tactics. it does not prevent us from conducting necessary military operations. it does not prevent us from gathering necessary intelligence. i do not disagree with the caller, but i do not think what he says is justification for using torture. marietta, georgia. bill, a democratic caller. worked at the cia a

number of years ago, and it is a great organization. when --st problem is having a person like liz cheney and her father, dick cheney, dictating that there are weapons of mass destruction, and the administration knew there were people piloting planes and they were not even paying attention to that. so they should just leave the cia alone and get out of the business and let them do what they do best. -- will ithe cia have its authority questioned, scrutinized, diminished? cia has a very important role to play in keeping our nation safe. i have known a lot of people who have worked for the cia over the years who are very patriotic and confident people. -- very patriotic and competent people. as the caller said, this whole

program started because vice president cheney, secretary rumsfeld, people who worked for dick cheney, were pushing the cia to do this. were justnow say we following orders, and that of course is not an acceptable defense. a lot of people in the cia did not want to get involved in this. the dod and the fbi. those who were responsible and tried to cover it up and lied to their superiors -- they are culpable. i don't think the entire agency was culpable and that we should eliminate the cia. that in thisncy case got off the rails, got out of control. i think some of your callers and listeners should be very concerned about a government agency that has the ability to go off in that direction and do things without the kind of oversight and accountability

that every government agency should have. host: why does that happen? there is oversight, jurisdiction that congress has. congress and the oversight committees could have done a better job. they were not briefed on some of these things, but they did not push. i think they were willing to let a lot of this go in the early days, not only the intelligence committee but other committees. they were kind of looking the other way. there was a failure of oversight there. it is good that the senate intelligence committee is trying to correct that, that there needs to be better oversight than there was. today," an"the usa analysis piece, "history of the cia." stretchesagain, cia trust, and each time, agency says inquiry will endanger lives." wayne, from jefferson, georgia.

caller: good morning. ciauld like to see the investigate ms. feinstein. she is an agent of brazil, her and waxman and boxer. they have this top 21 thing going, and they are trying to overthrow our government. host: let's move on to mike from buenaa vista -- from vista, virginia. caller: i am not for torture, but you have isis cutting americans' heads off. we should not be apologizing to other countries that they do not follow the same rules we do. point, other callers have brought this up very isis, these other terror

groups, do not follow the geneva convention. guest: that is true. i hope we are not holding ourselves to the same standards as isis. america is much better than that and we have told ourselves to higher standards. there are lots of ways to get the needed intelligence. it is a painstaking process that takes a lot of patience. torture is a sign of weakness. good interrogators -- and i have talked to a lot of them -- know how to do it. it is a very challenging process that needs a lot of skill. brutal torture that gets that info -- brutal torture that gets bad information is an advocation -- is an advocation of the responsibility they have. host: mary, silver spring, maryland. democratic caller. get in myhappened to e-mail, the new york review of books, mark gannon's 2003 article.

2009, and it in brings in a lot of the facts. i am going to the library to get copies of that, and i wanted to bring it to your attention. likeecond thing, i would -- and i am coming in on the democratic line, but if you had a line for americans, i would come in on that. we need the criminal courts to start taking people to task and recommend -- and making recommendations for criminal charges for not only just cia, which is just awful, but look at all our other agencies. in thatt obama said interview yesterday, mistakes were made. that seems to be the excuse to do nothing. we go through the hearings, we expose all these awful things that are crimes against humanity, and then we have

silken voices saying to us mistakes were made. host: is this an excuse to do nothing? i think the first thing that president obama did, which was important, was to end the use of torture. he did that the first day that he was in office, that many of us have been pushing for. i wish that the door to prosecution, or at least further investigation, had not been closed to the president, but he did that for political reasons. so i think there does need to be further investigation. the international criminal court does not really come into play because that court is designed to handle cases when a national court system is not capable or willing to do that. this case, the u.s. is certainly capable of doing these things, but whether there seems to be

the political will, that does not seem to be the case at this point. host: what about the laws on the books? what would you like to see? guest: the laws we have against torture are adequate. they have not been enforced. we have a torture statute. there have been some improvements made, for example, in the army field manual, the way the army treats detainees. there are still some problems with that field manual, but a lot of things have improved. that is not a law that is for the army on how to deal with detainees. host: we will hear from james next, from crestview, florida, a republican. good morning. caller: good morning. i have a hard time understanding -- when we are at war, war is war.

attachtraining people to -- to detach themselves from humanity to win. with thert comes out timing of all the lies that came out on obamacare. this is one of the administration's ace in the hole reports that they released as a bait and switch. the american people need to start looking deeper at what we are doing. -- they are beheading people, locking them in rooms, walking out on national tv, and beheading them in front of their parents per you aren't educated man. explain it to me. guest: as i said before, i find horrific ands deplorable, but i think we need to hold ourselves to a higher standard. this report, the timing of this report, is not based on any particular desire to release it

now. they have been trying to release this for a long time. they have been really -- they have been working on this report for seven years. i know a lot of the people who worked on it. they are hard-working, patriotic people. they were not doing it for political reasons. morentelligence committee, than almost any committee up until recently, was completely bipartisan. they have a chairman and a vice-chairman from the two different parties. to beaff was designated bipartisan. they were not associated with either party. that has changed. it has become partisan recently. but i think that if this report , when theme out now new senate comes in, it is possible it would never have been released. and this information needs to come out. we need to understand what happened so that it will not happen again. host: the editorial pages weigh in on this this morning. from "the new york times," "the "it is hard to

believe anything will be done now. republicans denounced the report, acting as though it is the reporting of the torture and not the torture itself that is bad for the country. maybe george tenet, who ran the cia during this ignoble period, could make tiny amends." "the washington times" calls the report political, but they say it is difficult to argue with john mccain, the republican senator from arizona, a man who learned something about torture and its limits in a north vietnamese prison. john mccain rose in support with releasing the report." "from the washington -- from "the washington post" -- "a depicts interrogation

methods that should never be repeated." next caller, hi there. bush, the minute that he okayed water torture -- and why don't we call water teasing -- he okayed that. during the bush administration, they had three guys talk about that guy who had just come to court. host: i will take the first part of what you just said there. does this report say president obama okayed interrogation -- guest: president bush. host: president bush, i'm sorry. the enhanced interrogation program -- i have not read every word of it yet, that itnot sure

mentions president bush directly. outside of this report, he did say he approved this program, the waterboarding, the water torture, as your caller referred a techniquewn to be of torture that goes back to the spanish inquisition. so the idea that people would say it is not torture if you do it in certain ways is just absurd. page the report does, on 37, for our viewers interested in owing to the report -- you can find it on our website, c-span.org -- it references the memo of notification that president bush signed six days after the terror attacks in which he authorized the director of the central intelligence to undertake operations designed to capture and detain persons who pose a continuing, serious threat of violence or death to u.s. persons and interests or who are planning terrorist attacks." it does not mention terror

techniques. texas,o to mike from independent caller. caller: good morning. can you hear me? host: yes, we can. caller: i am enjoying the program. the question in my mind -- do we introduced the question to the justice department to look at whether torture is legal or not? where did that come from? host: do you know, john bradshaw? guest: the cia went to the office of legal counsel at the asked them for opinions about this -- about these matters. as i noted before, the opinions were then subsequently based on information that the cia provided about the impact of

these techniques and whether they were causing serious pain. thoughe opinions, even they have the seal of the office of legal counsel, are not really valuable as legal reasoning. claremont, california. don, a republican. caller: i have to quickly say this is old news. this has been discussed for eight years. the program has been stopped for six years. it is old news, and representative cummings said yesterday that this is just to combat gruber, who is giving the republicans a big excuse -- that asryone points out democrats liars, that they will stay anything they want, to divert attention so that people can -- so that people like john can talk up here like everything is normal. in the next point is to take morality lessons from people who

are using their last effort, they would not put out a republican minority report, and it is an attempt to harm america. read "the military times" story about what is happening to the military. they can find money to go fight ebola but they cannot fight -- they cannot find money to protect the country. how could i forget his name now -- the comedian that is having all the morality problems with his girlfriend -- to take morality lessons from them is disgraceful. host: john bradshaw, go ahead. that this is old news, a lot of this information has been around for a long time, but the fact that people are still defending it, all of these cia directors and a lot of these people, shows that the country has not come to terms with this yet and processed and resolved whether this was the right thing

to do. so i think there is still a debate that needs to be had. this report, which was worked on for so many years and was so exhaustive and methodical, is a valuable contribution to that. to dismiss this as old news -- in a lot of countries, and i worked around the world on human rights issues and i never thought i would have to be working on them in this country in this way. but sometimes it takes 10, 20, 30 years to resolve some of these issues and crimes against humanity. we will keep working on this until it is resolve that people understand what really happened. host: what about the price tag of $40 million to do this investigation? it.t: i think it is worth i do not know the details of how that money was spent or to say it was all well spent. there is a lot of work that went into this and it went on for many years. i would say it is likely worth it to produce something that is

so important to the future of our country. host: how much more would you like to see redacted, and is there talk of that? excuse me, unredacted. some of thee seen documents that have come out over the years where the reactions were at a higher pace. this version that came out yesterday is actually not that bad. the agreement between the committee and the administration was pretty good in getting a lot of this information put out in unredacted form. it would be great if it could all be put out without any of these reactions, but it is pretty readable and , and some of it is in places where they use pseudonyms, the names of those people have been out for many years. i do not think it is putting anyone into additional danger. host: miller place, new york. anthony, a democratic caller. caller: thank you for this

opportunity and for the outstanding program c-span provides. the last guest pointed out that upon his departure, there was a lot of information -- -- whether it was manipulating the media or false flags. would seem to me, it really this to be reviewed in whole situation -- people from the private sector rising to the most powerful positions in government. to coming ney, prior some l of this, had accounting scandals -- his company was floundering or in the red. government in our and then allowing -- they needed the business. though this ever-expanding government has to continue to make way for itself -- the collapse of the made them less --

you know, we really should have been downsizing at that time. and i guess industry leaders, like lockheed martin -- much like lockheed martin, what have you depend on military contracting -- host: let me and there, anthony. about big government and the cia sort of becoming this agency with not a lot of oversight. well, i think that the caller has a point. the interaction between the and the administration has become a big problem for our country. as the military-industrial complex -- it can now be to as the military-industrial- congressional complex.

we have them working together and doing a lot of defense security and lding infrastructure -- which is not always necessary and sometimes wasteful. not going to defend dick cheney and his work and private nment sector, but it extends to both parties, really. it is something that we really need to look at. need better oversight with. host: john bradshaw, executive director. you can go to their website for more information. thank you, sir. guest: sure, thanks for having me. host: coming up next, we are going to talk to senator john hoeven. as well as the remaining days of the hundred and 13th congress. after that, we will open up the phone lines right after this break.

this week on "q&a" -- political reporters discuss on the about being campaign trail with senator mitch mcconnell. >> she had planned for 4 years this campaign. this started in 2010 right after he so what happened to the republican primary. handpicked sky, trey grayson -- at that point, mcconnell realized that he had recalculate everything he knew about republican politics in his home state. he started to make changes. he started to build this very

sophisticated structure, knowing that this would be the most difficult race in the campaign. >> they knew they were going to spend a lot of money on technology. they had watched the obama campaign in 2008 and 2012. they had watched harry reid's reelection. they needed to build from this 2008 race, won by 6 points. he was going to have the latest technology. i did an interview with him in 2013 and he said he was going thorough the most senate campaign ever -- in american history. he probably got there. >> sunday night at 8 o'clock eastern. 10 years of "q&a", we are airing one program from each year starting december 22 at 7:00 pm eastern. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we want to welcome back to our table senator john hoeven. with the cia in

report. do you agree wwith the release of it? and what did you make of it? guest: well, i don't. i have only had a very some level briefing from of the republicans who are members of the it intelligence committee. as you know, there was not one republican that signed on to the report. so i think their problems with it, but i do need to read through it. and i am concerned from the standpoint of what it means for security of the country, as well as our ability to have cia officials who can operate effectively on our behalf. that said, the role of the intelligence committee is to make sure things are done right. and that the laws are followed. but i think there are some serious concerns and problems with the report. host: your republican came to the floor and defended the release of the report, saying that americans need to know.

they need to know what happened in the name. how do you respond to that? guest: we want transparency. we want to make sure the laws are followed. the role of the committee is to do all those things, and i understand that. there were cases where the cia exceeded their authority. those need to be dealt with properly. but at the same time, we are a war on terror against people want to kill us and want to harm our nation and people. and to employ very, very ruthless means. so we have to be able to defend this country and defend our people. that is a tough business. so, you know, this has to be yes, we a way where, have accountability, but at the same time we protect our country. -- are they ws necessary? will have to see why

the people do not in a few any of the cia officials involved. hard to understand of -- there is 15 members the committee -- a democrats and 7 republicans. why is there not one single republican on the report? host: another issue for you this morning is that there has struck in the house on $1 trillion spending bill -- calls the ngton "omnibus bill". it does not fund the homeland security department for the whole year. funding st temporary for that agency because of what president obama did on immigration. in support of this strategy? guest: yes. and if it passes this measure, it will pass the senate, in my opinion.

of homeland nt security -- is only a resolution. that is being done specifically because a president exceeded his authority aand issuing, you know, his executive order in immigration legal in this country. that needs to be addressed. opportunity to n address that very important matter that goes into checks and balances in our government. host: this is a little over $1 trillion. tell our viewers what are the highlights. is roughly level with last year's. when i started with the senate spending discretionary was $1.4 trillion. now it is down to just a little

over $1 trillion. so we are working to find but these are the discretionary funds -- things like social security, medicare, medicaid. those are mandatory programs. those are two thirds of the budget. this is the one 3rd of the budget that is discretionary funding. money for ebola -- all the things you would think of as typical discretionary spending. are 12 appropriation bills. those are combined into this omnibus. what we want to do as republicans -- when the new congress is seated -- is make sure each one of those 12 bills goes to the committee, and across the floor, and this past individually, rather than passing all these bills at once. so that there is a much more transparent, open process. we want to change the way this is done in the future.

and go back to the way it has always been done historically. host: one of the big-ticket items is defense. the bill includes $5 billion in new money to ccombat the islamic state terrorists. this administration $5 billion without authorizing him, the president, to be fighting isis. this is also -- that is addressed in that legislation, and it requires ninety-day reports on the progress that the administration is making. one of the things we will address in the new congress is what is the administration's strategy for combating isis. that we no question need to combat, you know, this terrorist force. but the administration still has to bring 40 strategy so can be know we

successful -- bring forward a we can y so that we know be successful. we want to make sure that it is a strategy that can succeed. host: will you give the president flexibility? guest: i believe we will. look, the commander and chief does have the n ability to prosecute the war. be a strategy that is well-defined, well thought, and can succeed. bring that to congress. host: other issues are so-called policy riders. the washington times says that the republican said that they care in nding for obama the bill, aand included some of ions to prevent obama's administration's environmental policies from taking effect.

chief among those is restrictions on expansion of the clean water act -- which could let the epa regulate farm operations. of s that harm the prospects his getting past when you add things like that? guest: in my opinion, it enhances the prospects of getting it passed. the administration has gone too over regulating virtually every sector in our economy. so we are trying to cut back some of that incredibly burdensome regulation. that will strengthen the package to pass -- it helps getting both republican support. go to our viewers. hi, mary, you are on the air.

caller: yes, i'm interested in border security. now, this is what really gets me. about border king security 1st. okay. 9/11 -- right after 9/11, george w. bush did not secure our borders. the floodgates were opened. i don't blame the illegals, but they were pouring in. there was no security at the border. now, obama -- as far as what he has done with his executive to do that -- but just like everything else he the rited from bush, back ration message -- go and look -- even after the 9/11 commission, they said that al in our as interested open borders, and the bush administration still do not do anything. guest: i believe bush did send national guard troops to the border, in an effort to better

secure. but i think that addressing the immigration issue starts with border security. we have to secure the borders. people want that done. the border is secure and the american people are comfortable that our laws are being enforced will we be able to take the next steps. her point is that the board needs to be secure, and i agree with that. omnibus der this spending bill, though, you freeze spending. it does not include funds to combat illegal immigrants. guest: and remember, that is the portion of the omnibus that is a continuing resolution because we intend to take that issue up in the new congress. host: tom, from leesburg, virginia.

caller: i just wanted to make a couple comments. as far as border security -- what everyone is to give her is that border protection on their re money infrastructure technology, as far as it goes and pretty much anything else within the customs and border protection bureau. one of the reasons why the not secure the time are being funds that sent in is funneled out to each bureaus -- it is actually being snatched up, pushing their information and keeping ystems those afloat. as far as the report goes on my point is that, listen, it is impossible for us

to come as americans, believe is the only scenario that the united states has been involved in. have special operation units that are stationed all around the world, conducting in and day out, that no one, no civilian, knows about. these are things that have been happening for years. we worked hand-in-hand with israel. we do all different types of operations throughout the world. host: okay, tom. guest: 1st of all, making the just that it is not border patrol agents on the border, and that is correct. it means not only border security on the border with technology, it also means enforcing workplace laws. enforcing the visas. have a real problem with visa overstays.

in addition, we have to make sure we have entry and exit systems at all our airports and seaports. i think he is making that point. it goes more into border security than just having defense, technology, and border patrol units. those things are important, but so are the other things that identify the secure border and take away the incentive from coming into the country illegally. on the 2nd issue, again, i think he makes a valid point. the cia, as well as our military, has to combat people who are trying to kill us. congress provides authorization other e cia and these agencies to act, then we have to make sure the act within the authority they are given, but at the same time we have to recognize that we're dealing with people who are trying to kill us. this is a very difficult business. and we have to make sure that the people -- whether they are a covert litary or operations -- have the ability to give a safe.

again, the accountability, but at the same time recognizing to t it takes tough measures defeat a violent group. to the democratic line. you are on with senator hoeven. caller: one other thing to toss military served in the for 26 years. if we are going to be the shining city on the sea, you know, i didn't sign on for that. want to know -- if this was europeans, with this happen? with this happen if it were europeans instead of arabs? guest: 1st off, thank you for your military service. we appreciate it. far as torture, no.

under the bush administration, was given authorization for enhanced interrogation techniques. and they follow those, according to the time. there were instances, according to the report, where they exceeded authority. to be obviously, has looked at. and it is the role of the to make ence committee sure that the cia and the other agencies under their jurisdiction follow the law. i get that. have to understand that going back eople are and saying what was the enhanced interrogation technique at the time. then the obama administration changes the answer, no, that is torture. so that is a changing standard. but you have people who are following the authorization that is given. so we have to be careful as to what is the authorization, what do they do at the time.

the final point he said, well, if this was europeans versus look, we have to -- the objective is to protect our of who it is dless that we are fighting the war against. so, again, i think the role of is intelligence committee to make sure that the laws and the authority are followed properly, but i will remind you, this is a tough business. dealing with a terrorist and you are trying to get information and save lives, we have to be realistic about what we are dealing with and what we tried to do. host: let's go back to this trillion dollars spending bill. the "washington post" headline -- leaders have agreed to a deal. when do expect this to come to a vote? guest: i expect the house to vote sometime on thursday. and we would get it sometime friday. we may be able to vote friday, depending on whether we can get what is called consent

agreements. or it could get pushed into saturday. i think it will probably get done by saturday, but it could go longer. host: adam reporting for the "washington post" found in this the most one of notable changes, including dramatically expanding the money that political donors could give national parties. drastically under parting the 2002 landmark campaign finance overhaul. top donors would be allowed to give 3 times the annual a national party donations. is that appropriate? guest: so, that is a provision i'll have to look at a more detail. some of these negotiations came down to the wire. host: you served on the appropriations committee --

guest: understand, i negotiate certain parts of this. once we have done those negotiations, it has to go up to the leadership. than the leadership conducts negotiations to make sure they have enough votes to pass the bill. from the point of a committee member, you know, my work stops. then we provide leadership the opportunity to provide they can get enough votes, which means they do enough changes and add some things, again, to try and make sure it passes. host: do think you will have enough time to read it before you vote on it? guest: again, this is not the way i believe it to be done. each of those 12 bills passed should be individual, in order. that is what we're going to try and do next year, when republicans controlled the senate. that is what has not been done with senator reid and democratic control of the senate. so i do not think it is a right but at this , point, if we don't move forward on this basis, we are in a situation where government is

not funded. host: we want to let viewers also know what is in the spending bill. it would also allow the benefits of current retirees to be severely cut. part of an effort to save some of the nations most distressed pension plans. the bill authorizes a 1% pay raise for military service members, and allows a 1% pay raise for federal employees. lawmakers banned or limited certain agency conferences and awards. 5% discount on tobacco products all that military exchanges. to some of the provisions in this lengthy 1600 page bill coming in at over 1 join dollars. paul in ohio, go ahead. i was just wondering, tthey were talking about this campaign where no one ask he died. but entire families are being killed with a drone program,

yet this in the think that that is okay. i was wondering if you could tell me how they justify that. thank you. guest: i think we're going with this is that one of the problems with this report and the way it was done is -- at cia no int does the longer have the ability to people that we capture and try to get information so that we can be against groups like isis? just killing these are in a cause they situation with the rules changed on the line? very u are making a important point -- we need intelligence from enemy combatants that we capture. if we are not able to interrogate these people you this information, are we our people at risk? tthat is something that has to be thought about very carefully and consider very carefully this is put t like

out in a partisan way. you have to ask yourself, why were they not able to get republicans, as well as democrats, on the report? why did they not interview the cia officials involved? so it is not just looking back what was done then, it is, what are the ramifications going forward? i said we have to have accountability, we have to make the laws are followed. we have to make sure that we can use a covert operations to get information's so that we cannot only be successful, but do everything we can to protect our men and women in uniform. host: we'll talk with marcel next. republican. caller: i am disappointed with senator lindsey graham for him release of the detainees. that is it for me.

300 girls were kidnapped. young girls were kidnapped and they are raping them. they want them to get pregnant so they can have their kids. they are killing egyptians. they are spending -- talking about the cost of the senate report. she disagrees, basically, and what was done with torture. citing other references that are more in line with torture. to share the same question. $40 million and you haven't anybody that wed was involved?

host: in their defense, they do say they look at 6000 documents. guest: and you don't interview anybody who is involved in carrying out the operations? i think she has some very valid questions. as to her comment about the people in egypt. yes, we are fighting people -- other terrorist groups -- they kill people indiscriminately. they are beheading americans, they are raping, they are torturing. they want to kill us. we have to be realistic on who we are dealing with. host: you are also on energy and natural resources community. get your thoughts -- eemboldened by keystone, critics are delaying new pipelines. given the example of keystone, projects in north america proposing $15 billion more and stretching miles have been delayed. guest: thank you for bringing that up.

i think it is a very important point. talk about keystone -- a huge project, moving oil through a pipeline instead of railcars. now, people say, well, yes, it is a big project -- 40,000 jobs 1,000,000 barrels of oil, but it is just one pipeline project. we need infrastructure, which and other pipeline pipelines -- to move energy to market as efficiently and safely as possible. infrastructure pipelines, railroads, and roads -- we need to do a highway bill next year in the right mix so that we can move energy efficiently and effectively as possible. be t: this is the oil will

diverted overseas -- 2 markets overseas. guest: i think i saw the average price of oil is down below $3 a gallon. the produce 1.2 million barrels a day, 2nd only to texas. look at what is happening. more supply is printing presses down at the pump. talk about building pipelines, you know, it is creating more supply. supply and demand. more supply helps give consumers more choice and lower prices. the obama administration's own department of energy were produced a report in 2011 oil from canada -- that we get to keystone -- would be used in the united states. host: following oil prices,

saudi arabia and opec decided to let them slide in hopes of go after the shale. what are you hearing from your constituents? other concerned about this -- dakota to get hit because of saudi arabia's decision? guest: sure, it will have an impact on the short run. what is going t on. we are producing more energy in this country. which means we don't have to get our country from the -- our energy from the middle east. what is opec doing? they are worried now about their market share. they see hat do happening -- they see our country becoming energy independent. isn't that what we want? that is why they are pushing back. and that is why i want to build an infrastructure that gives us more competitive in energy.

our country benefits economically with jobs and national security. host: yyou teamed up with senator mary landrieu on this. she lost her reelection bid. so where do you stand on this? guest: i will reintroduce the bill after the 1st of the year. it is a bipartisan bill. every republican is on board with it. we have had 9 democrats -- who are still in the senate. more democrats, actually. so we are over the 60. the issue, as you say, will be the presidential veto. i will bring the bill back, we will move it across the floor and the house will pass it -- no problem. if the president then vetoes it, we may have to come at it with other legislation. broader energy measure -- and have artie made over to talk about ouse to

it -- already made over to the white house to talk about it. introduce an appropriations measure, and bring it back again. host: what are you willing to give the white house and the democrats in order to get keystone? guest: look, i'm making the argument on the merits. talking about, e you know, making our country energy secure, creating jobs, national security issue so we from the e to get oil middle east -- they supported overwhelmingly. if the administration has some do that things we can make it -- that may work, in terms of building a good energy plan. that is what will talk about. but i will continue to come out it on the merits. host: okay, we go to the phones. the democratic line.

caller: i 1st want to see that you seem like a very nice man, as opposed to some people from your party. but i encourage you -- the mayor of homeland security testified. he said that the short-term for his organization -- he cannot work with that. and i think i understand what he is saying. he needs some in order to not only have the secure the borders, but also provide security for the presidential race. also, i would encourage you to read research going back to torture. the research on effectiveness of use and torture and getting information. because i think most of the you arch does show that don't get information from torture. so it doesn't work. thank you. guest: i understand your point and torture.

that, you know d -- in fact, i have talked to senator mccain on it very directly. he is someone who was, of course, tortured in vietnam. so i understand what you are saying and i spent significant mccain on that subject. on the funding issue -- again, do not reduce funding for the department of homeland security. we sustained funding, and only extended that until favre 27th because we intend to be working on it right away after the 1st of the year. so it is not a situation w we are put -- a situation where we are putting homeland security in jeopardy. host: we go to taylor, a republican.

caller: thank you, and i appreciate your program. say to the to senator that i think you are on the right track. secondly, on the torture report. it was a very long report. ended up, i think, by jay -- who is now leaving office. and senator feinstein. report would is have been much more accepted by this merican public before president took office -- with what was sympathy to taking place and what was hoping to be accomplished through this program. think the american public has gone through this several years ago, and it was

nnothing but political timing -- bad political timing. and so i think it should have been judged in the context of when it took place. and not based on today's date we know about everybody. host: okay, senator hoeven, do you agree? guest: i think he is trying to create some perspective on the report and what has transpired. know, that is important. i have tried to express some of the same concerns. and, again, you have to keep we have to be - in a position to protect this country. we are fighting a war. again, we have to follow the law, we have to have oversight. the intelligence committee has rule. but that should be done on a bipartisan basis. we have to make sure that our

men and women in these agencies and in the military are in a position to protect us. and we have to do everything we and to make sure our men women in uniform can't exceed. and we are not putting them in a situation where they are in greater peril, rather than position hem in a where they can execute a strategy that wins. host: senator, i want to to read this headline in the washington times. president obama saying his successor will not undo immigration reform. because if they do, let's say it is a republican, it would be a bad political move. reality you know, the of this -- and this is something we talk to the president about leading up to after the on and even election -- we said, look, the approach to immigration reform is a step-by-step process. congress to be seated, and allow us to start starting with --

what security -- so that people can see what is in the bill. so people have a comfort level, and congress and the administration are working together. give us a chance to do that. he went ahead unilaterally. we have to respond in order to protect the constitutional these sibilities of branches of government, as well as address what we think is a very bad decision on his part. we will do that, as we have but we will also then move forward in a step-by-step approach. host: if republicans in the ress are unable to stop president's executive action, and a republican takes the white house, do you agree or disagree with the president here? guest: i'm saying that we are going to start before -- to a step by step aapproach

to address immigration. i hope that is well underway before the new president comes in. the new president will work with us, instead of taking unilateral action. host: independent line. will. tennessee. go ahead. caller: good morning. and to all of you, happy holidays -- to all of you. christmas is quickly on its way. our i would like to ask senator this morning has to do with the torturing of terrorists or any other agent going up against the american people. you know, there are 3 examples i can give you that -- thinking to be some here has form of deterring terrorists. number 1 -- the scripture says supposed to bring

up children in a way they can grow. to do that, you have to use a rod. we still have capital punishment in america. capital punishment is a deterrent for all those evildoers out on the street -- even in this day -- vandalizing and riding and killing. the most important thing -- host: well, we are running out of time with the senator. your 3rd thing, if you could. caller: this is it -- .created man to be obedient -- god man to be obedient, and that is why he created hell, as well. host:, okay, thank you. senator.

guest: well, i guess what i would say is that you have to be able to -- aand we talked be ut this -- we have to able to interrogate enemy combatants. if we are not able to do that. if the cia or other agencies are not able to operate, then we are essentially in a situation where our forces just kill the enemy and that it. now, is that the best solution? does that give us the information we need to prosecute the war on terror? that is the balance we have to hit -- how do we make sure we line with our n values. and how we think things should be done as americans. and at the same time, the men employed in these agencies are not going to be second-guessed. again, i am careful to say where that authority is is a problem, ere then yes, the intelligence

committee has a responsibility. but again, it should be bipartisan. it's a not be republicans or democrats by themselves coming is how it ying, this is. host: maryland. guy is watching us. good morning to you. caller: good morning. i really wouldn't want the senator's job because they are in a high position. the american people look to the government to protect them, but at the same time tell him that they only have so much they can do to protect us. yet when something goes wrong, they blame the government for not protecting us. but when the government wants to put certain things in place to protect them, they say they are infringing on their rights. you can have it both ways. guest: you know, i think you make a really good point. i think you said it very well.

so, obviously wwe have to get that balance. and i think you describe that balance very well. how do we make sure we are doing all we can do to protect this country. responsibility of the government -- to protect its citizens -- and do it in a that americans wanted done. but, i guess what i would say lay that out u well -- that is why it should not be a partisan report coming out. there should have been some the intelligence committee -- on a bipartisan basis -- make sure that the actions that were taken were proper. the i think that is underlying problem -- maybe the biggest underlying problem and how it was approached. host: senator, i'm going to get in one last phone call for you. it comes from linda. hi, linda.

caller: with feinstein putting this out in the open -- with of our best marines on the in the over there jeopardy already and her making -- is se on them absolutely un-excusable. they will get hurt over there even more now. guest: you know, maybe what i could emphasize here -- and the point she brings out -- we have men and women in harm's way. think about it. they are over there putting everything on the line for us and our safety. we have to make sure that we can do what we can to help them do their job -- help them do it safely and come back to their families. appreciate that important part which she brought forward. wish all your

viewers a very happy holiday season and a merry christmas. you for being here. in this last minute, i would like you to tell our viewers what the senate needs to do with before you leave town. guest: okay. as we have talked about, the funding and governments we don't have a shutdown. then the defense authorization act -- again, very important. that is all about giving the support to our men and women in is so critically important -- we admire them and thank them for all they are doing for us. so that is the 2nd critical piece. the 3rd thing is the tax extenders. that is very important for our businesses across the country, particularly our small businesses, farmers, people who are out there that keep everyone working. that, you know -- we are at the end of the year, so they need to know what the provisions are.

if we don't get that done, that hurt our economy and our ability to create jobs. so that is the 3rd piece. host: there is the terrorist risk insurance program - it has been taking out of the omnibus spending bill. support of that program? guest: yes. what happened was there was a difference of opinion regarding dod frank. there was not in agreement on that, and that is why it was left out of the bill. it is something that needs to be passed -- and will be passed. we will pass it, i think, very soon in the new congress. there*support for it. host: of course, you can watch all those debate on c-span 2. senator hoeven, thank you very much for your time. guest: thank you.

coming up next, we get your thoughts on the senate reports. the phone lines are on your screen. begin dialing in now. this week and "q&a", politicians share stories of being on the campaign trail with mitch mcconnell. >> he had planned, for 4 years, this campaign. this started in 2010, right after he saw what happened in the republican primary. rand paul beat mcconnell's handpicked guy in the primary. at that point, mcconnell realized that he had the recalculate everything he knew about politics in his home state. very arted to build this

sophisticated structure, knowing that this would be the most difficult race in the campaign. >> they knew they were going to spend a lot of money on technology. they had watch the obama in 2008 in 2012. they had watched harry reid's reelection in 2000 and. they knew that they needed to go from this race where he won by 6 points -- he was going to have the latest technology. i had an interview with him in 2013 and he said he was going thorough the most senate campaign ever -- in american history. he probably got -- he probably got there. at 8 o'clock ht eastern and pacific. to mark 10 years of "q&a", we program from e each year starting december 22 at 7:00 pm eastern. >> "washington journal" continues. host: and we are back. we're going to wrap up today's "washington journal" with your

thoughts. what do you make of the report and the release of it? 202-748-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats. 202-748-8002 for independents. with senator dianne feinstein who chairs, for now, the senate committee. had to say t she yesterday. [video clip] >> as i noted, we have 20 findings and conclusions. which fall into 4 general categories. 1st, the cia enhanced interrogation techniques were not an effective way to gather intelligence. 2nd, the cia provided extensive amount of inaccurate to the white house, the department of justice, the cia inspector

general, the media, and the american public. 3rd, the cia's management of the program was inadequate and deeply flawed. was 4th, the cia program far more brutal than people were led to believe. host: senator feinstein on the floor yesterday, outlining the committee's report. the democrats put that report together. they had started working with but blicans on the panel, republicans decided to not be part of that investigation. 7 years, $40 million. carol in salisbury, north carolina. a democratic caller. caller: i think it is amazing is talking about this seen it on tv ve she has the -- i think they

should water board all of them over there. it wouldn't hurt to do a little bit of waterboarding in congress. host: okay. sandy in lexington, kentucky. caller: thank you for taking my call. to say 1st that senator feinstein, to me, is a traitor. why did they waste $40 million on this report? some things have to be secret. to cia does amazing work protect this country. to be water boarded? do they want to be killed by a like obama is doing? host: can i ask you to respond to what senator john mccain said on the floor? and aid the truth hurts that americans -- and that americans deserve to know what happened in the name. caller: okay.

i liked mccain until that comment yesterday. i don't like him anymore. is a traitor, too. was fundamental in funding -- waterboarding, what is that? what about the people who are getting their heads cut off? people who out the were disintegrated? anything you to do them is too bad. host: on osama bin laden, i just want to show you the front page of the "newyork times" -- i find it -- where they talk about that very issue. 1st, let's go to mike. an independent caller. caller: good morning and merry all of your listeners. ask -- you ed to have -- c-span has really

promoted this democratic view of the so-called torture report. i was wondering, are you all going to get the same amount of time to the republicans and the cia? host: yes, absolutely. let me show you what the republicans on the committee -- let me show you what he had to say on the senate for yesterday. [video clip] >> putting this report out today is going to have significant consequences. in addition to reopening a of old wounds -- both domestically and internationally -- it could be used to incite unrest, and even attacks, against our servicemembers. and our international partners. this report could also stoke additional mistreatment or death of americans and other captives overseas.

it will endanger cia personnel, sources, and future intelligence operations. this report will damage our relationship with international counterterrorism partners. even worse, despite the fact that the administration -- and many in the majority -- are aware of these consequences, release the osen to report today. the united states today is with a wide array of security challenges across the globe. including in afghanistan, pakistan, syria, iraq, yemen, north africa, somalia, ukraine -- and the list goes on. focusing on the of us, s right in front the majority side of the intelligence committee has and t the last 5 years --

over $40 million -- focusing on a program that effectively ended 8 years ago, while the world around us burned. republican on ing the floor yesterday, taking issue with the release of it how it was done. the former cia officials have of the t in defense interrogation techniques, putting together a website. you can go there to get their side of the story. many of the former cia director's writing this morning "wall street journal" -- piece -- cia interrogation saves lives -- written by former directors and deputy directors. they write in this that in the after september 11, 2001 there was evidence of al qaeda planning other attacks.

every day felt like a ticking time bomb scenario. those former cia officials writing in the "wall street journal" this morning. we go to georgia. hi, go ahead. caller: hi. want to know just -- i don't want any torture going on under my name. and is not a democratic view, it is an american view. i just want to know, for those people calling in, do we have or do we not have a treaty against torture? was torture used if necessary and world war ii? nazi war criminals -- what about all the nazi war criminals this government let gave them in and high-paying jobs -- instead of torturing them or at least putting them in jail. we are over there to steal oil

and gas, anyway. host: okay. debbie from virginia. what are your thoughts on this report? caller: well, i would just like to say merry christmas to everyone. -- you ave a thought when you say torture, are you talking about the middle ages? now, that was torture. i think that the torture that to the american agents s, to the cia that are captured by our the ies in the field in middle east -- what is done to them? someone is water boarded

is not electrocuted, not that is the least tthat our country could do to get information out of them. we will -- debbie, host: okay, debbie, we will leave it there. page newyork times" front this morning -- rejecting the claim that the tactic led to bin laden. months before the operation killed osama bin laden, the cia secretly prepared a public relations plan that would stress the information -- that information gathered from its disputed interrogation program had played a critical role in the hunt. a day after the raid, agency officials and classified briefings made that point to congress.

the conclusion was implied in movie "zero dark 30". go to the lines. caller: thank you, and they give for the program. it is a wonderful service to the nation. i would just like to remind viewers and listeners that we back to that tuesday, september 11 2001. those towers n were struck -- those folks in those towers had two decisions to make -- either punch to the death or burned to death. unfortunately, war is ugly and it is messy. sometimes interrogation tactics skill workers in, but we have to do what we have to do.

this nation needed to take did at as the president that time to protect the nation in and is just unfortunate. this world is far from perfect. host: out of new jersey, secret cia tactics revealed, and a side graphic here. wisconsin, democratic caller. hi, clark. good morning. i would like to say, these republican colors calling in, they are ok with these kind of

tactics because it was a republican administration that was responsible. what if this had been clinton, or president obama? people keep saying how much the investigation costs. how much has it cost for them to repeal obamacare all those times, how much has it cost for the government shutdown? this is political. people are ok when it's their party in charge. host: in other news on capitol hill, on the other side of the capital over in the house, icon of us jonathan gruber was testifying before the house government oversight committee where he apologized for his insulting comments on the affordable care act. -- yesterday had this exchange with congressman trey gowdy. [video clip] gruber, what did you mean when you said "they proposed it and the past because the american people were too stupid to understand the difference"?

said that, i was at an economic conference and i was being glib and making myself look smart at the expense of others. >> are you offering a defense for saying it, or meaning it? >> i'm offering it as a defense for using hurtful and inexcusable language. >> what did you mean by "too stupid to understand the difference"? congressman, i did not mean anything by it. >> you said it. you had to have meant it. >> i was once again, being glib and trying to make myself seem smart. >> will did you mean when you said it was a very exportation of the lack of understanding of the american voter? what did you mean by that? is an example it of mine excusable arrogance and trying to insult others to make myself seem smarter. >> what did you mean when you said the american people don't care about the uninsured? >> once again, that was an overstatement of conjecture on

political topics of which i'm not an expert. >> professor gruber, i have listened to you all morning talk about your lack of political acumen and that you are not a politician, so therefore you don't know not to call people stupid. most of the people watching this morning are not politicians and they do not call people stupid. yesterday over at the house government and oversight reform committee, that exchange between congressman trey gowdy and m.i.t. economist jonathan gruber about the comments he made on the affordable care act. if you would -- if you missed it, you can go to our website www.c-span.org. we are getting your thoughts on report on interrogation techniques. caller: do you remember if senator dianne feinstein gave the reason why she did not want to include the republican report?

that is why -- i believe it was seven republicans on her committee voted against releasing it, because she did not include their report. do you know why she did not want to include their report? host: i don't know. i don't know if she said that during her speech on the senate floor yesterday for an hour, but again, we covered that, of course was a go to our website and you can watch it there at www.c-span.org. from the minority report, it was issued. if you are interested in reading it, you can go to it and find it. one of the conclusions that they write about in this minority report, conclusion one, they say the first faulty premise in the report is that --

that is the issue that both sides have. if you miss the report and want to read some of it, it is over 500 pages. you can find it at our website www.c-span.org. michigan, you are up next. caller: i'm amazed, especially the young ladies that are reporting in this morning about , the way we doe the people and water ball them and everything else. i am a veteran of the u.s. army and the main reason we don't

ever want this outcome and i can understand why the republicans don't want a doubt. they will use the same tactics on our own prisoners. as a matter of fact, they have in vietnam. now it will be twice as worse. and this whole thing, this report coming out yesterday, oddly have to do is go back to the beginning of what happened in the war when we went to a rack and afghanistan. -- two iraq and afghanistan. the whole thing was a lie, that we had nuclear bombs pointed at us. if i was a colonel in the intelligence agency, do you think i would say, yeah, they are right? no. host: all right, tony, democratic caller. go ahead. good morning. as far as the situation with the interrogation, we read a report that said 25% of the people responded never. from 2009 was a poll and it was in the new jersey

newspaper this morning. caller: ok, now, in this situation where they are holding a terrorist who has information about an impending nuclear, biological, or chemical attack, what are we supposed to do, ask them nicely? got: all right, tony, we your point. auburn, new york, republican. hi, fred. morning, and thank you, greta. we heard a person talk already -- hello? host: we listening, fred. go ahead. we had the person talking about but towers. we also had the pentagon hit. that we are think dealing with ordinary people. nobody was killed by waterboarding as far as i've heard. but they have been killed by drones that we sent in, and

killed innocent people. the people that died on 9/11 were not at war. by five persons that we know of, i guess, that were arab muslim terrorists. the phil roe this morning, believe me, they would cut his if they hada minute the opportunity. i wonder what he thinks about that. kerry wasetary testifying before the senate foreign relations committee about isis, and he called for giving the president flexibility to deal with isis in the new authorization. here's what he had to say. [video clip] flex we think the president does need some folks ability that is not reflected in it. i think he is owed that. constitutionally, we are not here to make the constitutional argument, because we do not want

to get trapped into that. we are trying to get to a place where we find a reasonable way to have the level of folks ability necessary that meets the you arend nobody knows not voting for something open-ended, you are not creating a loophole for the president to do something you do not want him to do. i don't think anybody wants to get into a long-term round operation here. but we also do not want to hamstring the generals and the commanders in the field. the president is the commander-in-chief. for their ability to make some decision they need to make. that doesn't need to take you into a long-standing operation. john secretary of state kerry on capitol hill talking about authorization for combating isis. in the "washington times" they report that for now, senator robert menendez, chairman of the committee has written a draft authorization for the use of military force that would impose a three year on the authority and for bid ground, at troops in most situations with exceptions

for intelligence gathering, or rescue missions. he did not suggest a geographic limitation. the speaker of the house john boehner has said to take up the war debate next year and make the case for it to the american people. athens, georgia, jamie, and independent. good morning to you. we are talking about the senate intelligence report. what did you make of it? listr: it is among a long of senate intelligence reports to my beginning with the warren commission, and then the tower

report, the church committee, and of course, the starr report. this one needs a better name. it should be called the feinstein report or something of that sort. i think it is basically true and it leaves out a lot of very important information. host: it is over 500 pages. is unredacted version thousands and thousands of pages host of the committee said it will look over 6 million documents -- it looked over 6 million documents to put together this report. the republican report said they did not interview any cia officials for this. tom, democratic caller. caller: i'm an air force veteran and i worked in intelligence. everyone is making a mistake. it was not a report that was issued yesterday's up it was an executive summary of a 6000 page report. call it a summary. call it a snail's eye view of

the entire 6000 pages, but it had to be issued, and senator feinstein was correct. the reports about africa before apartheid and it had to be released. what the irish had to be released, by humans rights watch and amnesty international. you do not have a democracy in the dark. torture is torture. , oh, whatman who said is so special about waterboarding, i would like to see if she would like to be tried and tested like a lot of us were being waterboarded, and what it means to be dropped underwater, what it means to you psychologically. all of these people who say these things are not torture -- and john mccain, who i sometimes agree with and sometimes i do not, was the one who most articulately said this was torture and we should not hear about this. this is a man who served in hanoi hilton for months and months. was a prisoner of war who was tortured. i would take his comment as the nonminority majority next year

and say this report had to be issued. people say, someone was going to be hurt. people were hurt by torture. we lied with the nato ruled that said this would not be done by the united states personnel. then we sat there and used u.s.s that were not personnel. we put it in romania, egypt, and let other people torture for us. u.s. personnel. that is like saying the church was not responsible for the spanish inquisition because they turned the prisoners over to a civilian body to burn them. the report had to be done. host: specifically about waterboarding, those that point to the legal justification say that this is training our troops go under, waterboarding, and the reason why does not torture is havese it does not long-term effects. it does not have long-term

mental harm. what do you think? that we arepeople training with this, the people in the military that are trained know that it is just training and they will be out of it instantly. talk about the person who was waterboarded over 180 times. when you are being tortured and you are a prisoner, not just being trained as military personnel, you don't know what will happen next. and it does have long-term effects. this goes along with sound, with sleep deprivation, and it goes along with light 24 hours a day. torture is torture because you don't know what is going to happen next. and what happens to someone in a 24 hour timeframe being trained has no comparison to someone being tortured. host: all right. let's listen to what senator john mccain had to say on the senate floor yesterday. [video clip] >> the truth is sometimes a hard pill to swallow. it sometimes cause of difficulties at home and abroad. it is sometimes used by our enemies in attempts to hurt us.

but the american people are entitled to it nonetheless. values know that the that define -- when the values that define our nation are intentionally disregarded by our security policies, even those policies that are conducted in toret, they must be able make informed judgments about whether those policies and the personnel who supported them were justified in compromising our values. whether they served a greater believe,whether as i they stain our national honor. did much harm, and little practical good. what were the policies? what was their purpose? did they achieve it? did they make us safer, less safe, or did they make no difference? what did they gain us? what did they cost us?

the american people need the answers to these questions. yes, some things must be cap from public disclosure to protect clandestine operations, sources, and methods, but not the answers to these questions. by providing them, the committee has empowered the american people to come to their own decisions about whether we should have employed such , andices in the past whether we should consider permitting them in the future. host: senator john mccain on the floor yesterday talking about the senate report. he started out by saying "i rise in support of the release of this report." again, he spoke right after senator dianne feinstein. linda, go ahead. caller: i have been sitting you're watching all of this, and i'm very angry -- sitting here watching all of this, and i'm very angry at some of the responses. host: you are angry with some of

the responses? yes, i'm very angry, because who will speak to the -- for the people who were beheaded , how they've dealt hours before they were beheaded? host: all right. let's go to marry next in erie, pennsylvania. caller: i remember going to london and visiting the london dungeon and seeing the torture chambers. i was so upset that i was crying. i remember how great it was that these things were not being done anymore, and we find out we are doing torture here. the whistleblower, bradley manning, still in prison. who seems to guy have told the truth. i find it really sad that americans are calling in support of torture. the one gentleman from tennessee was trying to use the bible to make his case for torture. and i feelespicable

that if you don't tell the truth, like during civil rights the same thing was happening, lynching, shooting feminism blacks, and we wanted to ignore the truth and not talk about it. it only breeds more violent when you don't tell the truth. -- more violence when you don't tell the truth. also, there was a cut -- a book called "killing hope" written by william blum, and he uses government records. it was about cia interventions since world war ii. i wonder if you might have him on the show to get a historical perspective of the operations of the cia. thanks, mary, for the suggestion. lugo to johnny and baltimore next. caller: i have a comment about the discussion. i think if we cannot win a war without abandoning our values and destroying our own humanity, then we've already lost.

if america wants to be that example for the rest of the world the way we want -- the way we claim we want to be, then we cannot muddy our hands this way and destroy the very thing we are fighting for. host: all right, johnny. a lot has been happening on capitol hill in these first few days of this last legislative week of the 113th congress. if the two sides can come together on a spending bill to fund the government through fiscal year 2015, another issue race relations in this country in light of what happened in ferguson and the grand jury decision in new york as well. before the senate judiciary subcommittee yesterday, a new ,ersey democrat, cory booker was testifying about policing in new jersey. here's what he had to say. [video clip] seen my lifetime, we have some thing happens that is remarkable on the planet earth, which is the american prison system to the point now where

america has 5% of the global population, but 25% of the , of humanities imprisoned people. and by god, we do not have a ,ountry that has more criminals more criminality, more crime intent people than china or russia or india. and that explosion of in thelity has made us last 30 years and 800% increase in the prison population. the overwhelming majority on the national effect -- national level are nonviolent offenders. not picking up guns, not beating people in the street, not assault. unlike anycans, other country bear the burden of spending a quarter trillion dollars carrying this system. and the point that is felt in the anguish of staff that i talked to here in the senate, and people protesting is not

necessarily the specifics of cases, but the knowledge that we all have. and that of my colleagues, republican or democrat, have denied to me that this system is woefully biased against minorities in our country. senator cory booker from new jersey yesterday talking about the criminal justice system testifying there before his colleagues before the senate judiciary committee. you can go to www.c-span.org to watch the whole thing. on the air, republican. what you make of the intelligence report on the cia interrogation techniques? hi, greta. i'm calling in about the torture. host: yes. caller: i'm just kind of curious about these people who are against getting information, however we have to do it.

how can they call that torture when that party that they belong , they have no concern about aborted?at are they are the innocent people. they think it's ok to kill them. all right. david, go on to independent color. caller: i'm just determined that this is an unnatural process. cut off moneyuld to israel, because that is the -- they use that commonly. and we are funding them. but we will cut that offer our country? john in lakeland, florida, democratic caller. caller: hello, greta. how are you this morning?

host: doing well, sir. you are on the air. caller: ok, good. if bush had not gone over and -- this is the cause of all that is going on. talk aboutpublicans this investigation that they put out. what about benghazi? they put all of these men in benghazi and what did they find out? nothing. if they had not cut the troops, we would not have had to go. host: all right. a little bit from this report by the financial times this morning. they highlight this, that money was made on the cia torture program, a lot of money.

the twoonto say that contractors earned $81 million. good morning, jr. what are your thoughts? caller: the previous guy from california, he was saying that torture should not happen and what not. my question is, what is the president obama sending drones over and just killing people out of the sky? what is the difference? if he is that? host: you don't see a difference. caller: no, no. i think that torture that they said, they said they were doing waterboarding, sleep

deprivation, to me, that is -- like you said earlier, our military, our navy seals are trained with water. me read this opposing view in usa today for sub it is written by mark lowenthal, the president of the intelligence security academy and was andstant of production during the bush administration. debbie, milton florida, republican caller. go ahead. caller: i just wanted to respond to the interrogation techniques. i've been sitting here listening to everybody calling in. do.pport what they have to

we set up a central intelligence agency to get intelligence, and that is their job. they have to use whatever means short of the things that are being done to our military and our present -- our prisoners. that is why we have the central intelligence agency. a the military -- i'm military brat and i have children in the military. i understand that we have people that are trained, like the special forces and the ones like that, the seals that go in and do their jobs, because they are trained to do that. that is their job. they have committed themselves to do that, to follow the orders and to go and do what is necessary when other people may not want to go in and do what

they do. we are looking at the cia in the wrong light. i think we are making judgments do to dot they have to their jobs and get the intelligence. host: ok. miranda, you are next. what do you think? caller: i agree with the senator from arizona. the summary should have been put out there. what i don't agree with is hiring people who treat people in such a way that they justify -- if somebody doesn't want to drink water, somehow they thesey rectally hydrating people to a point that in the summary, a report that someone had rectal prolapse. along with that, they cut the

clothes off these prisoners. i was in the military. rape't think replicating is the type of -- these people who are calling in haven't read. and find thee pdf word "hydrate." i'm a little bit nervous. that's ok. for those who want to read the report, they can go to our website www.c-span.org. we have it linked at the top of our webpage. this is how the headlines are playing out around the world. america" the stain on is the headline the guardian puts on their paper. you also have "cia lies and brutality exposed." you also have the arab news out

of saudi arabia, "cia torture brutal and ineffective" is what they write in their pages. and from egypt, "u.s. ex-pats are warned of heightened tensions ahead of the cia torture report." let's go to linda, democratic caller. good morning, c-span. i just need to pray for all of these people calling in, these good christian folks that talk about how it is ok to use any means necessary to torture these people. as americans, we are not innocent. have maimed, rates, and burned slaves, given smallpox to indians. this is something we do not want to address first up and again, when we start to deal with the things we do not want to, you know, we can come to terms and talk about it. these people justify killing

jesus and then go to church on sunday and pray and think it's ok. we don't want to kill and torture, but then we are always on a high horse about abortion and these other things. what kind of christians are we? that is why the of the countries look at us and say we are foolish. host: linda, we will have to leave it there. that doesn't for today's "washington journal" and now we bring you to house five coverage. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's room, washington, d.c., december 10, 2014. i hereby appoint the honorable david w. jolly to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house of january 7, 2014, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour debate.