i think it is very sad. there are tons of policies that really just as racist. the racism comes out in discrimination of the poor. host: the next caller is tom from minneapolis, minnesota. go ahead. caller: it is wonderful you have this conversation on. it is great to hear a lot of men from the black community. where the black community, i think, is on its will have to lift itself up by the bootstraps. that is really hard because of the way we have politicians bought and sold. barack obama proves the a lot of white people are not racist. the black community has a long road ahead of it. black men and women out

there know that. this is sad. you have to fight for what is right, go forward. i don't need fight in a bad way. you have to vote. voting will help, eventually it will help. good black politician can get 90%. that is a voting block that they value. host: we have time for one more caller. that will be jah. go ahead. caller: i'm thankful that c-span did what you did to air the rally for this 20th anniversary celebration. for thehank god minister bring in the message that he brought, and all those people who are thirsty, who needed to hear this message. the time has come. as a closer, i will say that

we need to stop hating on the message because we do not like the messenger. he talked about human rights. when human rights fail, it is not a black, white, or yellow thing. it falls on the shores of everybody's doorstep. the convention for the child is not even signed into the united nations by the united states. we never signed that, or ratified that, why have we not done that, mr. obama? blackize to so-called people for the indecency of slavery. do this so we can get past the in differences that we continue to suffer. killing people in our streets -- there is no separation when it comes to truth. host: we will have to leave it there. i conclude that discussion on the million man march. stay tuned, we will be back soon with two top political reporters in iowa and new hampshire. we will be discussing the 2060

presidential race, and how it is playing out on the ground. later on, we will talk to michael o'hanlon, the security analysis of the booking -- brookings institution. he will talk to is about the hotspots in the middle east. stay tuned. ♪ >> i wrote to the white house coverage of the presence of candidates continues from new hampshire. monday morning, live coverage from the "no labels problem solver" convention in new hampshire. speakers include eight democratic and republican presidential candidates on balancing the budget, securing social security and medicare, and making america energy secure. on tuesday afternoon, we are

live with john kasich, as he speaks in new hampshire. on wednesday, live at 7:00 p.m. eastern, former florida governor jeb bush will speak at a town hall meeting in concord. 2016, takingaign you on the road to the white house on c-span, c-span radio, and c-span.org. >> i think every first lady should do something in this position about the things she cares about. i think everything in the white house should be the best, the entertainment that is given here. , in a worlds good where there is quite enough to divide people, that we should cherish a language and emotion that unites us all. >> jacqueline kennedy's 1000 days as first lady were defined

by images as mother, fashion icon, and advocate for the arts. it was ultimately the tragic images of the assassination of kennedy and his funeral that cemented her in the public mind. jacqueline kennedy, tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span's original series, "first ladies: d image." an i from martha washington to michelle obama. tonight at 8:00 eastern on american history tv on c-span 3. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we are taking a look of the 2016 presidential race right now. we're talking to to reporters in new hampshire and in iowa. we speaking with jennifer jacobs, the chief politics reporter at "the des moines

register." we are also speaking to dan t tuohy. jennifer jacobs, i will start with you. can you give us a sense of what is going on on the ground in iowa? guest: on the democratic side, hillary clinton still has the lead. there's no doubt about it. bernie sanders, of course, back in january of this year, only had 5% support. in i left i will pull, quite a bit. hillary clinton dropped below 50% to 37%. she still has the lead in iowa. bernie sanders has been attracting these huge rockstar crowds. hillary clinton, i think, is trying to capture a little bit of that excitement. she has katy perry coming to campaign for her and iowa. -- in iowa. host: i did not know she is

political at all. guest: indeed. on the republican side, it is still trump. people have been predicting his death in the race, but it is not happening. his high water mark was 16 points above his nearest rival, now he is only five points above ben carson. those two are pretty tight. everyone else seems to be second tier you have carly fiorina, and a club of people who have little experience below them. throw the samell question to you. to has the momentum in new hampshire? is the line of the same -- line-up the same? guest: it is, to a degree. donald trump still has the lead in new hampshire. the outsiders, whether it is ben carson, carly fiorina, are making a strong play.

all the democratic side, you have hillary clinton and bernie sanders going head-to-head. bernie sanders, like iowa, has great crowds, and there is a great grassroots appeal to him. hillary clinton won the new hampshire primaries in 2008, and has a lot of friends in new hampshire. bit of background and logistics for our viewers, can you explain the difference between a caucus, a primary, and how that will work? jennifer, you first, can you inflate how the process works in your state? guest: sure. on the gop side, it is pretty straightforward. people get together in the neighborhood and cast ballots. they listen to speeches, and cast their vote on a little piece of paper, and drop it in a bucket, or something like that. they are counted in a very public way. on the democratic side, it is much different. it is kind of like a sporting

activity. people are all standing in one room, like a school gymnasium, and try to recruit supporters from one candidate. it is a lot of cheering, excitement, persuading. you have to take a very public stance. it also takes time. in iowa is time-consuming. again, you have to listen to the speeches, get up, that's a silly in these events. some people are intimidated by that. candidates have a hard time getting people to come to the caucuses because it is not just a private voting booth experience. host: in new hampshire, how does the primary experience work there? is a primaryy election. we have democrats, republicans, and independent voters go into a right now it -- looks like february 9 is the primary day in new hampshire.

republicans will pick a republican ballot, democrats, a ballot. these independent voters can really make a difference on primary day. that is why people talk about new hampshire being so unpredictable. right now, we don't know where some of these independent voters -- maybe for donald trump, you name it, or vote for bernie sanders, clinton, martin o'malley, jim webb. we want you to join in on the conversation. you can call in with your thoughts, questions, or comments. republicans co can dial (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 745-8002. we also have a social life for people who live in new hampshire iowa, you can call us at (202) 748-8003. we are on social media. you can send us a tweet,

@cspanwj. you can leave us a comment on facebook, facebook.com/cspan. or, send us an e-mail, journal@c-span.org. we are talking with dan tuohy and jennifer jacobs. strongo has established ground operations in new hampshire? on the ground, in new hampshire, who has a strong operation? guest: well, there are several campaigns that are really doing of new hampshire's 10 counties. to start with the democrats first, hillary clinton just opened up her office in new hampshire, which was pretty notable. not to be outdone, bernie sanders house, i believe, nine offices in new hampshire. i have not done the latest after both comparison, but they have quite a lot of staff and volunteers. they are going from the canadian

border to the massachusetts border. it is interesting to see how they are doing it. martin o'malley is still trying to make a push. he is playing the long game, of course, and tried to remain upbeat. jim webb, he has not been in new hampshire oh whole lot, but will be at a convention on monday. there will be a lifestream, i believe, from las vegas. rewriting thes script, if you will, here in new hampshire, like everywhere else. he speaks to some very large rallies. he comes in, speaks at al large menu, and flies out. christie just held the 29th, i believe it was, town hall meeting. in ae pataki is going all new hampshire. lindsey graham as well.

those gentlemen are trying to fight their way into the middle of the pack, or the top-tier. it is a classic 2016 story. good luck. there is somebody viable candidates and well-known candidates. kasich, he is doing quite well. he has a bus tour that he began on friday. he will continue that this upcoming week. host: it is throughout new hampshire? guest: correct. host: jennifer jacobs, how about you? what you thing as far as ground operations in iowa? guest: hillary clinton has everybody beats. .hey have a masterful team they have been working really hard for a long time. for example, for the first of a gutted to be on tuesday, hillary clinton's campaign has organized in0 watch parties and iowa -- iowa. martin o'malley is trying hard. he is working very hard. good team. a

on the gop side, ben carson seems to be the most organized. his campaign site is organizing like crazy. then, you have carly fiorina, who is not doing any organizing herself. she's completely a being that up to her super pac, who she cannot communicate with. then you have jeb bush. they have a precision team. it will bring in many people in the last few weeks before the caucuses. then, you have donald trump. everyone flocks to him. they don't want to do a whole lot to get people flooding into their offices, and wanting to fill out caucus cards for them. then, you have mike huckabee, who is very experienced with the caucuses. he won our caucus in 2008, so he knows what he is doing too. i would have to say, ben carson on the republican side, and hillary clinton on the democratic side. host: james, democratic line. go ahead. yes, ben carson, he is

an african-american. every year,ally -- in the presidential race, if you are a black man, and get up there and criticize your own it,, white people will use just for the simple fact that he can get up there -- what then carson does not realize, white people look at him -- he is jus. he speaks about how he came up -- i'm pretty sure his mother was on welfare. he was not rich starting out in detroit. he was on social security. his mother was on social security. now they want to pull this letter of so other people -- now they want to pull this latteaddr

up so other people can get to it. writtenknow you have about this. how do people in iowa see him? they see him as very inspiring. they love that rags to riches story. they are very moved by his personal story and they think he is very intelligent. they also like that he is very soft-spoken and thoughtful. obviously the iowa caucuses are made up of a lot of white voters and he is very appealing to them. host: dan tuohy, what do you see as the demographic coalition that might be supporting ben carson? he has that outsider label as well. he has a certain star power. major star power. when he shows up in new hampshire, i have been to a few

events where they don't realize he is in the room and their expressions are priceless when they realize it. he is like a rock star. he has that going for him and his message is a great rags to riches story. he's an outsider to washington. never held elected office. this year, i think people are really looking for something like that. someone who is not in d.c. or part of the establishment. your thoughtswith and comments. republicans call (202) 748-8001. democrats (202) 748-8000. (202) 748-8002. there is a special line for those who live in new hampshire or iowa. .hat is (202) 748-8003 let's talk about advertisement

and spending. the omaha world herald had the story about jeb bush. even though he is lagging in the polls, he is spending big on campaign ads. the super pac supporting him is spending 1.9 million dollars in iowa, new hampshire, and south carolina. the next highest fundraiser was the conservative solutions project, which backs senator marco rubio and they spent $700,000 in three states. places currently in fifth at a .4%. t 8.4%. are you guys already being inundated with tv ads? guest: we just have a few candidates on the air and it is a bunch of super pac's right

now. onepro-bush super pac has that says he wants to disrupt the old ways in washington. and there is one for marco rubio. bobby jindal's super pac is promoting him as well as martin o'malley's. hillary clinton's campaign is running ads nonstop in iowa. is about thewa ad gop congressman kevin mccarthy admitting that the benghazi committee hearings or political -- were political. so she is pointing out, the republicans kind of invented these committee meetings just to hurt me in this political race. tuohy, has the upheaval in the republican party here in washington and the fight over who will be speaker of the house having any impact on the ground in new hampshire?

are ordinary voters paying attention to the? guest: i think to a degree. it lends to the narrative that washington is a dysfunctional mess. and that is what some of the outsider candidates are running on. whether it is donald trump or ben carson or carly fiorina. even the sitting governors are pointing out -- chris christie was in new hampshire this past week. he was the first candidate here who i heard talk about this game of thrones down in d.c. with mccarthy out and who is the leader of the house. it's one of those things -- chris christie of course is a sitting governor. he's trying to tap into that distrust or anger with the establishment in washington. he was using that to court a great deal. as he pointed out, no one cares about these games. but he is still trying to use it as a mallet to win over some voters here. texas is on from

the republican line. go ahead. at the i was stunned black conservative from the last call. i used to be a democrat. i even voted for president obama wants. we have inremise this country about destroying african-americans because they don't vote democratic is strange to me. that's what brings me to bernie sanders. i don't understand the appeal of bernie sanders. he is not an outsider. i hear a lot of pundits talk about -- he has the same appeal as donald trump. but i don't see that. i perceive them as being president obama 2.0. a bunch of promises that he can't deliver. he talks about the banks -- big banks. he talks about free college tuition. the cost of college is constantly going up and he doesn't talk about bringing the cost down. he talks about giving everyone

free tuition. we understand that you are not a supporter of bernie sanders. who do you support in this race so far? caller: i admire ben carson. but it will probably be john kasich or marco rubio when it's all over. that's who i wil believe will be the republican nominee. host: dan tuohy, what do you think? i think a lot of people are looking -- it is still early. let's face it. 24/7. all in this toy fo democrats, bernie sanders -- some of his methods -- people may not like it or be critical of it or curious of it. but he has been running on some of these messages for 25 years.

that is what he is trying to hammer home. on tuesday in the first democratic presidential debate, you will hear bernie sanders say something similar to this -- that he is not new to these issues, whether it is a labor deal or a trade deal. he has been on this issue from the get-go or from 1991. this analysis of the upcoming democratic presidential debate. several decades in the making for both candidates. a review of mr. sanders's campaign debates shows that his message hasquality remained strikingly unchanged and reveals a competitive, highly confident debating style. he conveys a palpable sense of conviction and outrage. from the desbs

moines, what do you expect to see out of this debate? bernie sanders is famous for getting on the stump and thundering away about financial issues. and that works for him. me assome democrats tell i was writing a preview of the debate -- they are wondering if bernie will just continue with a dry, policy heavy focus. or if he will be more deft and give punchy lines. which are more important in a debate. is kind of shaping up to be two debates in one. hillary and bernie sanders will go at each other on policy issues. they have been very good about not attacking each other on a personal basis. the second one will be those lower polling candidates really trying to be heard -- probably by making some jabs at the two front runners. color on the democratic

line. go ahead. -- caller on the democratic line. go ahead. the reason i am not a black republican is a very wise congressman out of michigan -- democrat -- his name is slipping my mind this morning. i can't think of his name for anything. he made a statement. he said the reason he is not a republican is because he got in a long line guest. any black person that wants to get in the republican party can get in the short line to power and influence in the party itself. lineg to be in the long means that you are taking in all kinds of people. all kinds of people are welcome in the democratic party. and everybody knows everybody is not welcome in the republican party. you get one black person to stand up there like they did last time with the cookie maker

-- whoever he was. i need some help. i can't think of the guys name. host: herman cain. caller: herman cain. that is right. what is that guys name out of michigan? i can't think of his name. that's all i wanted to say. thoughts?tuohy, any guest: it is still early. these campaigns are getting going. whether it is donald trump or ben carson or hillary clinton, the key here is the campaigns are really trying to make the most use of their time. the numbers come in and they are trying to keep up. that is one of bernie sanders's challenges. fromt all of his support donations. to make the most of it and reach

out to prospective voters. you see that with donald trump. there is still quite a buzz about him. on aer people will show up cold february day and cast a ballot for him is one thing. but they want to hear what he has to say. next caller is anthony from north carolina on the independent line. go ahead. caller: good morning. challenge the guests this morning to comment on one thing about the presidents club. it is a book. i highly recommend that to anyone before they vote this year. the significance of where i am going with this is -- look at the history of republican candidates who have won the presidency and democrats. republicans over the last 25 or 30 years have had two or three

or four rounds. primaries -- every four years before they could even get themselves positioned to be a president. democrats have been -- president carter, president clinton, president obama, they have been successful in getting it done on their first drive. try. there is a song out there about one day we will all be free. when you reach the highest office, you know things that no one in this world will ever know. and that's in the presidents club book. sets therue presidents ideas of his citizens free so that the people who live in america and to come to this america and who aspire to be residents are contributing in some way to this nation understand that america is what

-- every third world nation -- host: ok anthony. any response to the caller? guest: it sounds like he is talking about some of these outsiders possibly coming in and making a stop at the white house and winning on the first try. i'm not sure it is that easy. hillary clinton did very well in the debates in 2008 and she had a disappointing finish in iowa of obama.great rise side, this mess in congress with the speaker vote has some of our republicans in iowa really excited at the thought that they are putting their foot down and saying, we need to advance our conservative message, we need to stand up to the president. but other people are worried, saying we need someone in the

white house who has political experience, who at least knows the basics. someone who has experience in executive office. they calls that between the non-politician and the politician. but if you look at the polling in iowa, it is still less than half on the democratic side and the gop side that want that outsider. it is not a majority for either side. donald trump was on the stump on thursday in las vegas reacting to the news that kevin mccarthy was pulling out of the race for house speaker. here's what he said. just start by saying -- you know kevin mccarthy is out. you know that, right? [applause] giving me a lot of credit for that because i said you really need somebody very very tough and very smart. smart goes with tough. i know tough people that are not smart.

that is the worst. ok? that is the worst. you've got to be smart. we need the whole package. like me, thank you. i like that. i like this guy. it is bedlam in washington right now. bedlam. it is a mess. i've never seen anything like it. i've always been in politics. for three months i have been a politician. can you believe it? it is so embarrassing. i never wanted to be a politician. but at some point, i said we are going to make our country great again. and we're going to do it. [applause] but kevin is a nice guy. and i just hope now that they find somebody that is going to -- have those qualities. where we can negotiate, we can use the debt ceiling and do something really really significant. because if we don't, we are going to be in very big trouble.

we are going to be in very very big trouble. we are in a big fat youthful bubble right now. you watch. i predicted the last couple. we have to our act together or we are going to be greece on steroids. that is what's going to happen. wrong --'s nothing there's nothing wrong with the republicans taking a tough stance and sticking with it. host: dan tuohy from the union leader in new hampshire. we got a little bit of a sense of donald trump's style. do you think 2016 is the year of the outsider? guest: so far it seems to be. john kasich is a sitting two-term governor and a congressman for 18 years. he has talked to out how people want somebody who can fly the plane and also land the plane.

that theme is there. it has always been there to a degree. christie mentioned the speaker's race. donald trump was hammering away there. a lot of people in new hampshire are busy working people. they have a lot of obligations. people areentage of probably wondering, who the heck is kevin mccarthy? or any of the other people seeking that leadership role. it is a very important debate, but it is outside the realm of what is in front of a lot of people day today here in new hampshire. host: don from indiana on the republican line. go ahead. caller: good morning. i have a question rather than a comment. by the time the primaries get around to a lot of the other states, the candidate list has been whittled down to people we don't really want as our

candidate. why is it always iowa and new hampshire? why would it not be rotated to different states? host: jennifer jacobs, you go first. we hear that argument every year, every cycle. there is a lot of different reasons for it. iowa has a long tradition of testing candidates. our voters are very engaged. we have a lot of really good organizers here. iowans always say, if somebody else can do it better, proof why you could do it better. iowa has done a good job of testing candidates over the years and we are pretty experienced at it. if somebody else wants to step forward and show why they would do it that are -- -- better guest: i also get the question a lot here in new hampshire.

we have helped the first primary since 1920. -- we have held the first primary since 1920. we have a sophisticated electorate. it is also a level playing ground for candidates that may not have a lot of money but have a message. that is the quick answer. i know that comes up. the caller is right. if you live in the mid-land or the heartland, you wonder why iowa and new hampshire. that is the first takeaway here. dan is right about the inexpensive nature about being able to campaign in iowa and new hampshire. it just doesn't cause very much money at all. so those candidates can make an impression. host: ken from south carolina is on the democratic line. go ahead. caller: hello.

i'm an independent. on the independent line. sorry about that. i would like to apologize for dr. carson. i am a black man and a veteran. i think obama could be called that name. he hasn't done nothing. the supreme court nominees were a white woman and a hispanic woman. down there, the kids coming up from el salvador. louis farrakhan and the million man march yesterday. -- hillary clinton would do anything to get elected. when she was the first lady of arkansas, she ran the state like a business.

and benghazi, -- it doesn't matter. she said she can't read all the cables that come across are desperate and i don't know why black people are so fooled into thinking the democratic party cares about them. host: can you talk about hillary s?inton's number guest: what was the question? host: her performance in the polls. race int's a very close new hampshire. bernie sanders had been in the lead. it's not a donald trump leap. d.

her campaign is very well staffed and they know the state well. she won the new hampshire primary in 2008. just tuning in now. we have a long way to go to the new hampshire primary. she is not going to look at one or two polls. for my paper, we don't look at polls all that much at this time of the year. the sample size and the margin of error -- it is one of those things like there is a poll every other day. we should let the voters weigh the candidates and see who they like. lamarr from baltimore is on the line. caller: good morning. yesterday i registered as a libertarian for the state of maryland. i hope others will go out there

and register before they make a big mistake. how some talk about people are more focused on the constituents that support these candidates and do their research instead of race baiting. which some journalists would like people to do instead of pointing the blame at a person because of the color of their skin or their nationality -- they should look and see what they are trying to support and what agrees with that person and that's who they should vote for. not because of the size of someone's wallet. host: we will take another caller. carl from georgia on the republican line. go ahead. caller: good morning. i would like to ask your guests. ground --eard on the because down here in georgia, all we get is news because they spend most of the time in your area. have you heard the candidates

that ourt the aid country gives to all these other countries? i will use an example. mr. trump was talking about mexico building the wall. why don't we use that as a means of communication by saying -- we will take away the billions of dollars that we give to mexico if they don't build the wall? have you been hearing the candidates on the ground discussing aid to other countries? thank you. rand paul used to talk about that on the campaign trail. talking to that libertarian base about wanting to have government step back from all of this tampering with other countries. he talked about wanting to scale back u.s. aid to foreign countries. he doesn't talk about that so much anymore. muchrdly campaigns in iowa anymore now that he has dropped quite a bit in the polls.

this is a national security year. especially on the gop side. everyone is very worried about national security and defense. messaget necessarily a that they want to hear about the or. scaling back aid activities in other countries. host: dan tuohy, what is your take? paul was in new hampshire on friday for the republican liberty caucus convention. he did talk about this in his remarks. activistsut 800 gathered in nashua. he has said it before. i'm sure he said at one point in iowa as well. that is basically that these orntries that "hate america" want to persecute christians, why in the world is the u.s. giving them money? it is a big applause line for him.

there are candidates on the republican side bringing this up. i'm sure ted cruz has talked about it as well. host: let's talk about a name that no one has mentioned yet. joe biden. is there any sense that there is momentum around his campaign or any hope on the part of democrats in your states that he might enter the race? jennifer jacobs. to be it is going interesting in the debate on tuesday. he will be a presence in that debate even if he is not on stage. is waiting very much to see if he is going to get in and reshuffle the whole race. there is some interest in iowa. whether it is enough to beat hillary clinton is a big question mark. it doesn't look like that from the polling so far. candidates don't tend to pull very well when they are not actually official candidates. if he jumped in, it could change. there is some interest but it is

not overwhelming. host: dan tuohy, do you think he stands a chance? guest: he does have some supporters here in new hampshire. at this point it looks like he is going to wait until after the debate to make an announcement one way or the other. news release from the biden people about a week ago. state representative came out supporting him. they framed it like he was already in the race. looking for ane alternative. biden cangree joe make inroads in new hampshire -- i don't know. martin o'malley is having a heck of a time trying to keep up with bernie sanders and hillary clinton. if joe biden were to enter the race, who would he take votes from?

hillary clinton, bernie sanders, possibly both? it is a dynamic that will be very compelling to analyze. host: our next color is bridget on the democratic line -- our next caller is bridget on the democratic line. whoer: i don't give a d going to be the president. the thing is, black people -- we ain't going nowhere. --don't care what republican y'all try to throw up in there. we don't care about none of that. i'm trying to get a president up in their know how to run the world and the country. not a clown trump. that clown when all the way around the world on a plane. so did clinton. clinton know everything. she try and keep her in there. host: let's take another caller.

richard is our next caller on the democratic line. caller: the question i would like to know is -- who was supposed to fund the money for mrs. clinton to appropriate soldiers protection for the man in benghazi? was it supposed to be out of her pocket or was congress supposed to appropriate the money for that? and what is the number of the bill that provides the information for the people? you: jennifer jacobs, do have any thoughts on how the benghazi episode is affecting hillary clinton's chances? guest: we don't hear very much about it in iowa at all from either side. used to hear about it pretty early on from carly fiorina. she used to really hammer on hillary clinton about benghazi. it has kind of fallen off the radar a little bit. it will pick back up as these hearings begin.

certainly the democrats are trying to decide who to vote for and it is not something they are very concerned about. dan tuohy, what do you see is the most motivating issues for voters in new hampshire? as a couple of colors have mentioned, people want more jobs, more economic equality. have mentioned, people want more jobs, more economic equality. racial justice. tax reform. core issue is immigration reform. democrats are looking at support for people to go to college and not be settled by high debt. national security is an issue that never gets old. that you havee met with marco rubio over the past week.

sense ofive us your where he is at in terms of the he also came out with a pretty aggressive tax reform plan. how is that playing out? guest: he is still making the pitch like all of the men and women. he hasn't been in new hampshire as much as other candidates. i sat down with him and my publisher to ask him what his tion in newc hampshire is. voters are just turning to pay attention. he will be back in new hampshire a lot. he is focused on tax reform. he was hammering away on syria as well. he is well known among republicans. he needs to introduce himself to new hampshire voters and that is what he is doing.

it is not a quick process. jennifer jacobs, here is another name we haven't mentioned. larry lessig. doesn'tmentor says, he have a lot of money. what does i will think of him? -- what does iowa think of him? guest: he just started campaigning. he is that harvard law professor. he is trying to run on a single issue campaign. he is trying to reform campaign finance. he has been having a lot of trouble gaining any traction. he can't get onto the debate stage. he hasn't made a dent in iowa. he is on tv with some advertising. would will be -- what will be the format of the debates on tuesday? had to do some unique

strategies to make sure everybody got heard for the republican debate. there be any special about this anything will there be special about this debate? guest: they will be looking for the moderators to make it a true debate. not just a chance to grill hillary clinton on live tv. people will get focused if it is just about grilling hillary clinton. they have narrowed it down to just two hours. that is probably the biggest news is that it is not going to be three hours like the gop debate. morrie is on the line. i thought the guests gave a really inadequate answer to why iowa and new hampshire should vote first. urge everye to viewer on c-span to boycott iowa and new hampshire financially until those states cede their duopoloy over our electoral

process. host: on fridays washington journal, we did have iowa representative steve king on. he was asked about the rnc iowa ands comment that new hampshire might have no official claims to the status after 2016. >> reince and i need to have a talk. he told me that he is supportive of iowa being first in the nation. we had a long conversation about that. his commitment to supporting iowa in the first in the nation caucus -- here is what happened. we have an iowa straw poll. that is like a great big political fair. and you have big tents popped up, wonderful food. people bring their families.

and they bring them in and they get to meet presidential candidates and hear speeches. they get caught up in all of that. and we have a straw poll. it is a measure of the organizational ability to support the campaign ads for the candidates. times.s gone on multiple there has never been a republican a send to the presidency since ronald reagan that didn't first win the ames straw poll and the iowa caucus. part offforts on the the rnc at the national level to undermine the ames straw poll. i went in there and propped it up as strong as i could at the undermining took place anyway. the central committee made the decision. they pulled the plug on it sometime in mid summer. if they are able to plow through the straw poll, the next target will be to take iowa out of first place in the first of the nation caucus. that's the next agenda. i predicted it six months ago. this confirms what i had said. reince previous and i are going

and i are going to have to have a talk. what you respond to that. preibus hasman been very supportive about iowa being first. we've got a couple of -- some people think -- crazy outsiders coming in here and it has really ruffled the feathers of the establishment. it almost seemed like a warning to our iowa gop caucus-goers. thatu vote these people can't win a general election, you might get the rug yanked out from underneath you. what do youohy, think? is questions like -- it

years andvery four never stops. for more information, anyone can y100.org.rimar it is a resource that the centennial commission put together. is made up of republicans and democrats. it is a bipartisan support. the candidates are also -- they say it is a good starting point as well. is there a better starting point? i will let the dnc and rnc members debate that. host: there's still time to get in your comments. (202) 748-8001. democrats (202) 748-8000. independent line (202) 748-8002.

if you live in iowa or new hampshire, (202) 748-8003. from pennsylvania on the independent line, bruce is our next caller. caller: good morning. looking is -- whenever i at the politicians for example like hillary clinton, just recently -- she flip-flopped on keystone pipeline and on the trade deal. i just look at these things and i say to myself -- how could you trust somebody -- what are they going to do if they are president? are they just going to do the same thing? i'm for this now, i changed my mind. i would just like comments from

the people on your show. host: dan tuohy. you go first. guest: i think that is what martin o'malley has been raising a lot. he is trying to challenge hillary clinton and bernie sanders to try to get the narrative turned in his favor. it is up to voters and really it is up to hillary clinton to explain her positions. i'm sure he will hear a lot about this on tuesday night in the debate. this comes up a lot of times. someone like hillary clinton or bernie sanders or a congressman who has been in office for 20 plus years -- positions do change. a lot has gone on as far as progress depending on your position you may think it is good or bad. that's why people change. sometimes it is difficult to reconcile one's support or position on an issue in 2015 with 1990.

from this color is liverpool, england. -- this caller is from liverpool, england. caller: good afternoon. my question is about the ordinary folk in iowa. and new hampshire. in europe, millions of people fleeing slaughter and rape and syria fromq these lunatic terrorists of isis. most or quite a high number of k are refugees in your

not from syria or iraq but from afghanistan which is obviously not the levant. of refugeesllions infiltrators from these lunatic crisis terrorist groups coming into europe. if they get legitimate papers, they could easily go to the united states and create mayhem and mass slaughter in the usa. what would bes, presidential candidate from both parties do if they were elected to try to prevent these lunatic infiltrating the united states and killing innocent civilians in iowa, in new hampshire, in colorado, in alaska, whatever

whatever -- host: we heard your question. go ahead. that is something that is definitely on iowa caucus-goers mines. that is for sure. grahamrobably lindsey who talks most about that issue. he has not gained very much traction in iowa at all. each candidate has a different plan. host: dan tuohy from the union leader in new hampshire. it is similar. we are 2000 miles away from the border. immigration is a concern for voters as is isis and national security . host: thank you so much for joining us, jennifer jacobs from the des moines register and dan tuohy from the new hampshire union leader. our next guest will be michael

o'hanlon. he is an analyst at the brookings institution. he is also the author of the book "the future of land warfare." looking into the big business of fantasy sports. a gaming and sports attorney will give us his take. -- wasmakers announced to stop trying to train rebels and equip already established programs fighting isis. representative adam schiff is our guest. i do think it will be more successful. i think it will be far more efficient and effective to work with forces that are already on the ground demonstrating a will to fight. is a change that is

necessitated by the failure of the dod program but also makes a lot more sense. >> from the beginning of this debate on how to aid syrian rebels -- you have expressed concern about how to vet the individuals who are receiving every -- our aid. does it make the vetting process any easier? >> it doesn't make it any easier. we do have relationships with some of the commanders of these units. we can witness what they are doing on the ground and we have been witnessing what they're doing on the ground. i think we have a good sense of their fighting capability and the administration has been making an effort in combination with the intelligence community to identify -- are these radical, are they they somewhere in between. and using those factors to give us some good guidance about who we should back. >> the white house said today that essentially they were not going to drop the requirement

state that they will only fight the islamic state. and that they will go after the assad regime as well. can this program succeed if they don't drop that requirement? >> ultimately that is going to cause a real problem. i think initially we can certainly provide support to those groups that are fighting isis on the front lines. but this is not a static battlefield. it is very dynamic and those that aligns change. todayp we are supporting because they are fighting against isis -- if they are successful and it then brings them into conflict with the regime forces, they will be up against regime forces. will be veryline difficult to maintain and that has been a problem all along. host: you can see the entire interview with congressman adam schiff on sunday at 10:00 a.m. on c-span.

we are turning now to discussing the middle east. our guest for this segment is michael o'hanlon. he is the 21st century security center codirector at the brookings institution. he is also author of the book "the future of land warfare." thank you for joining us. guest: nice to be with you. host: there have been several developments of in the crisis in syria. the most recent was this blast that hit a peace rally in turkey. here is a photo of the damage in the washington post. the story said that 97 people were killed, 246 more were injured. can you tell us a little bit about what happened in this case and how does it relate to syria? guest: i think the toll now is even higher. we have had more casualties reported overnight. it appears to be a bomb set i

isil. the group now running half of syria and a quarter of iraq. and occasionally inspiring these loans will for tax in the united states and elsewhere -- and occasionally inspiring these wolf attacks in the united states and elsewhere. -- so even as the rest of europe combined faces a few hundred thousand and we face a few tens of thousands, turkey has a million or more by itself. turkey historically has been helping some of the more hardline sunni groups. not necessarily isis. groups with pretty close ties to isis as they tried to overthrow president assad. and russia has just taken assad's side. syria has been a place where

turkey has been trying to figure out its best approach and more recently has been willing to help us go after isis. recognizing that isis is just a bridge too far. favor ofou are in overthrowing president assad, even if you want to or put some of the hardline sunni groups, isis has just become too dangerous. escalating war between turkey and isis which previously had sort of been tolerating each other but not any longer. host: you mentioned a number of different groups. explain to us what is at the heart of this civil war that is going on in syria? guest: great question. on one side, it is relatively simple. it is president assad and what is left of his army. group, afrom the -- shia movement inside of syria.

it is about 15% of the population. another 12% or so is christian. and that group has often historically aligned with the hat group. the other two thirds is pretty much all sunni muslims. some of them are kurds. been militarily successful against isis in the countries north. turkey has a very complex relationship with the kurds. we are now working with them to try to put pressure on isis inside of syria. but within turkey itself, the kurds have often pushed for more autonomy and a lot of them were killed yesterday by the isis attack so there is a war within a war. isis is going after kurds wherever they live because it sees them as its primary antagonist in this northern sector where they have been militarily effective. you have a assad,

whole range of sunni muslim opposition groups, unfortunately isis is the strongest and holds the most territory. we are essentially enemies with both extremes in this conflict trying to figure out some way forward working with the moderates. host: how does russia play into all of this? guest: russia is just friends with assad. they say they are trying to fight isis. it is not what appears to be motivating them. they are attacking somewhat more moderate sunni opposition groups closer to assad's center of power new the main cities like damascus. this is the western third of the country. that is where russia is trying to help assad we consolidate his position. have actuallythey helped isis the last couple of days. by attacking the moderate sunni groups, they have made space for

isis. host: why is russia backing president assad? guest: is a historical friend, it is a nemesis of us. russia believes an old-fashioned zero-sum politics. and they have a navy base on the mediterranean coast that assad allows them to access. so they are not only pro-assad, they want this sector to be safe and secure. they say they also are concerned about isis. russians, not necessarily to putin, who i don't believe when he says anything, they have suffered attacks from isis extremists in their own country largely associated with the chechen war in the past. they have some fear that isis could target them as well. but so far it hasn't and i don't think they really believe they have the means to defeat isis. so they're using that as a smokescreen. what they are really trying to do is prop up their old ballot -- ally.

republicans can call us at (202) 748-8001. democrats (202) 748-8000. independent line (202) 748-8002. a tweetsend us or an e-mail or comment on facebook. our first caller is gary from ohio on the republican line. caller: good morning. questionyou asked that about the heart of the problem in the middle east. i'm not sure, but i was under the impression that it was all the trade that goes on in the world -- they have to take their gold and change it to a dollar and then

make a trade with the dollar. so all of these countries that are in trouble with the united states have been dealing directly with gold and that is -- to protect the american dollar and have a monopoly on the whole world trading system. i was under the impression that that was why -- that was why the whole world -- the whole country down in there -- all those countries are at war. host: michael o'hanlon. guest: thank you for the question. gold gold you mean black -- mainly oil, as the beverly hillbillies might have said, you are right on the money. that is the resource that most of these countries have.

i'm not sure if the fight is really about oil per se. obviously in many of these countries, people want to access the oil revenue for their own group. so they are competing for resources. but syria actually has some of the least amount of oil of any middle eastern country. it has had some, but not a lot. syria, the think in simpler way to understand this conflict is an outgrowth of the arab spring of 2011, the rising up against dictators. president assad and his father had been in power for so long that sunni muslim groups saw an opportunity. they had had their country run by this shia group for very long. they felt this was finally a chance to make amends. and then the war took on its own dynamic and just kept accelerating and intensifying. not so much about oil or gold or the dollar, more about our inside of syria itself and who is going to run this country that was two thirds sunni muslim what had historically been

dominated by the shia group. i think that is the simplest way to understand it. host: our next caller is doing on the democratic line. ewey on the democratic line. caller: i agree with you that it basically breaks down along the lines of religious factions in these countries in the middle east. it is not just syria. but syria is different from the rest of them. a grandfathered in dictatorship. it looks as if russia is going to join anybody that is against the united states or the west. russia will take the side of anybody -- cuba or anybody like that. this thing about the kurds. in 1993, i lived

grouphville and a large of kurds moved into the downtown area of nashville and bought a complex and nobody but kurds lived there. they were being gassed in iraq. they were using brutality and just ran them out of the country. that is one of the main quagmires of that area. is just religious fractions -- factions fighting each other. tellingt no business anybody what religion they should be. we've got no business doing that. host: michael o'hanlon. guest: yes sir. thank you for the comment. the kurds are sunni muslims for the most part.

but they identify more along ethnic lines. to whatd one more layer we have been describing as largely a sectarian or religious-based conflict, the kurds in iraq, turkey, and syria, and they also have a group in iran, they tend to be as anything bych their culture and history and ethnic association. they are very distinct from arabs in terms of their culture and sense of identity. so quite often they are fighting for themselves and their own right to be safe within their homeland -- as you point out i referring back to when saddam hussein gassed them notably in 1988 -- they have suffered a lot. even from other sunni muslims. so right now in syria what you are seeing is this small enclave where the kurds tend to live. they have been very successful in fending off isis and taking

back villages from isis. to the point where we are hoping we can use them as a centerpiece of the next tactical move we appear to be planning, which would be a combined kurdish-arab attack toward the center of where isis has territory inside of syria. we will see how this plan develops. i just referring to press reports. i don't know if it is a realistic plan or how far it could go in defeating isis. the kurds have been important not just because of their religion but their ethnicity. the white house seems to be shifting its strategy a little bit. timestory in the new york -- obama administration and's effort to train syrians to combat isis. house is essentially acknowledging the failure of its $500 million campaign to train thousands of fighters and announces it will instead use the money to provide ammunition and weapons for groups already

engaged in the battle. explain this decision a little bit and what it means going forward guest: great question. if i had been the white house, i would have this carpet differently because they all use of the fetus language to say that the previous program was not working and that is a true and i will come back to that. iere is an opportunity t believe we need to build up with confidence to get the weapons to existing groups in ways that can help them do meaningful things on the battlefield. i think it is a reorientation and i hope it is not a scaling back because the program was limping along and you allude to the troubles, and the program was not able to find enough fighters so people were aware that we had headlines or maybe they were a few dozen people who would graduate from any cycle of the training program, and we were trying to bring individual fighters into turkey or jordan, them individually and then

trained in. and then by the wednesdays, tuesdays or a few dozen into a battlefield where there were tens of thousands of enemy forces and hoping you could make a meaningful difference and it was never on the scale that was necessary. one of the reasons we had so much trouble is we were asking people to leave their home communities and leave their families defense was temporarily while they came to a foreign country to get trained. we were also asking them to promise they would use the training and equipment we could provide to fight isil and not fight president assad. to our logic, that may have seemed smart, prioritize your enemies, but to their logic it was crazy because most of them hate assad and that is the fundamental motivation. sure, isil is a problem but they seek a sad as the cause. assad as the cause.

we should have seen that as a problem. host: it sounds like the requirements put on some of the fighters we were training seem to be onerous. does this state to the u.s. military and the lack of experience in syria or was there an era of judgment? guest: i think it is an error. i think president obama has had a fairly decent for policy record on many issues but not on this one. his goal has been to stay out and we understand why. we are tired of big wars in the middle east, a wind that is your preeminent guiding principle, you are bound to have troubles or even fail. here we are 4.5 years into a war that i think we have more than one quarterly of people debt, half of syrians displaced -- people dead, half of syrians displaced, worse than the bosnian civil wars of the early 1990's. not yet as grizzly as the

genocide of 1994 the 20 in that direction and we don't have real leverage on what to do about it. i think the basic philosophy of saying, let's stay out as a priority has led to failure. host: our next caller is spencer from illinois. caller: hello. host: you are on the air. caller: my comment is that president obama and president vladimir putin are on the right track. a lot of people do not understand that the united states is a middleman. if you do not go along with the united states, you will have problems. iran, they had people in pray that obama is president because the united states with have had their foot on their heads for the next 15 years and not let them be nothing if president obama was not president. they got their foot off their head and if you don't go along

with the united states, you will thetrumped and it is pentagon. they mislead the president on a lot of stuff in the middle east. he just found out, him and vladimir putin get to talk in private and they will clean that all messed up, but the pentagon -- you have [indiscernible] they don't want to lose their job. host: all right, spencer from chicago, illinois. we are talking with michael o' hanlon, the codirector of 21st century security center of brookings institution. do we have in some form already that we will see ground troops in syria? guest: thanks for that because her want to mention, one of the things i talk about in my book, right now, there is this prevailing sentiment that we can and should avoid messy operation like iraq and afghanistan. i agreed that is what we should host: when you sit moderately

large presence in syria from the u.s., what number are we talking about and what do you think is

the appropriate size for the overall u.s. military? guest: these are my thoughts, my analyses, and in response to the previous caller and spencer's comment, there is nobody at the military level that i am aware of that is promoting this specific plan. people are aware the president does not want to do it and conditions are not right, but if he got that this kind of deal, something in the range of 30,000 americans might be needed for a while. far less than in iraq or afghanistan at the peaks of the wars. we had more than 100,000 americans at a time in those complex. a substantially sized country, 23 million people, thet the size of bosnia and initial international force in bosnia was about 50,000 people. coupleextrapolated, a hundred thousand peacekeepers. we could find a more economic and sufficiently to do it but i think we will probably need,

someday, 2018, 2019, 20 30,000 -- 20,000 to 30,000 u.s. troops and we could scale it back. host: next up is martin on independent line. go ahead. caller: i think it is time people paid attention to the turkish government and the situation. to be courtney did effort on part of the turkish --ernment to promote isis there seems to be a coordinated effort on part of the turkish government to promote isis and the turkish people movement. the explosion is clear evidence of this and the people of turkey, as well as the people of kurdistan, need to be recognized politically and supported for diplomatic recognition and the remains inamanda prison like nelson mandela was. who remains in prison

like nelson mandela was. turkey is promoted as a u.s. ally when they are simply aggravated in the situation and theirting to use it for own original power or play in the region. i would like you to talk and begin to address those issues as well as why people are not promoting the recognition of kurdistan. , you summarized a lot briefly and concisely, but i think you also helped answer your question because i agree with the concern you expressed about the president of turkey sometimes seeming to be in cahoots with isil or a lot of people who are sort of like isil. the president was also an sympathetic to the kurdish cause for a long time, unfortunately, when you talk about releasing the kurdish leader who did formally advocate violence and

youth of violence interested of independence, when you mentioned those two concepts, you get to what the turkish fears are, turkey is move thata violent would seek independence and they will not allow it. to the pressure we can put on the turks to avoid a horrible tragedy, to allow them to have political representation, greater a timely, we are onto something. i think we should continue to do that to the extent that we tolerate an agenda for the kurds and we will actually pour gasoline on the conflict so i don't agree with the latter point that ocalan should be released or anything like nelson mandela boy do i agree the turks should allow the kurds in turkey to pursue any form of independence. questions and comments from twitter. when asked, what is the current estimate of isis fighters?

another rights, what is left -- another writes, what is left to win in syria? guest: the country is have destroyed. it breaks your heart and should break all of our hearts. i think we have become a little bit calloused to the wars of the middle east because we try to do something about it and we both a lot of americans get hurt and we realized that our ability to make a difference is limited. it should still break our hearts and we should ask what are we doing about this slow-motion genocide, but there are a lot of people left that are safe and that should be the goal. in terms of the strength of my l, they don't -- isil, the short answer is they do not know. it has been the same guess they have had for one year. in that year's time, we estimate that 50,000 more foreign fighters have moved into syria and iraq from hundred countries

around the world and we have been killing about 1000 a month for our campaign, plus, the fighting on the ground. a lot of increase, a lot of subtraction from the net total and basically since we do not have access on the ground nearby for within the territories that isil controls -- controls, they are a group that thrives on secrecy and creating a kingdom where they do not let in nonbelievers, went out under those circumstances, the information flow is limited. host: sean from pennsylvania on the republican line. go ahead. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. source of the troubles in the middle east is the united states. we have destroyed the whole area

, distort the middle east. the initial invasion that iraq in 2003 -- afghanistan occupation, the libya situation, the whole thing has been when absolute failure after another and people who promote the policies gain more prominence. , theyontinue to promote would have gone to war with iran. they obfuscate so much of the truth and in syria, all the .inority support assad it is the sunnis versus everybody else. , theuestions are terrified armenians, the greeks, the shiites, they all believe that

their lives are in danger. if the sunnis, whether they are moderates or jihadist, whether they are colliding themselves -- can youda, which imagine at this point since 2003 two 2004 2 and we are supporting -- 2003 two 2015, that we are supporting al qaeda or we were? have provoked us to become more aggressive in going after isil. host: let's get it one more caller. steve from kentucky, go ahead. my question is you had made a comment that russia was e it is ania becaus old ally. what is the difference in the

united states, which is aiding israel, as an old friend? i will listen to your response. host: michael o' hanlon from the brookings institution. guest: quick question. loyalty and international a russians just not characteristic. sometimes it may be good, although i am not sure in this case. the thing about president assad in syria is whatever you thought nowt historically, he has dropped barrel bombs on innocent people throughout major cities. he has killed, by most estimates, the share of the 250,000 people who have died in this war, any of them innocent civilians. most innocent civilians, in fact. his desperate hold onto power has turned him into a mass murderer. i do not know any other way to say it. i think president obama had it right when he spoke at the yuan

general assembly couple of weeks ago. the united states had been trying to promote reform in syria and we were trying to work with assad or tolerate his efforts to 2011, but once the arab spring's uprising again, instead of trying to address the concerns through dialogue, he just went to a crackdown that led to this incredible war. russia is standing by a man who has become a mass murderer and i am not surprised. in parents to russia, a sort of predicted that an opposition group like isil might end up being the main county to assad so their diagnosis or prozac to stations -- diagnosis have been more accurate than ours. i will go that far in understanding the russian view. russia has got to realize that assad cannot be part of the answer. the sunni-arab world is livid with assad and this provide a continue until there is some

kind of change in the policy in syria. i do not agree with everything israel does play it is far more humane and -- but it is far more humane and upright in syria. host: you mentioned you recently wrote this book, "the future of land warfare," can you tell us what the central argument of the book is? is there a role for land warfare? guest: the central argument is, whatever happens in syria, and i would love to see a solution emerge and be proven wrong that does not require an international peacekeeping force or any american boots on the ground, but the central argument is we are starting to put thatlves into thinking land warfare does not have a future and that we can sit here in our comfortable homes and offices in washington and elsewhere in the country and rollout certain forms of messy, ground operations in the future. has told thema

army not to plan for large-scale stabilization missions anymore. by the stabilization, that means counterinsurgency, major humanitarian relief, peacekeeping, the kit and caboodle of the messy kind of war that we are tired of. i understand what president obama is tired and want to avoid deploying forces to any on his watch and that could be legitimate but i don't think it is smart to tell the army not to plan for the things or prepare for these things or have the capacity to handle them if need be because i could imagine a , five years,narios 10 years, 15 years, that could interest andtional require large-scale missions. hopefully not like iraq or afghanistan, but i will sort of finish on the whole line you may have heard -- you may not have an interest in war, but for may have an interest in you. we may want to stay out of these things we may not be able to and

it is imprudent to this was the possibility. host: i don't even know if you to look forward five years, 15 years, with the situation in afghanistan showing there is a need for ground troops. general john campbell recently talked about the need for flexibility in the drawdown of troops in afghanistan and here's what he had to say. general john campbell it was envisioned in 2014 that we would transition to a normalized embassy presents by january 2017. that remains are planning assumption. since that time, much has changed. we have seen the rise of dice, increased al qaeda presence in afghanistan, and we have some partners in the president and chief executive of julie. as a result, i put forward recommendations to enforce this club addressing core missions, train, and pies and assist. the afghan security forces that conduct counterterrorism

operations to protect the homeland. as the upsurge in violence shows, afghanistan is at the decisive point. the president is well aware of the tenuous security situation, and i also appreciate he has other global issues as he considers my recommendations. my role is to provide my best military advice based upon my assessment of the conditions on the ground. way against the risks to the eigh it against the risk to the force. host: what are your thoughts on general campbell's comments? guest: i think they are doing a great job and we had a terrible tragedy to the hospital bombing and our hearts are out and the u.s. military made a major mistake, but overall, our men and women have done an amazing dedication and

general campbell is a finally there. i think he is right. he is saying that things have changed enough and president obama promised to get forces out in the speech last year and we will not be able to prudently stick to that. ultimately, it is president obama's decision and he has not changed his planning, but the original idea was to get all of our operational forces out of afghanistan by the end of mr. obama's presidency. just keep a small training mission and embassy presents, and general campbell says that now there is a discussion that president obama has requested with options for staying longer. we should know that people should be aware that we were down 10,000 troops in afghanistan, a modest presence compared to 100,000. we are down to 10% of that. the debate will be whether we keep 5000, 7000 going forward or whether we go down to 500. i think if you go down to 500, possibly there is a high risk of

the country falling apart. we sought the taliban assault but now the afghans are taking it back from what we can tell. it is slow and urban fighting and we made a big mistake in the use of force within the conflict by trying to help our afghan partners. the afghans are doing almost all the fighting and with a little bit of american help and monday, they can actually do an ok job theyd american money, connection to an ok job with ups and downs. with the exception of parts of konduz, they are in government control and konduz is being taken back by the government. let's compare that to iraq where also felt -- where the city fell months ago and they are still in enemy hands, still in isil hands. we should respect what afghanistan does come with a happy warrior culture. a lot of them fight hard and some of the units did not hit initially in kunduz, but you see a counterattacked that afghans

orchestrate and conduct. i think there is a good chance that if we stay and support at a modest level, less of what we are at today and keep the money flowing to help them because they are impoverished and do not have the funds to pay to our military, that this project can hold together and we can keep al and other terrorist groups from using afghanistan as a major century in the future. host: huntington beach, california, up next. y is calling on the republican line. go ahead. caller: if the country falls apart, so be it. ago had it right, the united states has caused these problems in the middle east, but as syria goes, my question is -- a rhetorical question -- why are you not just the clipping these rebels -- ideally equipped army rebels to

go against -- are you just sending them off to their death? they have logistics problem because assad has airpower and now they're going against the russian military and this is kissing these guys goodbye and i think we should just get out and that the united states military be used to defend the united states only and nothing else decides that. that is my comments. thank you. a reasonable argument and well-made, but i would disagree. the 9/11 attacks came out of tohanistan after he tried ignore the country for many years, and we felt it was so far what it could not be at that but turns out we were wrong. in syria, we tried the hands off approach was the end of the spectrum after he tried the big invasion in iraq and afghanistan and that did not work out either. when you and i could agree on is

basically that they we tried has been successful apparently, we disagree in the next step and i think what we tried to fully disengage, we see problems get worse and not better. we have to try to do our limited parts to manage these things and coming back to afghanistan, the immediate topic for the last few minutes, afghanistan is in a far better place today then in the 1980's or 1990's. that is largely because of the united states, because of the role we have played, are congress, men and women in uniform, tax layers in supporting creation of an afghanistan government and police that are doing 99% of the fighting on their own and holding the cities and the major roads, even if some parts are contested. i think that is a lot better than what things were when osama bin laden could use the country to prepare the 9/11 attacks. host: that been from -- nevin from tennessee is up next. caller: where does it end.

-- where does it end? it has been 15 years, another 15, another 30 years of this, and it is the local saudi arabians, jordanians, those -- and the iranians who play a central role to end this. they cannot go on for generations for the next 40 years. eventually, they will have to to send in their own troops. the jordanians were sending in their own pilots and the guy was totally burnt alive. guest: at first, i thought you were referred to afghanistan and now it say it does not have to end, we could keep our thousand forces there indefinitely because this would be a generation long struggle against and relatedil movements. as long as we are relatively safe in the united states and the world economy is functioning, we should be

grateful things are not worse. my standard for success is that america be secure, the global economy be secure, and it is a shame we have to send people, it is a shame we have to lose lives and spend dollars, but things could be a lot worse. i standard for success may be a little different than yours, but going over to syria. i think you are right to say we will need to see the regional partners do more. i have been to conferences and meetings with a couple of the key leaders from this region and what they say is -- we need your leadership, america. the problem is that if you look at jordan, saudi arabia, turkey, they had different dogs in the fight, different preferred proxies, different allies, and they are competing with each other. the only way to create a coalition that together in a realistic plan to stabilize is if washington takes the lead, no other party can play that role. i think we need a strategy that is more realistic. instead of a new coalition government in syria that

replaces president assad where everybody is happy and get along and somehow this celfin forces itself, i think we should go for a model that is essentially confederation with different groups large living on their own with their own security forces, government, and there is a weak central government to hold it together. i think that is a lot more realistic. if we lead with that vision, i think the regional actors would be willing to do more as you suggest they should. host: our last call comes from prudence in utah. prudence is on the democratic line. caller: i am curious about something. this business in turkey, because is thethat isil terrorist group of the day, but i do not know what they could possibly have done that would -- this messd any that happened there, the only one that benefits is

[indiscernible] it is perfect for him. countryying to get the to feel as if they need him so that they can build more palaces or whatever he is doing and change the constitution. things are different in turkey now. i do not see why somehow they don't look at this little differently. lasting bondssil in turkey at the moment. host: michael o' hanlon, the last word. guest: prudence, you are right to inject a note of caution. we don't really know what happened in the terrible bombings but we do all the great that our hearts go out to those who have lost their lives in the conflict and in the latest bombing. secondly, i think it could be retaliation. in turkey, to kurds

kurds in general, kurds in syria , you attack us, we will contact you. by the way, if you want to go along with this american plan for kurdish forces to help sillate the capital of thi stay, we can do more of this. it is a threat and an attack, and i think that is the way one should understand what isil just there. when there are misgivings or mistakes, and i think there are many, and turkey would be better is with somebody else, isil a group we cannot coexist with. isil is a group that is killing innocent people far more than we even know because they have stanched the information flow that has an ideology of is acceptable for supplies to human beings. we will have to keep looking for a way to find a strategy that we can work together on. jordanians, russians to try to

stabilize syria and ultimately defeat isil. host: michael o' hanlon, the author of "the future of land warfare," and codirector at the brookings institution. thank you were being here this morning. congress is threatening to look into the big business of fantasy sports. attorneyllach a sports will join us to tell us more about those developments. we will be right back. ♪ >> tonight on "q&a," former senator gary hart on his new book "the republic of conscience : comparing our current government to the public our founders intended." ofthe founders use the words

the agent republic of greece and rome and warned against corruption. their definition of corruption was not bribery or money under the table. interesttting special ahead of the common good. by that definition, washington is a massively corrupt place. >> tonight at 8:00 eastern and pacific on c-span's "q&a." ♪ >> this monday on c-span's series "landmark cases," dred scott was enslaved to u.s. army dr. john emerson. during his investment in the army, emerson was assigned to duties in several states during which dred scott married harriet robinson. when the doctor die, mr. scott tried to buy his family's freedom from the window but she refused and he soon. c-span's newse in

series "landmark cases: historic supreme court decisions," with our special guest vistaprint bracey and martha jones -- christopher bracey and martha jones. they will reveal the life and times of the people who were the plaintiffs, lawyers, and justices in the cases. "landmark cases" five many at 9:00 p.m. eastern. we will take calls, tweets, this the commons using the hash tag, landmark cases. for background on each case while we watch, order your copy of the companion book available for $8.95 plus shipping at www.c-span.org/landmark cases. >> washington journal continues. host: we are joined by daniel wallach, a gaming and sports attorney in fort lauderdale, florida, and here to talk about

the controversy brewing in the fantasy sports world. thank you for being here. guest: thank you for having me. host: can you start by telling us about fantasy sports leagues? nfl sunday today, people watching football, but they are watching out for the game that only -- but also for the impact on the fantasy league. how does this work? guest: fantasy sports is the product or industry that has 50 million to 60 my customers, brings a close to $3 billion in entry fees. -- 60 billion customers and brings close to $3 billion in entry fees. people register with fantasy sports sites and take players and build a team that consists of running backs, quarterbacks, wide receivers, and you aggregate all of their individual performance statistics and there are points that are assigned for certain number of russian yards or --

rushing yards were receiving yards with touchdown passes and those, and you go head-to-head against other people like yourself or part of a larger pool with thousands of entries and whoever accumulates the most points based on real-world nfl games, will win the contest and win the money. it may be reduced to the bare essence, you are wagering or placing money on the outcome of individual performance statistics rather than the final score of the game. host: that is how this difference from the local office at school that one has going about football game to something much more sophisticated and detailed. guest: exactly. you deal with advanced data, statistics, analytic algorithms with more sharp, more skilled players years. the difference between sport againstis you are going

contestants and not wagering on a point spread, so there is a difference. this involves all of the professional sports leagues. there is basketball, baseball, hockey, golf, horse racing. host: i did not realize course raising was -- i did not realize course raising was a category. -- horse racing was the category. guest: if there is a sport, there is a fantasy. host: they have opened an investigation into two of the biggest sides, tell us about what is going on. guest: on monday, the new york times published a story that broke the floodgates open and took a look inside the way some of the fantasy sports operators have access or some of their employees may have access to information which could give them an edge in the contest, and there was one incident that was

made public of the draftkings employee. one of the largest or its sports operators. one of their employees played on the draftkings' site -- on the and there is cross site play, where employees will play on the site of another company and the question has arisen on whether they have made access to information that could give them an upper hand or edge in the games. "the new york times" raised major red flags over whether that may be akin to insider trading or give the employees another advantage against ordinary folks like you or me. this situation led to a massachusetts attorney general of you and other new york at 10 general is looking into it and i learned that in tampa, there is an ongoing criminal investigation to determine whether the operators that

operate in florida are complying with the law in florida and federally, so there is a tremendous amount of scrutiny brought on to the fantasy sports industry as a result of the revelation. host: our viewers can join in the conversation by region for this segment. eastern and central time zone, (202)-784-8000. mounted and pacific, (202)-784-8001. are a participant in fantasy sports or play one of these leaks, call us at (202)-748-8002. tell us a little bit about what you do and the type of blog you practice and any involvement you have in the case. involvemente zero in the case. i am a sports and gaming attorney with a fort lauderdale law firm. i represent professional sports teams and gaming interests

state ofd outside the florida. i have represented race tracks, everys, equipment, participant in the gaming industry, and i am also a board certified lawyer practicing before the united states supreme court and various courts of appeal. my entry into this conversation is a result of my writing and commentary. i have been interviewed and quoted in a number of national publications and i write the sports law blog and i have been over fantasydebate sports, as well as the legalization of sports betting and i have been writing about the subjects for the last two years and i consider myself on the cutting edge of both topics, but my practice sort of spans the gamut within gaming and litigation practice. host: i heard earlier that you were careful to describe exactly the nature of plate on fantasy -- withites with waging

wagering versus bedding. our fantasy sports leagues gambling? to the count as a gambling? -- do they count as gambling? guest: that is the debate in the industry because the connotation associated with gambling is that it leads to regulation. every form of gambling in this country, be it a lottery, casino, sports betting, online poker, all is regulated. fantasy sports operates in the unregulated sphere, so understandably, the owners and operators of these companies run from any of the season with the word gambling, but it is clearly gambling and cannot be anything but gambling. you are wagering or placing money on a proposition, it is a proposition that based on an uncertain outcome, no different than sports betting. it should be legal, no question in my mind that fantasy sports is legal in most jurisdictions.

it should be clarified to the legal in every jurisdiction but it needs to be regulated and the law needs to be clarified. be pavedmately will the way. we are in a dynamic time right now. hearings, wearing are in the class action mode right now. two lawsuits have been filed against the two leading operators, but the way i see it heading is within five years, we will see full on, legalized sports betting in fantasy sports but it will be regulated, tax, and the days of the industry under the radar and operating -- industry flying under the radar are gone. host: what to say to folks who argue it is not gambling where fantasy sports leagues require skill to win?

guest: that is the biggest misnomer i have heard. many sides of gambling involves skill, poker, which is regulated, is a skill game. sports betting, one of the ultimate skill contest, that is gambling, and that is regulated. any states such as florida have gambling statutes which prohibit ting ong or bet contest of skill, so the characterization of fantasy sports of contest of skill does not remove it from the gambling regime. that is the greatest mischaracterization that i have ever heard. skill does not equate with no gambling. it is irrelevant to the question and that is now coming into the isefront, and fantasy sports no different than sports betting. it is a skill game that should be regulated and legal. the only individuals and people

who believe that fantasy sports is not gambling are those who are served by the industry and industry itself. no one who is objective, no gaming attorney i know believes it is anything other than gambling. host: let's turn to the phone lines. arnold from new york. what do you think? guest: wait, that is my hometown. caller: really? what street? ofst: cat electronic, class 1980. do we know each other -- cadillac drive, class of 1980. do we know each other? caller: maybe. i love what you are saying. you could have whatever the point regulation that they said that, you could have the best bets and then they can say, you did not win, it was a great take on they could say, you wa

$2.50. how anybody can generate the past and the leaks are all involved, they own a piece of the companies. there is an vested interest and i do not know how it is on the up and up. guest: that is a great question, arnold. hopefully parolees is still in i'siness -- hopefully berell is still in business and i will meet you for dinner. the formulaow how is made or how the outcomes are determined. note is a lot that we do know that is not held open for public view. i am not sure that there is anything untold about any of doing the contests are operated for you point to the lack of transparency and mike of knowledge as to the safeguards in place to protect consumers. your second point raises the hypocrisy issue that professional sports leagues are heavily invested in the fantasy

sports. nba owns 10% or more of fanduel. there are sponsorship arrangements with fanduel or draftkings. this is a gambling product, the leaks have financial might behind this sports -- and while the leaks have financial might find these sports, there is opposition in legalizing sports betting, so they are walking a fine line and as the conversation unfolds, the sports leagues have a tougher time maintaining opposition to sports betting and i believe fantasy sports will ultimately pave the way of the legal sports betting. and theseek regulation transparency you are looking for, accountability, that apparatus will ultimately be in will bed operators accountable to uniform regulations, they will be licensing, monitoring, this industry will thrive and survive, but it cannot do so in a completely self regulated environment.

want to mention that two of the largest fantasy sports sites put out a statement about the recent investigation. draftkings and fanduel said -- they have always understood that nothing is more important than the integrity of the games we offer to fans while the industry works to develop and release more detailed policy, draftkings and fanduel have decided to brave and employees from participating in online fantasy sports contest for money. turning back to the phone lines, carlos is calling. you play some of these fantasy sports leagues. do you think it is gambling? caller: the only question i had was pretending to earlier and he said that the draftkings cannot play in the other league -- you cannot determine who will perform on sunday, so how did they get inside or edge in

winning? i want to know that answer, please. guest: that is a good question. robin, the chief executive officer of draftkings, made it on espn's "outside the lines" that this information does give employees and edge to have access. you are looking at -- if you are in a guaranteed prize pool, and you have the information on which nfl players are owned, assisted withe each cleric, you can structure your lineup in a way to differentiate your lineup from the lineups laid by the majority of contestants. for example, if you knew that aj green was only owned in 4% of the lineups, if you add a degree to your lineup and he performs well, you are absolutely right that the player has to perform well, but if he does, you have already differentiated your lineup and you have a leg up in

the guaranteed prize pool. then it has to match ups. -- pendant heads 10 matchups. if you knew which linux were optimal, he would have an upside advantage. it does not guarantee victory, but even a 10% to 30% edge is and that to create an unlevel playing field and the proof is in the pudding. this is why fanduel and draftkings have been employees from cross site playing. if this provided no advantage, why would they implement such a prohibition? the question is -- whether it was soon enough? we have had two seasons, plus, episodeit has taken one to shed light on this. there is no question that it provides an edge and fanduel and draftkings have acted appropriately in stopping ncc that kind of activity. host: for our viewers and caller s, a story about greater regulation for fantasy sports reporting that draftkings

content manager accurately published internal data with releasing it earlier than usual. host: from ohio, taylor is calling. what do you think about all of this? taylor, turn down your tv. hi, could i -- host: go ahead. caller: i need to step outside.

i question relates to online poker and gambling. why is it that online poker was the one that was a scapegoat for the initial online gambling debacle and now draftkings and fanduel are getting to a loophole which anyone who knows poker knows that it is a skill game, is it necessarily the timing or that football is king of america and they are able to get by on that alone? guest: you hit the nail on the head in both respects, fantasy sports is ubiquitous, 86 way people play. -- 56 billion people play and you touched on timing. that debacle was years ago and lessons have been learned from that. certainly, fantasy sports has a certain layer of protection under a federal statute known as the unlawful internet gaming enforcement act, so there are differentiate her's but i

believe -- differentiators but i believe because it came along years later and so why the plate of has the financial might legitimate mainstream investors, such as nbc, comcast, professional sports leagues, there is an air of legitimacy to it as compared to online poker, which is legitimate but it seemed to be or it certainly is not as widespread or ubiquitous as daily fantasy sports. all of america plays fantasy sports. poker at that time was kind of a narrow segment of the market and was always viewed as the traditional gambling product whereas fantasy sports has this debate playing out on whether it is or is not gambling. host: you can join the conversation by calling this. eastern and central time zones, (202)-784-8000. those in the mountain and pacific regions, (202)-784-8001. if you participate in fantasy

sports, call us with your thoughts and comments at (202)-748-8002. isare on twitter, the handle c-span wj and you can send us an .-mail we are talking about fantasy sports leagues with daniel wallach, a gaming and sports attorney. how big are these payouts. -- how big are these payouts? there was a good hundred $50,000 payout in a story i went earlier. what does that fit in in how big the winnings can be? guest: the winnings can be millions. $350,000yee who want came in second place, so first place was significantly more than that. fanduel has something called the world fantasy football championship. it is 120 people qualified and the first place i believe is $3 million. ofre have been results

people being made billionaires, but the amount of millionaires being made pale in comparison to the amount of people who were in smaller prizes or no prizes because they lose, so this is big money. to give you a sense of the scale, currently, it is estimated that the entry fee or total entry fee are the neighborhood of $3 billion. it is projected that five years out, entry fees will comprise $20 billion and the payouts every year are in the hundreds of millions. this is a major colossus of an industry that has grown from a small industry into one of the ofinant players in all corporate america. last month alone, they have collectively spent in excess of $100 million in advertising, so we are talking every week

millions upon millions in payouts. this is not small by any stretch of the imagination, although, you can produce up and smaller contest. host: ed from arizona. , what do you think? -- what do you think? i have to agree with the transparency thing. unless you have the top person of receiver quarterback in oppositions, you never really know if you are going to be the top pick her. isber two, but the concern being computer generated and all on file, what would stop someone , like an inside trader, not only to get the information of who put percentages of each position in, but how would you

know that that person might have entered after even came and started? the final point i would like to make is -- fantasy football, to me, is a lot of youth, kids in in fantasy play leagues. this is a way of cooking them into -- hooking them into gambling at an early age. that to me is a big concern. thank you. guest: he raises all fair points relating to transparency, contestson as to how are structured and percentages determined, it is controlled from within. that is one of the recent regulation is inevitable. just to safeguards. without public confidence in the integrity of this fantasy sports

, the industry will suffer and not as popular. the industry should be asking for information just to promote or instill confidence in the public. these questions that are being raised not only by this gentleman but prior callers, these are being raised by a lot of people. unfortunately, i do not have the answers yet, we don't have the answers. they are yet to be determined. there are fanduel draftkings --fanduel and draftkings that have independent investigation and we have congress looking around and we have the united states attorney's office in tampa looking into a different aspect of this. those inquiries as well as civil litigation system may ultimately provide this answers, but we are going to move from ability to accountability and the way that -- from no accountability to accountability and that happens

to regulation to protect the public and industry to ensure that everybody is playing by the rules, that the contests are evenhanded, and there is a level playing field and the customer fund are protected and information is kept -- inside information is kept limited to a small number of people, so the problems that we have seen some evidence of, i think these are able to be-- are rectified and the industry will be healthier but it will be regulated. host: this is a statement to lawmakers put out, cinnamon and as says that consumers expect -- senator menendez says there employees fantasy sports websites with access to nonpublic information but as a patent on my fantasy games, even if the games are operated by companies,sy sports could get those employs an advantage again to insider

trading. therefore, we also asked the ftc to investigate whether this constitutes an unfair or deceptive practice. who has the authority to oversee some of these sites? guest: i think ultimately it will be congress because in order to have state regulation, we have 50 states, it would be a hodgepodge of different state regulations to have 50 states to a skewedators friday of standard. it makes no sense to have the state regulated and i believe there is a federal statute called the professional amateur perfection act which may pose a limitation on the ability for state to license and regulate fantasy sports operators. that is the statute that prohibits states from authorizing sports betting. ultimately, i think the solution is one that will be on a federal level. with federal regulation, and i am not a big proponent of regulation in every instance,

but when you talk about the gambling product, or a class i gambling product that holds in customer --rs holds billions of dollars in customer funds with integrity and level playing field issues being raised, the government does have to intercede unfortunately. these are new companies and i do not know that more problems do not exist or whether this is because of the iceberg for an isolated incident, but i think we're headed toward federal regulation and they will be hearings over the next couple of months. i think by this time next year, we will see some type of regulatory scheme in place. , a gamingel wallach and sports attorney in fort lauderdale, florida. thank you for joining us. host: thank you very much. guest: thank you very much. host: we will discuss the campaign in 2016 tomorrow with the chief washington quest fun

at "the washington herald," and we will talk about the obama administration plan to release 6000 nonviolent prisoners with julie stewart, the president and on family minimums and we will talk about charter schools with richard kahlenberg. we will see you tomorrow. ♪ which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> next, newsmakers with california congressman adam schiff, ranking member of the intelligence committee. after