calendar leading up to the nomination. ed in kansas city. a republican. hi, ed. caller: yes. host: ted, you're on the air. good morning. caller: ok. good morning. yes. well, this morning, five bucks ago since that question was asked to donald trump, and it beats me why he couldn't still hand up to go on the show. but that's his prerogative too. but i just think that ted cruz is the best fit for all of america. and as far as standing thank you against hillary, they don't know if she'll be able to get in there or not. to me, like i've heard people say and my church pastor say if america does repent as a nation anyway, it won't make any difference who gets in as a president. host: ok. all right. that's ed, a republican. jenny in high point, north carolina, a republican.

hello, jenny. caller: yes, hi. how are you? host: doing fine. what do you think about donald trump not going to the debate? caller: well, i think that he is a control freak and wants to control the debate as if -- like he run his reality show. host: ok. do you think this backfires on him? caller: yes, i think it will. i think it will. it doesn't look good for him. host: and you're an independent. who are you supporting? caller: hillary. hillary all the way. host: ok. so you're an independent. have you voted for republicans in the past? caller: i have, i have. host: ok. why hillary clinton now then? caller: because i think she's prepared for the job. she has the most experience. host: ok. pamela in santa rosa, california. democrat. hi, pamela. caller: hi, how are you? host: doing fine. caller: well, folks are being nice to you since you can hang up on them.

[laughter] i don't think -- just thought i would throw that in. i think donald trump is being very disrespectful to his supporters by not showing up. you know, most of those people who will be there barring -- i don't think it's a very nice how you do. however, i will be very relieved if he doesn't show up. someone said this a little earlier. it will just give others a chance to share how they feel thout hot air balloon in the middle there. and he spends so much time bragging about the fact that his podium is taller than everyone else is. have one more thing to say. i believe after watching him for so many years on "the apprentice," he's always been

disrespectful and really mean to the women on the show. and it just didn't matter who they were. but right now what he's doing and he's done it for years is he's gotten his hair in a knot and he's taking his toy and he's going home. so donny, goodbye. host: ok. paul, miami, florida, a republican. hi, paul. caller: hello.ple of questions, maybe you or somebody could answer. did they pick megyn kelly from the beginning before all this controversy started or did they just put her in now? if they put her in and she's the only one who's had two debates because if they just put her in, that's wrong. and he's right. they just put her in to despite him. -- spite him.

if they picked her in from way before, then he's wrong and he should go. and that's what i think. host: ok. i am -- on your question, i am not sure i have been seen much about that. we'll have our producer look and see if we can find something real quickly. but there is this. i just did a quick serge on google and media light has this headline. donald trump praised megafor debate moderating in 2011. great job, i could never beat you is the quote from media light. let's go to ted from pennsylvania, independent. good morning. go ahead. caller: yes. i think donald trump is making the right decision. i honestly think that he's giving them all the networks, including fox, he's giving them all way more time than they probably have deserved because of the way they treated him from the beginning. you know, he's had to fight

constantly the whole time. i think and this is just him showing more leadership. he is a intelligent man and he knows that megyn kelly is biased and i would like to also say something about her original question that started this whole thing. it may not seem like it was a big deal to some people but if you really watch it, i mean, she asked him -- she suggest that she's -- basically, she suggests that he's abusive towards women and that he's called them nasty names in the past and whatnot. but she doesn't, you know, bring up the fact that he is defending himself. and that might be nasty and some of the exchanges you had with people like rosie o'donnell and whatnot, but he is defending himself. they don't ever mention the

things that they said to him, you know, and he has to come out swinging every time. and that's why i think -- host: well, ted wouldn't that be his -- that's the role he plays is to when you're asked a question and you respond and bring up points that you made or defend yourself, talk about your record, i don't know. i mean, isn't that -- the question is posed and the candidate gets to answer. caller: well, that's true. and he did answer it. and he was not nasty to her right then and there. but i just -- i can understand why he was upset about the way the question was asked. it was just said basically you have called women pigs. you have done this, you have done that. they didn't mention anything about why he did it or what he was doing and what they were saying to him.

it was -- well, people argue that's what happens. i mean, he was defending himself. like i said, it might not be the most articulate way spoken, but that's donald trump. i think his heart's in the right place and i think he has skills. host: ok, ted, i'm going to leave it there to answer the previous caller's question about when the moderators are chosen. if you go to election central, this is what our producer found. the moderators and the debate schedule is set ahead of time. you can find more information there. this story, likely to continue to develop as we continue here is the morning on the "washington journal." so we'll return to it later on, the last hour of the program to get more of your thoughts on what do you think about donald trump deciding to skip thursday's fox news debate. it's annie debate. we're going to switch topics and up next, we'll talk to alan mollohan from west virginia, a

former democrat from the congress. and then later, benjamin ginsburg will join us to talk about the r.n.c. rules may wreak havoc on the g.o.p. nomination contest. we'll be right back. >> we have main engine start. four, three, two, one. and lift off. liftoff of the 25th space shuttle mission and it has cleared the tower. >> every weekend on "american history tv" on c-span3, we feature programs that tell an american story, including saturday morning at 11:15

eastern. diane keisel discusses the life and accomplishments of civil rights activist. and then at 10:00 p.m. eastern on "real america," the space shuttle challenger exploded shortly after liftoff killing all seven crew members. and in 198. 6 nasa video report detailing the accident's causes. >> today is a day for mourning and remembering. nancy and i are pained to the core of the tragedy of the shuttle challenge. we know we share this pain with all of the people of our country. this is truly a national loss. >> sunday morning at 10:00 on road to the white house rewind, a look at the iowa caucuses including howard dean's 2004 speech featuring the dean scream and a conference on the history of the iowa caucuses whose speakers including tim kraft, who is the iowa caucus's campaign manager for jimmy

carter in 1976. and two panels with former campaign managers and political reporters. and journalist paul brandeis with his book. 21 presidents, 21 rooms, 21 inside stories. he explains how presidents from george washington to barack obama have left their imprint on the executive mansion. >> the thing i find interesting about the theater, if you look at records of what the presidents watched over the eclectic ir taste are and everything and they reflect the tastes of the presidents and they reflect the times and everything but there's one movie there's a quiz section america evening here. there's one movie that really resonated with more presidents than any other one. can you guess what that one movie might be? >> for the complete weekend schedule go to c-span.org.

"washington journal" continues. host: and we are back with former congressman alan mollohan who is vice chair of the bipartisan task force to look at the criminal justice system. let's go back first and explain what is the bipartisan task force?

has drug violations. host: take a look at this chart that shows drug offenses are the most frequent admission types. area,s in the dark blue drugs, so the prison population is mostly made up of drug offense. guest: yes, the majority. their sentences are averaged

over 10 years, and they and yout about half have weapons violations related to that. host: what happens to these nonviolent drug offenders when they are serving this time and why is that part of the failure, if you will, when these people are let go into society? that is something that we looked at next. for the first principle, we reserve prison for the most serious violent crimes. the second is to promote a culture of safety and rehabilitation in the prison. take the budget and

work with what they are given. it is not an indictment of the prisons necessarily at all. it is a factor that overcrowding has pushed out of the ability to actually do the appropriate programmatic in the bureau prisons that are necessary to rehabilitate, educate, and prepare people for coming back into society. most ofd all remember, these people are going to be back in society, but we want them to come back into society and have a successful reentry. that requires programmatic's that are not going on in the scale thatons on a would serve the prison population and the safety of society upon their release. the overcapacity comment, here is another chart that shows how that has grown over the years. dark blue is capacity and dark gray is contract and you look at

red over the years, 1981 to 2015, where overcapacity start to said in an how high it goes in this going until last year. i want to invite viewers to call in. what are your thoughts on criminal justice reform. democrats, (202)-748-8000. republicans, (202)-748-8001. independents, (202)-748-8002. fourth line for those with experience in the federal prison system, (202)-748-8003. we are going to go to betty, a democrat in massachusetts. good morning. caller: how are you doing? host: good. caller: good. i just wanted to say that they have a prison in florida, and a man is serving life, plus 30 years, for [indiscernible] drugst got involved with at 14 years old, and he has had

a whole long list of petty crimes, that the environment, and he got stuck in that three strikes you're out law and he has no chance of parole. it is my and plus 30 years. i have seen the transcript of the trial and it is a joke. he is treated terribly down there. guest: is he in the federal or state system? caller: i think he is in the state system. host: sounds like it. mail, half of him it was sent back. i sent postage stamps and they are stolen. i have been calling everywhere. i'm glad i was on the show this morning because i have been calling senators, governors. i am trying to get help for him. are runhe state systems totally independent of the federal bureau prisons and the federal system. interestingly, the states are doing some very good pioneering work with the justice program.

i feel pretty close to that , inuse chairman wolf and i the 1990's, had some really good hearings on prison reform. out of that, chairman wolf recommended that we get the council, state government and few charitable trust involved in taking these recommendations and then going out and seeing what works in federal prison, and then trying to get space to adopt those reinvestment practices. that means taking money you would use for reincarceration and put it in programmatic scum reducing prison population to the most serious and violent systems,- programmatic reducing prison population to the most serious and violent crimes, and then working with nonviolent prisoners and getting them out and reducing the prison

system. florida isow whether a part of the justice reinvestment program. it sounds like they would be a good candidate for it and i would encourage the department of justice. they are working very closely with the justice programs and they are doing good work with this. fear working with the states and working with pew in the council state government. we will recommend that they look at florida and invite florida to participate. they may become up when i do not know authorities participated. problem.ery hard every family in the nation is either affected by this problem or has a neighbor who is. certainly hard. i hope that florida looks at that and get some relief. host: cincinnati, ohio.

june is a republican. caller: good morning, everybody. to the gentleman there, he is a federal prison reformer person, i do not know his name, i'm sorry, but anyway, -- host: former congressman alan mollohan. caller: oh, a congressman. host: former congressman. caller: hi mr. alan. guest: hi, how are you? caller: fine, thank you. systemsthat justice have always had too much done to them or not enough. and you don't know how to be in between. that last lady who called in, her nephew should not have been in no prison that long for what he did. guest: you are speaking to one of the central findings that the report deals with. withad of having a system

one remedy that fits everybody that comes into it, the report recommends that every individual who gets into the prison system at the front and has -- front thatas risk assessments determines the risk of the individual. if we are not dealing with serious crimes or a risk individual, and let's think about treating them in a different way than just sending them to prison, which we are doing now with mandatory minimum. that is why we recommend that mandatory minimums be done away ,ith, with regard to drugs except for drug kingpins. we do not recommend that the reduced. we also ask that congress and the u.s. sentencing commission to look at mandatory minimums in regard to all terms and then start looking more carefully about where other reductions can be made.

area, ate drug offense his work mandatory minimums, like the crack cocaine law, which we passed a reform on that of the fairness act and number of years ago in the 1980's, which level the playing field with regard to crack and cocaine possession. there is a recognition that, that is very unfair, just look at the profiles of the people who are being affected. we also recommend that reports be done -- impact reports be done with regards to racial impact, so we have really understood -- so we understand what the effects of these policies come up with. it is very complicated and a very thorough examination. host: what did you examination find on the business of prison and the revenues generated? guest: there are two aspects to that. number one, building new federal

prisons across the country in order to accommodate this fast rising population, i mean, you are housing 25,000 prisoners in 1984 and the 20 years later, you are housing 220 thousand. there has to be the capacity increase. those prisons were built in districts and states that had the influence to get them built in those districts and states. arguably, they had to be built somewhere and they had to be built summer, so they do represent [indiscernible] , i think theret was the debate that continues, going in with of private prisons totaling on nonviolence, immigration, very at risk prisoners.

and in the federal bureau prisons handling everybody else. i do not think very many policymakers will suggest private prisons take over the federal prison population. host: we are talking about a bipartisan task force that looks into criminal justice reform and what can begin on the federal level. former congressman alan mollohan saying a lot being done on the state level, but what can be done on the federal level? take a look at this chart. drug offenses are dominating the federal system whereas criminal and violent -- five at offenses dominate the state level. dark loop are violent offenders on the state level compared to the great for federal prisons. take a look at the comparison to drug offenses. how many more drug offenders are ending up in federal prison systems compared to stay. guest: a lot of people might be surprised that the states would be handling violent prisoners and the federal government would

be dealing with less violent prisoners. that invites the recommendation that we referred on the federal level the prisons for the are in criminals, which the states. the other reason for that is the states are dealing with common law violations and sector violations, but regular murderers and those kinds of things and they have jurisdiction over it and the federal government does not have jurisdiction over those. host: we will go to new york. ken, independent caller. good morning. to our particular call. i would like to note that i have one time was a federal parole officer, way back in 1980. i would also like to note that was incarcerated in

1954, so i have seen both ends of the spectrum. i toward many of the federal early 1979,in, 1980. i found them to be very impressive institutions. to serve 27 on years in the criminal justice field. i do have a somewhat informed opinion and my heart goes out to mr. mollohan, because after all the years i was in the business, i remain baffled about the care and united states. host: let's take up that point. guest: i'm not sure i understand. experience,all his he says he remains baffled at how other can be reform. let me ask you that. despite the task force put together two years ago, you spent this time researching the topic and what happens to the report now? great question,

really. we address that. we create a couple of entities to carry on and over superior first of all, a working group between the department of justice and the judiciary. they need to communicate, and they need to be in communication. to follow the recommendations and to make judgments and report to congress to the public, and the other, we created a board for oversight accountability of the bureau prisons with regard to these reforms. so that somebody really is looking and somebody independent is following it. there is oversight from the peoples, lots of including, but somebody who has that outside responsibility. we create or recommend the

creation of these two entities, more cooperation between justice and judiciary, and an oversight board for the bureau of prisons to make sure that they are really implementing. host: doesn't the change had to come from congress? let me ask you this because he was a headline in "the washington times," they hope to pick the gop risk on prison reforms -- gop rift on prison reforms. they have discussion of it inamping the justice system hopes of overhaul and president obama's final term. he is on board with the criminal justice reform. it seems that republicans are, too. senator ted cruz, mitch mcconnell, they seem to be worried. they're worried about the release of violent felons. guest: to your first point, first. reform occurs in two places principally. if it involves a federal law,

then it requires a statutory reform. that requires an act of congress, so, yes. all of the crime laws that we have passed and all of the lawsuit have passed, like the ,rack-cocaine to the fair act to level the playing field, that has to come from congress. then there is administrative. we saw yesterday that the president came out with an edict that juvenile offenders would not be put into solitary confinement except under the most extraordinary circumstances. there is not a lot of juvenile offenders in the federal system, but that this the turn toward great leadership and we need to migrate that role, that principle to the basic prison population because it is -- solitary confinement is too easy to use, out-of-state, out of mind, and it is used way too much. and it will be used on offenders

who will be released and it has that outcomes. to your second point about the .pposition and the rift interestingly, texas is one of the justice reinvestment states. we are doing really good work down there in reducing the cost of prison, the prison population, and having very good outcomes. pennsylvania, georgia, states that might surprise people that are all engaging in justice reinvestment and doing what we are recommending. there are laboratories out there that we can look to and get these best principles and fact-based decision-making on the federal level. it is a great model for the federal system and we look to the states experimentation. you learn that in school, but we are seeing it with regards to justice reform and justice reinvestment. to the third point you made,

releasing violent criminals. i do not know anybody who is recommending reducing -- i'm sorry, releasing violent prisoners into the population. just nobody. we are certainly not recommending that. we are recommending that prisons the reserved for the most serious crimes. recommendingway it violent criminals they released on the population. it is a bit of a red herring, and i think folks who making that argument, we need to talk to them, and explained to the extent where we make them feel comfortable about it and ensure them or reassure them that nobody is recommending that we put violent criminals out into society -- out into the public. albuquerque, go to

new mexico. wayne, a democrat. caller: good morning, greta. that youate the fact are doing noble work there. worked in the juvenile justice system for over 20 years, and i remember at one point, there was forudy made as to the rate juveniles korea fund and go into the adult system. i remember that the study ended -- juveniles that go into the federal adult system, and remember that the study ended with the majority of them going to the adult system, but the study was dropped and not followed up on. i wanted to make the comment that i think a lot of this stuff starts when people are younger here. ,hey do not get the proper care the wraparound care when they are released, and the likelihood to reoffend is very hard. even though their records are

sealed, because they are under 18, i remember a lot of them were worried that this was owing to be a mark against them in their future. that was what i was going to ask you about in your task force. what can be done about somebody, especially, as you said, a low-level drug offender, or nonviolent offender, why that has to be on someone's record for as long as it does like a scarlet letter? guest: thank you for your call in question. the task force, the commission did look at the collateral consequences of a prison record. we recommend that it be looked where it isfully not necessary to the job application. the federal government already has taken steps, if not to consider that or develop the kind of information and many of the job opportunities, and we

recommend that the federal government migrate that same role or same practice to contractors, which are huge employers across the country, and we would encourage states to also do the same thing. we need to be very considerate of what are the collateral consequences? .any of them are unintended some of them very intended. definitely something we address and our report and we recommend that it be looked at and that those collateral consequences be reduced in all those areas where it is possible to do so without having any kind of a national security or community safety consequence. host: daytona beach, florida. gail is republican. good morning. welcome to the conversation. you ready to go?

caller: my name is gail, but i am an independent. host: go ahead. caller: good morning, mr. mollohan. i appreciate your help. i wanted to ask somebody who the prison systems. i grew up in miami in the 1960's, and i was never offered pot at any time nor did i ever see anybody smoking it. i do know that a lot of my that ores grew out of came back from vietnam and they were avid pot smokers, a lot of who, and i remember one kid was very nice, and he got five years for being caught for having taken part of. i thought that was so punitive agreed that and i

it should be an offense find, and now, our president wants that taken off the books. affect the prison system of letting people ought not to have party been serving these sentences? guest: our recommendation is some of them are retroactive to the mandatory minimum. with regard to nonviolent drug cases going forward, we suggest that the mandatory minimums be repealed and that going backwards, that over time, the cases be reviewed and the consideredinimums be for removal. hand, i would not early legality

of pot, but on the other hand, the point you are making is the first in a report that the prison should be reserved for the most serious violent crimes or crimes, and these other offenses held without learning the federal resin system. host: black mountain, north carolina. democrat. caller: hello. host: good morning. caller: good morning, greta. how are you doing, girl? host: i'm doing fine. caller: i have been imprisoned ministry for six or seven years. i visited prisons in north carolina. did you know that 70% of the inmates that they let out a returned? they come back to prison again. there is a big business in prison and some people make a lot of money for having a lot of listeners. it behooves them to get more people incarcerated.

that is what our prison system is. i talked to a judge one time, and there is about 80 million laws they pass, so there is a law against everything. every year, congress passes the laws to make it more confusing. host: we will take your point. guest: i would be interested -- you would be interested to know was represented on our task force and both individuals who represented them, one after the other, made major contributions to the report. i do not think that the federal government is passing statutes in order to create the business had a matter of fact, one of the big drivers in the great consternation on the hill is that the bureau of prisons is such a large part of the justice budget. i think i said earlier, if you add in the attention, it is

probably about $8.5 billion a year, the cost of the federal government and they're not making money off of that. there are private prisons, and they are in the business of making money, but their participation in the federal limited to low risk prisoners. people are in the business of running prisons and making money off of it, but the federal government is not passing laws for the purpose of making money. larry in indiana. republican and experienced in the federal prison system. good morning. caller: good morning, greta and mr. mollohan. i started in 1977 in illinois, and i retired from the federal level four.

i started at double six and went on to level four, and have also worked camps. i think mr. golson was at a camp, if i'm correct, is that correct? guest: i don't know where. caller: i think it was at leavenworth. host: your point? guest: he would have been low point. -- you would of been low level. is you arepoint talking about drugs, intercity children, young adults and adults that makes up most of your drug offenses in the federal prison system. when you're dealing with that, you have to go to the inner cities to work with them. host: we will take that. guest: sure. again, we have fixed recommendations. one of the recommendations, the recommendation was to ensure

successful reintegration. i report is comprehensive and we sort of concentrated this foring on reserving prisons the most serious criminals, but we are very interested in reintegration. what we found was that prisoners are not looked at individually enough. there are risk assessments done to the bureau prisons that are primarily done for security purposes, but we are recommending risk and profile assessments of the individual. what are the individuals needs? to the any drug treatment, education, psychological help? and then trying to fashion a plan for them, for the release while they are in prison, and associating that with programs that will address those particular concerns for that individual. hopefully, that will be very

beneficial in the reentry process to facilitate reintegration into the population with the skills and with treatment with regard to the individual condition of the person who is being reentered. we recognize that a very poor job is being done on reentry, and people are being put out of prison without skills, without the proper follow-up, and a period of integration back into society. there are a lot of aspects to that, but speaking generally, we addressed that in a report, have recommendations with regard to reintegration, and hope that they can be implemented as a part of a comprehensive recent reform package that i report actually recommends. i might add that we emphasize that these recommendations

should be looked at as a whole. they are really interdependent to achieve success, overall success. --m that version, prison from divergent, prison, to limiting the prison population, and for programmatics within prison and then reentry and programmatics on reentry to improve the success rate, and also, as i mentioned before, these groups, the working group between justice and to do share and thed the judiciary board to oversee prisons that implement policies, and working with congress for your statutory amendments. host: in warwick, new york.

dell, hi. caller: i am curious because somebody else had asked this question about privatizing prisons. what year was that started? when they started privatizing prisons. what is the correlation between entry of incarceration? thet: the privatization at federal prison level, with regard to the federal bureau of prisons, is separate from many privatization that states are doing. the federal government -- we speak to the federal system only. in the federal for low-risk individuals have been around for as long as i can remember, certainly to the 1980's, 1970's. on the state level, i cannot speak to that. there are a lot of

incarcerations done by the private sector in the states across the states. host: for more on this, if you're interested, go to colsontaskforce.org to find the report. thank you for being part of the conversation. guest: thank you. we appreciate all the callers and we hope we are successful in achieving prison reform and laying any fears on congress that anybody is talking about reducing or releasing violent criminals. no one is thinking about that. host: thank you. we are less than one week away from the iowa caucuses, and c-span will be covering that. we will turn our attention to campaign 2016, next. there is iowa, the capital on the screen, and republican lawyer and strategists will join us next to talk about the primary calendar and how that impacts the gop nominating

contest. we will be right back. ♪ >> we had main engine starts, 4, 3, 2, 1, and lift off. spaceoff of the 25th shuttle mission. , wevery weekend on c-span3 feature programs that tell the american story. the highlights for this weekend include saturday morning at 11:15 eastern. diane qs of discusses the life

and accomplishments of civil right activists toward the therapy. at 10:00 p.m. eastern on "reel america," the spaceship -- the space shuttle challenger exploded. watch president reagan's address to the nation. detailingasa's report the causes of the crash. >> nancy and i are [indiscernible] the challenger. this is truly a national loss. >> sunday morning at 10:00 on "road to the white house rewind," the 2004 speech featuring howard dean. and the conference on the history of the iowa caucuses. the speakers include the i/o caucuses campaign manager for jimmy carter in 1976. also, panels of political

reporters and campaign managers. at 8:00, a journalist on his book about the white house and the presidency. 21 presidents, 21 rooms, 20 one inside stories. he explains how presidents have left their imprints on the executive mansion. >> what i find interesting about the theater, if you look at records of what presidents have watched over the years, the tastes are eclectic and her affect the taste of the presidents, the times in which they lived, but there is one really resonated with more presidents than any other. can you guess what that one movie might be? >> for the complete schedule, go to www.c-span.org. isc-span's campaign 2016

taking you on the road to the white house for the iowa caucuses. monday, february 1, live coverage begins at 7:00 p.m. on c-span and c-span2 with live pre-caucus coverage. at 8:00 p.m. houston, we take you to the republican caucus on c-span and the democratic caucus on c-span2. see the event live in the entire day. join in on the conversation on to spend radio and at -- on c-span radio and on www.c-span.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: at our table this morning, benjamin ginsberg. thank you for being here. guest: thank you. host: your peace and "politico magazine," that is where i went to start. let's begin with what the republican national committee did before the 2012 campaign to

change the primary calendar. 2000: they did it at the eight convention, not liking the quickness of john mccain spectre he and the prolonged attention that the obama-clinton primary got the democrats that year. they did a few things to elongate the process. number one, they decreed there d ofd be a perio proportional voting, which means by definition, you have to divide up the people who can win delegates in the state as opposed to allowing one candidate to win them all in the state. secondly, they asked the state to push back their primary. so some large states, california, new york, new jersey, in the beginning of march moves back in the calendar. host: what is the impact on this years race with all the dynamics we have? that it isimpact is likely to be a more prolonged

what mittcloser to it romney had to go through in 2012. host: everybody is focusing on iowa, new hampshire and south carolina, but it is really after that, correct? guest: what the first three states and four states will tell you is who qualifies for the demolition derby of march. usually, there are two candidates who survived an establishment candidate and an nonestablishment candidate. this time, we may have three lanes. we will determine that, see that out of the first four states in february. states,u know it's four 5.4% of the total of delegates chosen. guest: right, but the eyes of the media are firmly focused on at least i will, in new hampshire, so they will be

coming to the campaigns. host: why do you call it demolition derby day, march 1? tost: there are 12 states go, over 600 delegates, the most delegates awarded in a day. absolutelyiod were the candidates will all have to find a way to claim victory that day or they will be out of it. there will be lots of ways to claim victory because it is her portion of voting, but they will have to claim victory of some sort to be able to go on. host: a lot of people talk about the three lanes. see and to the lanes on march 1 become that much more apparent? see on marchk you 1, or the you have three different lanes or not, donald trump will do how well donald trump does, he is leading the

polls everywhere now. ted cruz appears to have a lock on the conservative lane. the establishment lane is the very fractured leg with probably for candidates vying for votes. interestingly, those for candidates, when you combine the numbers, seems have less than one third of the delegates, so there will be motivation for all of them to state in if they can claim some possible reason they won on march 1. 5st: let's go through march to the 12. everyone gets a trophy is how you described it. ,uest: more proportional voting michigan is the only state in that period and it awards more than 50 delegates, but it is likely to be divided amongst the remaining candidates. there are enough states with sough geographic regions that everyone competing for votes that they will get some sort of a prize or trophy. host: at this point, we do not

have a nominee, that is what you are thinking? candidatech 1, if one runs the table, that will produce a nominee. march 5 to march 12, i think it is unlikely and that we had to march 15. host: what happens been? guest: march 15 is the first day .hen they allow winner take all there are two big states, florida and ohio. jeb bush and john kasich made it so that they would be winner take all states. they were not winner take all states in previous elections. that had obvious clinical reasons for it, perhaps, reality has changed a little bit since they put that through the legislatures. states.er take all florida is a huge prize. jeb bush and marco rubio have to win their own state. it makes it an iron cage competition between them. if donald trump, ted cruz or

some other candidate is still strong, that candidate winning florida would be a devastating blow to either jeb bush or marco rubio. can basicallyohio be something he has. he sees the convention coming and he might want to just hang in there, when the state, the delegates in ohio and become a broker at the convention. host: does governor john kasich have access to the leverage in ohio? guest: he does. tight stateery party. his people run the state party. it is a good state organization, he won reelection in 2014 with more than 60% of the vote, so he controls ohio and the levers in ways that neither jeb bush nor marco rubio can control for the. -- can control florida. host: under this scenario, is

there a broker convention? guest: they will never be a broker convention because there are no brokers left in the republican party. truth is, the way structures have involved is that this will not be like the old days, when people could command numbers of delegates and the skies them in the backroom and cut a deal. that will not happen this time. there could be a contested convention where nobody goes into the convention with fisher majority of delegates. host: then what happens under the rules? guest: then things get interesting. he would go to the convention and on the first ballot, all the delegates are required by role to vote the way their primaries were, reflective of those results, so delegates are more or less found for the first, but if no one can manage to win a majority on that first dollar, then no one is down. very few delegates are bound after that, so they will be a massive amount of force creating

. there will be some really sophisticated delicate tracking operations to be sure they know who the delegates are and which way they are going. and there will be very arcane sort ofd credentials to set forth the ground rules for the way that would play out. this for have been in many years, and you have been the lawyer in many instances, so what are these arcane roles that you see people start fighting over? guest: the ones they will find over the most, i think, are the ways the candidate is nominated and names put in and how many states you have to have a majority of delegates to put a name or nomination in. they will be sites over device residential nomination. traditionally, the vice president actually gets chosen before the presidential nominee in terms of acceptance speeches,

so that throws the program off. they will be fights over the credentials of delegates, who gets tested as a delegate -- it gets to sit as a delegate in the hall. host: we are six days out from the iowa caucuses. benjamin ginsberg, a longtime lawyer who has represented many campaigns, and he is here to take your questions and comments. all about how this season could be at a lot crazier than you think. democrats, (202)-748-8000. republicans, (202)-748-8001. independents, (202)-748-8002. .epublicans, (202)-748-8001 before we get to calls, let me downs this front page story in the new york times off of you. it is by jonathan martin and alexander burns. this is alarming the gop leader.

lobbyists andof donors and they are sending messages to the mainstream candidates, such as former governor jeb bush of florida, and they should withdraw from the race if they do not show strength soon. what do you think given what you just said? guest: i think if you are a candidate, you are not paying a lot of attention to that and you're running your campaign. the mindset of the campaigns that i have been in, and i believe the ones that are dean referred to in the article, are -- i am still going to win. suspectall based on national polls. when the voters start speaking, i am going to do well. that is the belief that everyone in these campaigns. they have been working hard for a long time, they have a lot of dedicated supporters. it may be that the folks in our native village in washington are agitating these things, but i

think it will not have an impact , certainly in february amongst the candidates who they are talking about. not get out do before the iowa caucuses, but scott walker did. you are part of his campaign, and he said the field of establishment candidates needs to narrow. guest: he did. that was back in september. he believed that he did not, i think at that point, see a direct path for himself. he believed that was the right thing to do, that he would not be successful this time. he pulled back. of seeing theedit reality that has unfolded, but that is very different from being in january, six days before iowa, and the candidates who are still there, they have made the commitment and their mindset is that they are going to hear what the voters have to say. host: we will get calls. allen is in brooklyn, democrat. good morning. good morning, you there?

caller: yes, good morning. host: go ahead. after: i recalled that the terrorist events in paris and san bernardino, they were a number of comments by various candidates and even some of the more moderate candidates on the gop side responded not only by decrying the state of muslim terror, but also by making blanket statements that among the syrians trying to escape from the region of strife, the only christians should be allowed through. also, ted cruz and his recent remarks about new york values focused on media and money as if he used codewords that directly invited people to an interpretation that he was against jews. as a jewish republican, how do or feel about the openly more covert comments about your members, including those who openly appealed to evangelical christians as if that is a

political identification? --ginsburg?esburg guest: i appreciate the question. i think the policy prescriptions they put that will be judged by the people and they understand that sometimes people of the opposite party have unusually negative and harsh views of their opponents. it is what makes it a democracy. next,kerry next -- terry ohio. independent. caller: thank you for c-span. i would like to know his opinion on what trump or cruz, and it looks like they will be the guys election, given that they do not have a really good strategy with minorities and they do need good public general. guest: i am not sure they conceived your basic premise

that they do not have a strategy for minorities. you certainly her donald trump talk a great deal about his outreach into the minority community and his friends in the minority community. ted cruz has taken the position that the way you build up republican support in the minority community is to stick republican,s that a conservative, and that those will help lift those who need help up by sticking to those core conservative principles. when it comes time to the election, it will be a fight country,isions of the conservative visions, small government, and a large government vision from the democrats. again, the glory of being in a democracy, the voters will decide. -- jeanmes next in next. question or comment?

go ahead. caller: i am a republican and i want donald trump to win and change the government from the constitution down. they kept the minorities, 3/5 persons. let the people be the judge of what we do. ,ost: ok, benjamin ginsberg can i call you part of the establishment? [laughter] guest: sure. i think i represent the republican sector. host: what do you make of this donald trump, ted cruz -- they are running on this antiestablishment campaign. guest: they have tapped into something that is obviously out there in the country, disaffection with washington, if it exists, and bernie sanders is doing the same against hillary clinton. something out in the land that probably has any

number of reasons, but there is an angry electorate. host: what do you think happens, first, if donald trump or not to run as republican? let's say he gets upset with what is happening with the way the party treats him and he decides to run as an independent, what do you think happens then? is an i think that unlikely scenario. he has said he will not do that kind of pledge, so i do not believe that i take -- and i take donald trump at his word. host: what about this idea of michael bloomberg jumping in? [laughter] guest: from what i have read, i believe he would consider that if you have donald trump and bernie sanders as the nominee or maybe ted cruz and bernie sanders as the nominee. that is the triple host: bank shot before it gets there. host:can you do that? is anything that prohibits michael bloomberg from jumping in once the nominees are made? guest: there are no legal

barriers, but there are practical barriers. it is hard to get on the ballot in all 50 states, but resources to what you have to throw qualify for the ballot and he has ample resources so it is not impossible. host: donald trump says he will not be showing up at thursday's debate in des moines, iowa, sticking byox news megyn kelly as moderator. what does that do to his presidential bid? is it important? guest: we will see interesting play out in the next few days. on one hand, it is a moment of strength for him. i think even more than megyn , the pressderator releases that box but that, they showed that there is a certain degree of getting involved in the contest and personalities. the rnc stop the national rebuke

from being in a debate, they kicked up nbc after a cnbc debate, not the same as nbc, so this political correctness within the republican party or debates has gotten a little muddled in the cycle. with donald trump taking something, he is trying to show a moment of strength. his opponents will insist that he is afraid to debate and he does not want to debate. what he has succeeded in doing is commending the news cycle again, much to the detriment of his opponents who are trying to break through. so thursday night, will people watch with donald trump? will there be an odd dance? will the cash will there be an audience -- will there be an audience? or will that furnishes outside the credentials? it is an outside to not agree have not seen before. the cnbc mentioned

debate. the candidates were quite upset. they had a meeting here in gettingon to talk about back to leverage. what role did you play in that this -- coulds they have predicted with donald trump was doing based on that meeting? anst: the meeting itself was expression of the frustration of the campaigns. becauseked to be there i had sent a lot of debates and i have done a lot of campaigns, and i am neutral in the contents. the purpose of the meeting was to be sure that the campaigns were talking directly to the sponsors of the debate. that in fact, having the rnc is a third-party, was not helpful development for that. there is a lot of contact between the campaigns in the debate sponsors and the cnbc

debate has been of a much higher quality. it has given the candidates a chance to talk about their vision for the future as opposed ha"the sort of "gotc questions that occurred before. host: was there and request for conversation from the donald trump campaign in that meeting that they could choose who could moderate a debate? guest: no. campaigns will always have the least -- release about to our fair moderators and you are not. think all the i campaigns agreed on, and i agree on, is that they date after a debate, the story should not be about the moderator. are not about credentialing moderators. there are about giving the candidates a chance to talk about their vision. can credential themselves on tv shows and interview shows. no, there was no specific

conversation about choosing moderators other than the general notion that the debate should be about the candidates and not moderators. host: in huntington, west virginia, democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. [indiscernible] gerrymandering. i will give you an example in west virginia. we have 55 counties and we only have 34 state senators. that constitutes the majority of 18 senators to our 65 -- to our 55 counties. a democrat who was elected on the democratic ticket to our state senator, then he changed parties and served as a republican state senator. he passed away and the courts

was publicly elected a and they elected a republican state senator to the position that was collected by the public to be a democrat. that is the majority of the 18 anybody can see west virginia is primarily democrat. host: mr. ginsberg, any thoughts on this? gerrymandering? host: i named my family dog gerrymander, i am familiar with the process. look, gerrymandering is sort of beauty in the eye of the beholder. majority party gets to draw districts. that's the way it works. the situation, the caller described, is one in which there was a death. the laws of the state put in place before this individual

incident occurred said that the governor gets to appoint the new senator. which you want to be careful about is that the laws are established in advance and not done particularly for a situation. gerrymandering is a process that everyone's been talking about for a long, long time. the reality of the situation is majority parties do generally get to rule. the common theme now is that gerrymandering contributes to polarization. i think that's a little bit of a difficult argument to sustain simply because the united states senate, which has no gerrymandering, seems to be every bit as polarized as the united states house of representatives that does. any number of state legislatures, which also are the product of what i think the caller would describe as gerrymandering, seem to function quite a bit better than the u.s. congress. host: linda in new york, an

independent. hi, linda. caller: hi. there is no doubt that the donald is a big attention getter, and he did very well with his reality show. the polls for the g.o.p. debates wouldn't be half as high without him. but you know, i have a feeling, i watch politics very carefully, that this is playing out, this g.o.p. primary, is playing out almost like "dancing with the stars" or that challenge show where people would call in and pick. now you have fox fighting among each other. i think this is a very clever car rove brainchild to get people tuned in to the republican debate and -- karl rove brainchild to get people tuned in to the republican debate. it makes the american people look very stupid to fall for this. host: ok. mr. ginsberg. host: i wish we were that smart.

host: when you say we, what do you mean? guest: i wish the republican party was so smart to create a show biz type creation to bring in lots of viewers and get our view across. host: do you think donald trump is that smart? do you think that's his strategy that he's employed is intentional and smart? guest: the voters, again, will decide that. so he -- with this debate and the whole process he's going through now, again, either this is somebody who is not going to get bullied around and it is a moment of strength, or on the other hand he will be portrayed as too fearful to take on his opponent. host: this is a sanctioned debate by the r.n.c. if he doesn't show up, are there any legal or -- is he breaking any rules? guest: i don't think he's breaking any rules. the sanctions, there's a whole discussion to be had about sanctions, but the sanctions apply to people who appear in debates that have not been

approved. there is no way to enforce the sanctions, though. host: ok. why do the parties have sanctions? guest: the parties -- the candidates traditionally negotiated directly with the networks. the parties decided to step in this year on the republican side to try and reduce the massive number of debates. the method they decide to do use was sanctions. the networks went along with it because each network got a debate. but in point of fact, the news networks are very careful to say that they make all the editorial decisions about their debate. they choose the moderators. we are seeing that with trump. they choose the participants. they have been employing the polls to do that. it isn't clear how someone who is holding a debate wouldn't have the right as a news organization to include whatever candidate they wanted to. host: what are the sanctions? what sort of punishment do you get if you don't go along with

the party? guest: the r.n.c. says if you appear -- and the d.n.c. as well -- if you appear in an unsanctioned debate, you will not be invited to any future sanctioned debates. if donald trump wanted to game the system he could have gone and participated in a nonsanctioned debate and not be allowed to participate in any more of the r.n.c. debates. host: providence, rhode island, jack. a republican. caller: hi. good morning. mr. ginsberg, you're brilliant guy. and so is ted cruz. he's a brilliant guy, too. what impressed me about ted cruz when he announced for president at liberty university, there was nothing in front of him. notes, nothing. and his intelligence is very, very fierce. now, my heart is with him, ok. but my head is trump because

trump can bring in like reagan democrats, like my passed away father. my passed away father was a master plumber. i was in the investment banking business for over 30 years. i'm 64 years old. done ok. so i really believe trump can bring into play like pennsylvania, even possibly new york state, or nevada, or places like that where i really feel he can carry the day. what's interesting, though, too, cruz said he's ahead in the polling. he's a smart guy. he wouldn't say that if it wasn't the case. host: two different things there, jack. let's begin with what he had to say. his head is with donald trump. guest: ted cruz is brilliant. i completely agree with that. i have seen him give many long speeches and arguments without notes. donald trump is brilliant, too. if you want to look at it just

in terms of the success that both trump and cruz have had in the private sector, they are both tremendous. or huge. in terms of -- they are running different campaigns from the perspective of your passed away father. ted cruz's race is to take the very conservative views of the republican party and to try and expand the number of people who hold those views who go to the polls. but it is a base election in terms of increasing the number of republican base voters who come. donald trum's -- trump's approach is very different, it is bringing in reagan democrats. people who are just fed up with everything that's going on now. and his apparent, what he seems to be shooting for in terms of voters, are really people who have not voted, who are not terribly ideological, but are we need up and think

somebody to fix it and he's the person. you should decide whether you're narrow casting or going for the broader electorate. host: second issue is polls. you alluded to this earlier. do you trust the polls right now? guest: no. the national polls, which is what we have been talking about in really setting the framework for this debate, if you read the fine print, they are 400 person republican or democratic samples. weighted for geography. which means that you don't really know what states those people are in. in fact, if they are weighted for geography, amongst the first 16 states to vote really only texas is a big state. so it is likely that in these national polls which we are living and breathing on, nobody from the states that are actually voting, or maybe two or three people from the states who are actually voting, are included in that universe. that's putting a lot of faith in something that's not meant to be that precise. host: there are six days to go

before the iowa caucuses. many people focusing on that contest, as well as new hampshire and south carolina. but benning begin ginsberg our guest here writing in politico magazine why the g.o.p. primary could be even crazier than you think. providing an insider's guide to 19 long weeks of chaos. mr. ginsberg, national counsel r the mitt romney 2008 and 2012 campaign, as well as the bush-cheney campaigns. battle creek, michigan, democrat. caller: hello. i was just wondering is it possible that donald trump could actually have any remote possibility of winning the general election considering that he's offended or insulted ke large groups, demographic groups? i have written down here mexicans, hispanics, he's insulted them. african-americans. he had that twitter thing about

crime statistics which was totally bogus. african-americans aren't going -- are going to vote against him in large numbers. mexican americans are going to vote against him in large numbers. muslim americans and arab americans are going to vote against him in large numbers. he's insulted women. young people don't like him. so you've got the swing states, i wrote down north carolina, nevada, colorado, virginia, florida. can donald trump possibly after offending like large groups, huge groups, voting groups, does he have any remote possibility of winning any swing states? guest: i suspect you're not calling on the republican line. host: he was a democrat, you're right. guest: the answer is, sure. that's why they run elections. donald trump is obviously appealing to people who have not come out to vote before. i think you never quite know the dynamics of a national race.

whether trump, cruz, or four establishment candidates is the republican nominee. you don't know what the race in the fall is going to be like until you know if it's hillary clinton or bernie sanders. host: patricia, florida, independent. you're next, patricia. caller: yes. good morning. i wanted to just say megan kelly , she does a lot of gotcha questions. and specifically for donald trump. i think that she could apologize to him and get this straightened out before the debate tonight on thursday. guest: mr. -- host: mr. ginsberg? guest: i think all things are possible. host: republican from maryland. caller: good morning. i think trump, he's infad waited with his success. i am a trump and also a ted cruz supporter. i haven't made up my mind which guy i'm going with.

we have a long time between now and november. this is just, to me, just kind of a minor point in the road. especially since mike huckabee sorry, 2008.9 -- understand santorum won iowa in 2012. host: john, your point. that this is just the beginning. as you say, we are looking at 19 weeks here. guest: yes, we are. it's going to start fast. there will be a huge amount of attention paid to iowa. there will be a huge amount attention paid to new hampshire. south carolina will either be -- will be a rubber match in effect. between the candidates. again, we'll know whether there are two lanes or three after march 1. and then the calendar moves in

rapid succession through march. april has some big contests in the mid-atlantic and northeast states. that could affect the outcome. if there's not a winner by that point, which is when mitt romney won on april 26, then i think the convention scenarios come into place. host: mitt rom knee and iowa, they -- mitt romney and iowa, they declared him the winner and take it book. guest: it was an important one. host: ok. what's the role of national council on a campaign? guest: a wonderful role. it is the most varied job that any lawyer could ask for. there is the fun of politics, learning delegate rules. there's compliance with federal election laws. but it's also really being a counsel to a start up company. these campaigns go start and end

in 18 months. they get incredible capitalization early in terms of fundraising. they have to have operations in virtually all the states. there are many, many people involved. and the spirit of the people who you work with on campaigns is perhaps the most rewarding part. host: when are you called in as national counsel and for what reason? guest: we try to be a presence in the campaign, actually. so it's both dealing with the problems of the day, the crises of the day. but also with long-term planning to be as efficient as possible under the legal restraints. host: what do you mean by that? guest: for example, there are different methods to raise and spend money. thrst the interaction with super pax or the -- p.a.c.s or the enforced not interaction.

there are always broadcast laws to deal with. the could be tent of your ads is something -- content of your ads is something that the lawyers will be brought in to review to be sure there arpt libel problems or content problems. the research backs it up. a variety of things on intellectual property will always arise because somebody will shoot a piece of campaign film with a corporate logo in the background. then you have to figure out whether you can use the corporate logo or not. just a whole variety. real estate leases. got a lot of headquarters out there. host: all right. we'll go -- continue with questions. beth, in maryland, independent. hi. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my call. two things. what happened to ben carson, looks like he fell off the map? and my other question is about religion. eligious values, moral values. are they pro-life? pro-choice? where does that come into play.

thank you. guest: in terms of the latter, the best way to learn that is to go to their websites and look up their speeches and statements rather than me trying to characterize what that is. the campaigns do put out an awful lot of information about their candidate's position. i think for all voters it's incumbent if you have questions about that, to actually go to the primary source material. move right past the babbling heads and see and hear what the candidates themselves are saying. host: port richie, florida, carol is a democrat there. good morning. caller: good morning. two comments. trump will run the country all by himself. he'll be out there with his nail apron putting that fence up. and bernie is getting the people involved in their government. not just young people. i'm 83 years old and i've never been so involved. i remember f.d.r. and i never had a candidate that i believe

in like bernie sanders. plus, the republican candidates have all the money to continue running from super p.a.c.s. and they may believe in their hearts that the trump road show will collapse and they'll be able to get in there. and i am so sick of trump. i really am. host: a lot there from carol. i want to talk about democrats. your piece, this primary could be even crazier than people think. what does that mean for the general election? if the republicans have this long contested battle, do you see that happening on the democrat side? if not, what does that mean then? guest: the democrats seem to have two candidates running. while that can extend out as obama and clinton did in 2008, just as a matter of mathematics, two candidates splitting dell case gets resolved quicker than three candidates. democrats also have a lot of

super delegates. about a sixth of their delegates to the convention are people not downed bound by state rules. they are leekted officials and the party hierarchy. they get automatic spots. they can be talked to by the candidates independent from the voters. republicans only have 16 out of 2477 as -- 168 out of 2477 of un-elected delegates. they are members of the national committee. that puts a lot more premium on going after the actual delegates in a campaign. i think as a -- all political operatives to prefer to know you are the winner quickly so you can start building your organizations for the fall. there is an argument to be made that you get more notice if it's a contested race. i think most people in campaigns would rather have the certainty of knowing they are the winner. being able to raise money for the fall.

there are dynamics in the way fundraising takes place. makes an important -- it important to have enough time in the primary season to go to the people you have beaten and talk to their supporters and unify the party and raise money from them before the general election. then there's the planning for the convention which takes a great deal of time. if the contest is not resolved until april, that's less time than normal. host: both party conventions taking place earlier this year tend of july back-to-back. a couple more phone calls here for you, mr. ginsberg. frank in clifton, kansas. independent. hi. caller: good morning. thanks for the call. hi a question here regarding past presidents being eligible to be nominated for vice president. in particular i'm concerned about if heaven forbid hillary

would get the nod that she could appoint or elect her husband to be the vice president. can you comment on that? guest: well, that would be delightful. i think that would be a huge plus for the republicans if that were actually to happen. but i think it's unlikely because i think any president wants to put, in this case, her own stamp on the presidency. and reverting back to a past president i think would take away from that. host: robert in portland, oregon, a republican. our last year. hi, robert. caller: hi there. when i was young i campaigned in daho for george hanson against --dy it twice. i was a kid sending out flyers and so forth. ultimately it was hin church in the republican state that won because of his personality. and i think it always seems to end up that the personality factor wins.

if i look at the candidates with the most personality today, you got sanders and trump. in my view, that's who will be the ultimate final play. i'll take your comment off the air. thank you. host: all right, robert. guest: that would be a great spectator sport. and that's the scenario where michael bloomberg, i think, would most consider jumping in. host: mr. ginsberg, what are you watching as former national counsel, what are you watching for in iowa and new hampshire and south carolina? where do you dig into the numbers? where should our viewers look? look on their own and not necessarily listen to what the media is talking about. guest: turnout will be the first thing to look at to check whether -- which way the election returns are going to go. in iowa, you'll know pretty early. i think from exit polls before the results come in whether turnout is heavy or light.

heavy or light turnout will help some candidates more than others. it's a little harder in iowa because the caucuses start at 7:00 central time and the results come in an hour or two later. in new hampshire you'll be able to tell over the course of the day what turnout is. if you want, it's always interesting to pick sample pre60's. the belle weather -- bell weather precincts or bellly counties in states and see how they are going. in south carolina you'll get a feel for it in the 10 days between new hampshire and south carolina for what the lines of argument are, how much establishment candidates there are, and the republican lane. how bernie sanders is doing reaching out to the african-american community there. those are the things i would be looking at. host: any legal challenges that you see that could occur as we go through this primary process? guest: legal challenges are

always possible. i think in primaries the battles that take place in the general election are largely absent. there can be problems with the tabulation of the vote. there are times when either votes are close or things just on't add up right and that's a primary legal challenge for this. host: the florida recount, do you see anything like that on the horizon in a general election matchup this year? guest: i never saw that on the horizon. i'm sure i would see it coming. i was fairly confident in saying before 2000 there will never be a general election recount in our lifetimes. i was proven wrong pretty quick there. these things are just -- just come up from nowhere. they are forces of nature. host: benning begin ginsberg, appreciate you talking to our viewers. we'll take a short break. when we come back we'll return to our question that we asked all of you earlier. what do you think about donald

trump saying he will not be part of the fox news debate that takes place this week on thursday a few days before the iowa caucus. it's going to be broadcasted from des moines. it's an iowa debate. of course we have a fourth line this morning for those iowa residents. ted cruz, saying he's not showing up for a job interview. we'll get your thoughts on that coming up. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> we have main engine start. four, three, two, one. and lift off. lift off of the 25th space shuttle mission. it has cleared the tower. >> every weekend on american history tv on c-span three we feature programs that at the time american story. some of the highlights for this weekend include saturday morning at 11:15 eastern. author and new york state supreme court judge dianne

keisel discusses the life and accomplishments of civil rights activist dorothy faraby. at 10:00 p.m. eastern on real america, 30 years ago this week, the space shuttle challenger exploded shortly after liftoff killing all seven crew members. watch president reagan's address to the nation about the explosion. and in 1986, nasa video report detailing the accident's causes. >> today is a day for mourning and remembering. nancy and i are pained to the core of the tragedy of the shuttle challenger. we know we share this pain with all the people of our country. this is truly a national loss. >> sunday morning at 10:00 on road to the white house rewind, a look at the iowa caucuses, including howard dean's 2004 speech featuring the dean scream. and the conference on the history of the iowa caucuses whose speakers include retired democratic political advisor tim kraft. who is the iowa caucus' campaign manager for jimmy carter in 1976. also two panels with former

campaign managers and political reporters. and at 8:00, journalist paul brandeis, on his book under this roof, the white house and presidency, 21 presidents, 21 rooms, 21 inside stories. he explains how presidents from george washington to barack obama have left their imprint on the executive mansion. >> here's what i find interesting about the theater. if you look at records of what the presidents have watched over the years, tastes are eclectic and everything, and they reflect the tastes of the presidents. they reflect the times in which they lived and everything. but there is one movie, this is a quiz section of our evening here, there is one movie that really resonated with more presses than any other one -- presidents than any other one. can you guess what that movie might be? >> for the complete american history tv weekend schedule, go to c-span.org.

"washington journal" continues. host: we are back. we are going to wrap up today's "washington journal" with getting your take on donald trump saying he's not going to attend to participate in the fox news debate this thursday in des moines, iowa. what do you make of this this morning? we'll go to steven in florida, a republican. go ahead with your take on donald trupp not going to the fox debate. caller: i think it's wrong. i'm a conservative. i'm very conservative, in fact. i do like what trump says. i do agree with a lot of his opinions. maybe seven out of 10. am i going to vote for him? personally i will be up front. no. i believe in ted cruz more what he says. this is ridiculous. if he can't stand up to megan kelly, how is he going to stand up to anybody? he runs around and tells everybody what to do and tells everybody what to say. but i don't see him doing that on his part. host: ok. let's listen to what donald

trump had to say. he had a news conference yesterday in iowa. and this is what he had to say about his decision. mr. trump: fox is playing games. fox is going to make a fortune. i told fox you should give money to the wounded warriors. i'm not a fan of megan kelly. i think she's a third rate reporter. she's not good at what she does. i think they could do a lot better than megan kelly. i'll be making a decision with fox. i probably won't bother doing the debate. i see they picked me as number one. not only number one. number one by far. but probably i won't be doing the debate. i'm going to have something else in iowa. we'll do something where we raise money for the veterans and wounded warriors. we'll do something simultaneously with the debate. but most likely i'm not going to do the debate. i didn't like the fact that they sent out press releases toying, talking about putin and playing games. i don't know what games roger is playing. what's wrong over there. something's wrong. but when they sent out that press release talking about -- i said, what are these people playing games? most likely i won't be doing the

debate. host: donald trump's news conference yesterday in iowa. later his campaign said it is -- they confirmed he would not be doing the debate. he said he didn't like the statements that fox news put out. here's the "washington times." fox news with the statement saying, the ayatollah and putin both intend to treat donald trump unfairly when they meet with him if he becomes president. and a source tells us trump has his own secret plan to replace the cabinet with his twitter followers to see if he should go to those meetings. it goes on to say, mr. trump posted a poll on his twitter page on tuesday, asking should i do the g.o.p. debate? with over 38,000 votes tallied, 52% said yes. and 48% had answered no. let's hear from steven in florida, a republican. hi. caller: hi. i still don't agree with what he has to say. i have listened to megan kelly over the years. i listened to everybody on democrat and republican stations. i listened to morning joe.

i transfer back and forth on tv sets. i cannot agree with the man what he has to safmente this is a show off move by trump to get more votes and more hype. i believe now the candidates have a chance now, the people who need to say something, say something. this is the real problem with trump. he's not conservative. he's all over the map. host: steven a ted cruz supporter. donald trump tweeting this this 340r7k. the statement put out yesterday by fox news. who would ever say something so nasty and dumb? kevin in dubuque, iowa. a democrat. what do you think about this? what do you think -- i know you are a democrat. what do you think iowans think about this? just a few days before the iowa caucuses and he's not going to be at a debate that's taking place in iowa. caller: i do think it is a disgrace. he showed up for all the rest of the debates. and he came to our state a lot. then he won't show up for a

debate that is going to be in our state. yeah, i do think it is a disgrace. host: do you think he should take ted cruz's challenge to a one-on-one debate? caller: i think he is should -- he should show up for the fox debate and buck up and basically be a man and show up for it. he's done it for the cnn and every other debate, too. he's not going to show up. and this and that and finally does show up. i think he should show up for it and basically kind of be a man and say. hey, i showed up. kind of bite his tongue and, you know, and things like that. host: this is ted cruz's latest tweet saying i challenged donald trump to a one-on-one debate. tell him to accept. with the image there, the hash tag ducking donald.

the start from texas was on mark levin's show yesterday. here's what he had to say. >> donald is now afraid to appear on the debate stage. doesn't want his record questioned. that reflects a lack of respect for the men and women of iowa. he's unwilling to go to des moines and be questioned. listen, where is iowa right now? it is a dead heat between donald and me. we are effectively tied. and monday, six days from now, will decide, iowa will decide. so if donald is afraid of megan kelly, i would like to invite him on your show to participate in a one-on-one debate between me and donald, mano a mano. we can do it a number of ways. we could have you moderate t we could have rush limbaugh moderate it. if he's afraid of megan kelly and you and hanity and rush. we could do without moderators.

i'm happy to go an hour and a half, mano a mano with no moderators any time before the iowa caucuses. that's what a candidate who actually wants to work for the people, wants to earn the support of the people will do is stand up and defend your record. so i would invite donald. let's do the event -- he's been saying this past week that he thinks i'm stupid. that he should do very, very well in a debate with someone who is so stupid away from moderators that he is so afraid of. host: senator ted cruz withal chaleng to donald trump to debate him one-on-one before the iowa caucuses this monday. william in culpepper, virginia, what do you think? caller: i believe that fox news is trying to up their ratings. they just had a debate a couple weeks ago. host: fox business did. caller: yes. but that's still their affiliates. i believe that donald trump is right in doing this.

host: why is that? caller: because like i said fox news is trying to up their ratings. and use him to do that with. donald trump has proven he's a brilliant guy. he's very successful. he's more successful than the rest of them. host: do you think that candidates should be able to pick the moderators? caller: well, i'm not saying that. but i'm just saying that fox news -- why should they be having another debate this soon after the previous one? host: ok. douglas in texas. republican. hi there, douglas. caller: good morning, thanks for taking my call. host: you bet. caller: a couple points i would like to make. i think all this challenging of donald trump to be afraid of megan kelly, i think good point to make is the way he dressed down that reporter just a while ago. donald trump stood his ground.

not scared. i think he's dedicating his time better place. i also would make the compliment you and your show, i think you're much prettier than megan kelly, why don't you do the moderation? host: i'm not sure that's the qualifications that they are looking for, but here is "the washington post" this morning as we told you earlier. senator bernie sanders is meeting one-on-one with president obama. it's only his second private meeting with the president. that's happening at the white house this morning. and the white house said -- excuse me, the piece in the "washington post" says now the white house has confirmed the two will meet wednesday. a tacit acknowledgement that the senator's popularity among democratic primary voters has unpleeshed a potent political movement that could influence not only the race to succeed obama, but also the president's legacy. they note by contrast that in the three years since leaving the state department, hillary clinton has had two small

meetings with the president and a breakfast with the vice president. as well as an exclusive invite to the white house after party following the inaugural ceremonies in january of 2013. mr. biden has held private meetings with hillary clinton, bernie sanders,' former maryland governor martin owe mallly. let me hear from frederick in account k a democrat. you are up, good morning. caller: yes. good morning. thank you for taking the call. number one, i just want to say that donald trump is a bully and it has proven he can dish it out but can't take it. thin skinned person like that should not be president. the other thing is donald trump is called a match against bernie sanders a dream come true. to which i can say, be very careful of what you wish for. thank you for taking my call. host: i assume you are a bernie sanders supporter? caller: yes, i am. host: what do you think about the democrats? they limited their amount of debates to six.

and many democrats critical of the democratic national committee for doing that. and also when they held these debates, having them on weekend nights and that this was done to smooth the way for hillary clinton. do you think that? caller: i do think that. i think debbie wasserman schultz should resign and get somebody who is nonpartial as to which candidate gets the nomination. should run the democratic national committee rather than putting a wax on the slide for hillary. host: "wall street journal" noting that ms. wasserman schultz supported hillary clinton in debate. there is newspaper article this morning saying that criticism of her is building. some people are, some liberal groups are calling on her to step down. by the way, there is going to be another democratic debate. that announced today. the union leader in new hampshire will be partnering

with msnbc to have another debate on february 4 ahead of the new hampshire primary. that will be moderated by msnbc's rachel meadow and nbc's meet the press moderator, chuck todd, will be holding that debate. in conjunction with the new hampshire union leader. february 4. this is not a sanctioned debate. so how the d.n.c. responds to that, hillary clinton and martin o'malley saying yes. and bernie sanders wondering if they participate in unsanctioned debate what does that mean? however the d.n.c. saying there will not be any sort of amifications for them. esther in memphis, tennessee, independent, good morning. caller: good morning. host: what do you think about donald trump saying he won't go to this debate? caller: i say -- i agree with the guy that just -- you just talked to. he's a coward because -- he's

supposed to be big a bad donald that he he's saying won't show up. you afraid of this lady. you tuck in your tail like a dog and running. i don't feel like that he should be president anyway because -- if you take the racism out of congress and put the god back in t. don't care who the president going to be, it's not going to work. you got to take racism out of it. and then -- who does all this big bad talking, but when it's time to do your job, you run. how am i going to trust him to lead me as president. host: ok. all right. memphis, tennessee. bill, in missouri. a republican. hi, bill. caller: good morning. good morning. i think that donald trump's

choice of not going to the debate is a slap in the face to the iowa voters. i think this is becoming a case of tail wagging the dog and trump is trying to use the press and press is trying to use trum top raise the ratings. my one concern is that the podium set up on the debate, i don't believe that there should be a blank podium in the center showing that trump's not there. they should just move the candidates in. perhaps add another candidate to it. i believe we can come up with a nickname for donald duck trump. he's ducked the debate. host: that's bill. mike huckabee, who is not polling high enough to make the prime time debate, said he'll fill n he'll take that slot graciously. we'll go to iowa. linda is there.

independent. caller: good morning. trump will do whatever he wants and the media will follow him no matter where he goes as they do now. just as watching the programs and listening to the radio, media hasn't been fair to the other republican candidates in allowing them to express their positions because trump is always their main focus. thank you. host: linda, who are you supporting? you're an independent. caller: sanders. host: ok. bernie sanders. are you going to go caucus? caller: definitely. host: ok. that's linda in iowa there. independent. we have six days to go before the iowa caucuses. tune in to c-span and our coverage on c-span and c-span2 of two caucuses, democrat and republican. our coverage getting under way at 7:00 p.m. eastern time. c-span.org as well. you can watch it all here unfold as we have done in many election cycles previously.

the caucusing takes place in iowa. then new hampshire follows on february 9. speaking of iowa, this is "washington times." a pro-ethanol winnebago stalking ted cruz wherever he goes in iowa. he's trying to make it across all 99 counties. ahead of the february 1 caucus. says that this winnebago is what follows him where he goes. the federal ethanol mandate which requires blending eth not increasing gas supplies, little interest to most voters outside the hawkeye state. it looms as a difference maker in the pivotal first in the nation caucuses. the question of whether the $5 billion issue resonates with iowans the way it once did comes with mr. cruz and billionaire businessman donald trump coming in with a tie. a poll released tuesday found mr. trump leading mr. cruz by 31 to 29 percentage points among likely republican caucus goers. senator ted cruz against ethanol

subsidies. the iowa governor came out and said the iowans should vote for anybody butt ted cruz because of his stance. the "washington times" says the popular governor made headlines last week when he said it would be a big mistake for iowans to support mr. cruz. an unusual repudiation for a signature governor about a candidate of his own party. supporters of mr. cruz including iowa republican representative steve king have since noted that mr. branstad's son works for the pro-ethanol america's re knuble future. did he shall -- renewable future. he said he is proud of his son. done, good morning. caller: i'm a social conservative democrat. the democrats don't want anybody who is a social conservative. mr. trump is the closest what i believe in. host: ok. caller: he's in the middle ground. that's why he's attracting all the attention. he's standing out there for most

of the american people. he's right. megan kelly is mean-spirited. a lot of americans are fed up with the liberal agenda that the media has imposed on us. and all these journalists coming up from the universities are of this far left agenda. they come out of school. i think that fox will change its mind. trump is right. they don't want to lose the money because people are going to tune in to his veterans rally. host: can i ask you this, the "wall street journal" front page this morning, anxiety fuels trump fans. does this cribe you? the crowds that swarm to mr. trump are worried about losing economic ground, angry at politicians who they believe put

personal above national interests, convinced the obama administration wants to take their guns, and leave them defenseless in an unsafe world. an uneasy in an america they see as slippingway from its roots. does that describe you? caller: well, mr. obama, he told us he was a christian. think he's a closet muslim. eah, america is a basic -- let's go back to our roots. independent people. the reason we have our guns is because we don't want somebody olling in here, another nation it -- that's why we have guns. host: all right. leave it there. get in more voices here. douglas, oregon, republican. good morning. caller: good morning, greta.

lovely idea of you replacing megan kelly on that debate. i think that would be a much more fair situation. i just don't see her as being fair anymore. host: why not? is it the questions she's asks? caller: it wasn't the first debate. it's everything in between. she's always got some dig. having michael moore on last night i thought was over the top. she's getting every little dig in she can. she's not objective. she became the story instead of being the moderator. i just like that. i like you and i think you would be very fair. what i want to say if it's not too late, i know we are a few hours before that debate tomorrow, the competing rally that donald trump's going to hold to invite any of the other candidates off the fox debate have a national call in telethon to support the wounded warriors and our veterans and i bet you

those people who will send in their paychecks. host: well, the real winner in all this could be the wounded warriors group, douglas. caller: i tell you what, i'm a veteran. as donald trump said it's a disgrace how we have treated our veterans. for that reason alone, if i had two broken legs and lived in iowa, i would get to that caucus to support donald trump. host: douglas, oregon, a republican. new york magazine noting what douglas just had to say. they say that one clear sign of graphity of tonight's development is the -- gravity of tonight's development is the fox. the network is split between brit hume and the conservative anchors that are furious that kelly, who graces the cover of vanity fair this month, has become the face of the network. an anchored fumed that kelly hosted michael moore on her program and the lefty filmmaker defended her against trump. that would be like rachel meadow

laughing along with charles koch. one producer speculated fox could go national review on trump and start attacking him. clark, bloomfield, new jersey. independent. hi. sorry, i have to push the button. there you go. caller: ok. got you. megan kelly -- donald trump everybody says he's afraid of her. he's not afraid of her. he's the only one that's protesting this. the report is how viciously they slander republicans. megan kelly slandered him. he said that, yeah -- host: how so? caller: he did say things go rosy owe donald -- host: how did she slander him? caller: what she said -- what she said about how he spoke about women. now, i didn't see any time that he ever said that about women except for what he said, rosie

o'donnell. and the woman who was on her knees supposedly, they interviewed her. she said, no. that was taken completely out of context. donald trupp is 100% right like -- trump is 100% right like he always is. he's right about ethanol. ethanol is the only fuel that will take us away from the middle east cartels. he's right about that. they are all wrong -- donald trump is a very smart man. he's a leader. host: who is your second choice? caller: there is no second choice. donald trump is my first choice. i haven't even thought about a second choice. host: if he's not in a general election matchup, if he's not the nominee, do you stay home? caller: no. but i would have to exam -- i don't vote frivolously. i would have to exam every candidate before i would vote. i don't take my vote lightly. host: could you vote for bernie sanders? caller: i don't know. i couldn't know. i would have to see his record. host: ok. caller: i can't say right now.

i couldn't tell you right now. it would be -- it wouldn't be right. i have to know exactly what each candidate stands for, their past, what their views are, and i have to know a lot about him. host: could you vote for hillary clinton? caller: i don't think so, no. not at all. she's a disaster. she's a complete liar. everything out of her mouth is a lie. she just -- it's terrible. benghazi, just benghazi alone. host: headline in the "washington post" this morning, email controversy continues to shadow clinton. let me read a little bit below the fold here from this "washington post." rosalyn is the reporter there. they write this, that the f.b.i. continues to investigate the security of clinton's email arrangement, particularly whether it could have led to the inappropriate handling of classified information. state department inspector generals also looking into the use of private emails at the state department. a report from the agency watchdog is expected to land at

some point during the campaign. the issue of whether clinton's system invited sloppy handling of state secrets also has not disappeared. those issues hanging out there. we'll go to jerry next in arizona. republican. good morning to you, jerry. caller: good morning, gretchen. i am a republican. i have been for many years. was a democrat earlier in my life. will i say this now, that i made up my mind that i will not vote for donald trump. probably under any circumstance at all. the main reason for it is that he never challenges people on the issues. if he gets an attack he goes to them personally. calling people liars and all that stuff. i don't think he's presidential and i won't vote for him. host: ok. that's jerry in chandler, arizona. republican. stewart in clear water, florida, democrat. hi. caller: how you doing, thank you so much. i'm a wounded warrior. entrepreneur, do i very well in my life and devout democrat. donald trump missing the debate

is a great thing. i utesed to -- used to like him, but i think he's the biggest racist, hustler in america. america needs to know this. you can imagine president obama did the same thing that this guy does around the country. people that interest on the fringe, that already hate president obama, he gives them validation to take potshots. just imagine that, america. all you folks on the right. the people that are voting for donald trump already have some kind of racist continuing in their body to vote for a guy like this. like the gentleman just said just now, who said he would never vote for donald trump, why would you even consider voting for this guy? megan kelly? megan kelly is right? hello? host: yes. megan kelly is right. caller: megan kelly is right. the one thing i don't like about her, i remember when she first was on fox news, she used to be

sort of -- once they get in bill o'reilly's good graces, they become more radical. you can't say nothing bad about them because they personally attack you every time. get this idiot off the stage. all of you you writing -- host: we heard that point. let me get your reaction to this tweet that donald trump sent out this morning. i refuse to call megan kelly a bimbo. that would not be politically correct. instead i will only call her a lightweight reporter. caller: it's unbelievable what this guy gets away with time and time and time again. it's just -- i just don't understand the american people. i served in the military for 25 years. it bothers me to the core that this guy gets away with what he gets away with. they put him on the show. they give him softball questions. and then he just goes on and on and on. what issues -- president obama is the smartest -- greatest

president this country has ever known in the history books. i promise you. host: stafford, virginia, independent. hi, sherry. caller: hi. i'm calling c-span. i'm a navy veteran myself. host: glad you called in. caller: i'm so glad to. i agree with donald trump. i did not like when fox came out with the statement about the ayatollah and putin and all of that. i just think they should not have gone that route. just stay neutral. let us hear and see what he has to say. but i totally agree with him. i might even vote for him. not sure yet. i agree with t host: you're not sure yet. who are you also thinking about or like in this presidential contest? caller: i kind of like jeb bush, but that's a whole other story there. i just have to see what they all have to say. i'm not a fan of ted cruz.

he jumps on the bandwagon. this is like a gift to him. i agree with donald trump. i'll watch the show for the veterans that he has. host: should donald trump take on ted cruz in a one-on-one debate? caller: absolutely not. he's not worth -- not at all. host: altoona, pennsylvania. republican. hi. caller: yes. host: we are listening. go ahead. caller: i'm calling in because i think this is the last ditch effort by the hierarchies in the republican party to discredit donald trump. they know that they can't control him because they can't buy him. it this is a last ditch effort to discredit him. host: he's the one that said he wasn't going to participate. what do you mean? the way fox responded? do you think that's in coordination with the party? caller: no. i think the party is trying to get rid of donald trump.

host: how so? caller: they can discredit him with megan on this debate. they can get rid of him. host: ok. fleetwood in baltimore, maryland. a democrat. go ahead. what's your take on this? caller: good morning. i think donald trump is an idiot, first of all. they always talk about he's a self-made man. we ought to ask the people that he filed bankruptcy how they feel about him being a self-made man. but the thing of it is that if donald trump can't stand up to megan kelly, what is he going to do if he's a-n a position -- he could tell mexico to build a wall and tell putin what he's going to do and tell the chinese, what happens when he gets into it it confrontation with these people internationally? what is he going to do then? run to his room? host: fleetwood, let me show you something. first of all a tweet from irish eye who is says this, refusing to talk to people shows leadership. what if he refuses as president

to talk to other world leaders s that leadership? the front page of the "washington times," trump proving a primary concern around the world. anti-immigration notions get panned. to an unusual degree world leaders and foreign populations appear to be monitoring closely the ins and outs of the american primary season and clear focus of much of the fascination is mr. trump and unexpected success to date in the g.o.p. pry marery. the donald has already been the subject of parliamentary debate in britain whether he should be banned from the country for his rhetoric. and foreign leaders fine themselves forced to prepare their talking points when asked about what's happening here in this country and this election battle. east jordan, michigan. kathy an independent, donald trump will not be at the debate with fox news in des moines iowa this thursday. what do you think? caller: i think it's a good decision that donald is doing. i am a donald supporter. i will vote for him.

if he doesn't get the election, then i just simply will refrain from voting. going down the items. number one, i watched that first debate that megan kelly participated in. not only her but the whole entire panel was just professional and they were mediocre and definitely out for plood. host: i have to leave it there. that does it for today's "washington journal." we'll bring it up to capitol hill the senate judiciary committee, senator charles grassley, republican from iowa, are lold hold a hearing on heroin and prescription drug abuse in this country. a love of coverage here on c-span. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]