thatack not -- genetic with mosquito-borne viruses. [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] host: good morning, everyone. donald trump and bernie sanders on again last night. bernie sanders ousted hillary clinton 51-36% in west virginia. but the former secretary of state continues to pile up super delegates. and so the gap widens between her and senator sanders. we'll begin this morning with the campaign. went to talk to military members only this morning. a recent "military times" poll shows that the majority of you prefer trump to hillary clinton by a huge margin. who is your choice for

commander-in-chief? if you're a active military, dial in at 202-748-8000. retired military, 202-748-8001. you can also join the conversation on twitter if you like at twitter.com/cspanwj or facebook.com/cspan. good morning to all of you. and we'll get to you calls here n just a minute. so let's begin first, leo shane, with who participated in this survey and what questions did you ask? guest: sure and thanks for the invite here. this is a survey of our readers who are. currently serving members. we asked some pretty specifically, you know know given specific matchups, who would you vote for? we wanted to really get some opinions on the likely matchups for this fall. so we asked them if forced to

choose between donald trump and hillary clinton, who would you choose? and the results were pretty striking. 54% of our respondents said they backed donald trump and 43% said they backed hillary clinton. 21% said forget it. i'm not going to vote if those are my who only choices. host: and why did they say that, would not vote? guest: we didn't give them a third option in this case. they said if we had a third party option, we'll take it. and in this case, we were just looking at the front runners and wanted to see what is their opinion, how many people are dissatisfied with these last two choices. we're seeing quite a significant number of service members aren't happy with only being left with trump and clinton, essentially at this point. host: what is it that they're

not satisfied with? guest: we've heard from some folks that they just feel like these are both establishment, candid in some ways. we've heard from a lot of folks that there are some frustration that they don't understand the military, neither have served and don't understand military issues. that's one of the things that we'll be digging in as the summer goes along, if this is just the initial gut reaction after the primaries or is this more systematic disappointment throughout the ranks. host: you also did the hypothetical matchup between donald trump and bernie sanders. and bernie sanders fared better than hillary clinton did. guest: yeah, slightly better, not enough to overtake donald trump. the biggest thing we saw in all of our result is party affiliation is what really mattered. when we look at service members who are republicans, they broke for donald trump pretty convincingly across the board no matter what the matchup was, about 80%.

and in clinton's case, among democrats, she got 72% of all the democrats, again, regardless when she's matched up with onald trump. we're seeing it reflected within the ranks. and that's significant to us because it means a lot of the concerns about foreign policy, lack of multi-experience, military issues that we've seen heeps pretty heavily on donald trump. they're just not resonated or just not affecting how military members see the candidates. >> and are most military members conservative? guest: it's one of those numbers that's tough to get to. there is certainly a larger number of republicans than democrats. there are certainly still some democrats in there. in the recent surveys we've

done, republicans to democrats and quite a few independents too. us to not surprising to see that folks who very strongly associate with the republican party are going to back the republican nominee even with some of the criticism surrounding him. host: how will you follow up on this poll? guest: we're looking at a handful of different issues throughout the summer here. since a lot of our readers were very focused on the third-party issue, we'll be looking at that. we already did do another question when they are talking about former marine corps general james madise. there's rumors about his possible entry into the race and among the people we surveyed, more than half said he would be a good candidate. we'll be looking at those third-party options seeing if there's a real appeal or if that's simply just another outlet of frustration about these front runners and

searching for some way to vote. most of the folks that we talked to in the survey said they want to vote. they want to participate. this is one of their rights and responsibilities, but they're just not enthused with necessarily these two choices that they've been presented. host: and leo shane, our military members active and retired, a group of voters that you can count on to show up on election day? guest: they usually are. there's a lot of dlts especially with overseas voters, military members who are serving overseas with getting their ballots in on time with some of the deadlines they have to reach. it's an emphasis that the military puts on getting their votes and sent them back in time. it is a population that, you know, maybe a little more so looks at these kind of civic responsibilities very seriously. whether or not that's enough to sway the election, that remains

to be seen. that military vote could be critical. host: thank you, leo. guest: any time. host: as we go to calls, take a look at how the "military times" poll broke down. when you look at the different branches of the military, army, navy, air force and marine corps, who do you prefer and a general election between what we have as right now, the two frontrunners, donald trump and hillary clinton. let's go to robert from wisconsin. retired military. good morning. welcome to the conversation. ho do you prefer here? caller: good morning. donald trump. host: and tell us why, robert. caller: well, one, i put on our uniform for democracy. and i hate sanders because he's

a socialist. i don't believe in it. clinton is nothing more than bama in a dress. mr. trump is going to enforce us as a nation, as a people who we are, americans, hopefully, we're all american. and i think he'll build our military backup. i've seen a very change in our military and a lot of us, we get together and talk don't like the changes we see in it. and we think trump will just build us back up, i mean, proudly. not arrogant, like some of the old hippies used to tell us, you know. you're all baby killers and whatever. and with honor and i think he'll do it. host: robert, do you worry about his impulsive nature? caller: no. no, ma'am. every president's got to put on different faces for different situations. that's a fact.

donald trump to me is like my old commander. he went off left and right. but he got his dimensions through and he told us what to do and he did it. so i love trump in that sense. i do regret dr. carson couldn't hang in there but i will go with trump. host: all right. vincent in tulsa, oklahoma, active military. hi, vincent. you're on the air. caller: i'm voting for hillary clinton. host: michael in arizona, retired. hi, michael. good morning. caller: good morning. taking my opinion is care in the -- would seem to be a little unprecedented this one thinking neither one of the two

major candidates have any military experience one way or the other. at this point, i'm worried about trump maybe being kind of quick on the trigger. and ms. clinton, i see her as being not so much interested or concerned about being attacked or whatever. but she shouldn't make military decisions based on sheer . litical assessment i do have to say that it is most interesting that donald trump and hillary clinton probably are two competitors for president of the united states.

but we're a strong country. we'll survive whatever happens. host: ok, michael. when did you serve? caller: oh, wow. 69. to 19 host: and were you in the army, navy? what branch? caller: i was in the air force. for s.a.c.w member host: we're talking to retired and active military this morning. who's your choice for ommander-in-chief? recently, donald trump gave a foreign policy speech, laid out his vision for what kind of commander-in-chief he would be.

take a listen to part of what he had to say. donald trump: tour friends and allies, i say america is going to be strong again. america is going to be reliable again. it's going to be a great and reliable ally again. it's going to be a friend again. we're going to finally have a coherent foreign policy based upon american interests and the shared interests of our allies. [applause] donald trump: we're getting the nation-building business and instead, focusing on creating stability in the world. our moments of greatest strength came when politics ended at the waters edge. e need a new rational american foreign policy, informed by the

best minds and supported by both parties and it will be by both parties. democrats, republicans, independents, everybody. this is how we won the cold war and it is how we will win the new future struggles which may be many, may be complex, but we will win if i become president. host: donald trump giving a traditional candidate speech laying out his foreign policy agenda if he were to become commander-in-chief. and we're asking military only this morning. who is your choice? go said, sir. what do you think? caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. host: you're welcome. so who's your choice here? caller: i originally liked rand paul. i was even a bigger fan of his father but not a fan of either trump or hillary but if i had to choose, i would probably pick

trump. primary reason is five worked with classified information in the past and the issue with our private server, if i did what she did, i have a pretty good chance that she would probably go to prison, that i would probably go to jail. so i don't think she should be qualified to run for president. and ultimately, i'm leaning more towards libertarian, the third party, but given the choices, i would probably take trump. host: so rafael, let me ask you then. you liked ron paul and rand paul, both of them seen as not wanting to get involved, not intervening in the world's conflicts. and as a military person, why did that appeal to you? caller: i've seen too many people and too many of my close friends suffer from ptsd and various other circumstances that i felt were unnecessary. i'm all in favor of defending

our nation, but at the same time, i think we have to be more cognizant of which international affairs that we as a nation want to get involved with. host: ok. so rafael, what you said about national security and hillary clinton's private server that she had set up for herself while she was secretary of state. front page of "new york times" this morning has an article. said a e-mail recently sent is unclassed. and they give this example that on the morning of march 13, 2011, the assistant secretary of ate jeffrey feldman wrote an you weren't e-mail informing them that --

host: rafael what, they say here is that this is a practice that goes beyond hillary clinton and that in the age of the internet, this is diplomacy as it's happening, especially in an urgent, fast developing situation. how do you respond? caller: you know i realize the issue here, but at the same time, i still think that people hould be scrutinized and

classified is still classified. host: do you think too much is classified though, rafael? caller: sometimes, perhaps. but, you know, i can't really comment to -- too specifically on that. host: ok. rafael, active military in seattle, washington. let go to the back to the "new york times." a review of the e-mails from mrs. clinton's private server that the state department made public under the freedom of information act provides an extensive record of how suns sensitive information often looped throughout president obama's foreign policy apparatus on unclassified systems -- host: so that in the "new york times" this morning.

sam, alexander, virginia. you're retired. who's your choice for president? caller: my choice is hillary. host: ok. tell us why. caller: mainly because -- well, first of all, i'm a little skeptical in this survey. i remember vividly. i joined the military in 1963. i was in vietnam in 1964 and 1965. and most of the people that i served with, we served, you know, regardless of party. but then all of a sudden, the party became the driving force and a lot of the people who identified as being republicans back during those days, they were officers. but what i really want to say is i don't understand how people who are active duty or, you know, retired can back donald trump. this is a man with how many

deferments? and all of a sudden, he's this big supporter of the military? when he had a chance to be a member of the military and he opted out? something is not right here. host: ok, sam. roy, in california, retired. and roy, what do you think? caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. host: good morning. caller: i'm supporting hillary. and partly because of the same reasons as the last gentleman mentioned. donald trump doesn't have a clue. he just says things off the top of his head and we have had many presidents and many commanders in achieve that lately have gotten us into dire situation about not only dollars, but treasure -- our blood of our young men and women. and i don't want to take a chance with donald trump. hillary, i feel is more stable.

she's been there. she's already established relationship with other government. and i think she will be a way better choice. one thing i want to say to tench that's out there supporting trump. a lot of times when you're upset, you make wrong decisions. you need to calm down and think about what you want to do clearly. just don't jump because you're upset. thank you. that's my statement. host: roy, have you voted for a republican in the past? or have you always voted for democrats? caller: i've always voted for democrats. and except in this election, if it came down to hillary and john kasich, that's where i would have a little quandary. host: ok. he's reasonable.

everyone's adopted a strident position and now, they're all going back to trump, no matter what they said about him. all of a sudden now, they have to fall in line. and i don't agree with that. host: ok. there's a few that are as you know. speaker paul ryan saying he's not quite ready to get behind donald trump and he, along with other leadership in the house and senate will have meetings with the presumptive republican nominee on thursday up on capitol hill. let's hear from hillary clinton. back in march at stanford university, she talked about national security issues. here's what she said to say about defeating ice is and what needs to be done. hillary clinton: we do have to take out isis's stronghold in iraq and syria. we should intensify the coalition air campaign against step ghters, leaders, and

up support for local kurdish forces on the ground and coalition efforts to protect civilians. and pursue a diplomatic strategy aimed at achieving political resolutions to syria's civil war and iraq's sectarian divide. second, we must dismantle the global network of terror that supplies money, arms, propaganda and fighters. this means targeted efforts to deal with isis affiliates from libya to afghanistan. it means going after the key enablers who facilitate, illicit financial transactions and help jihaddists arrange travel, forged documents and evade detection. and it means waging online battles with extremists to discredit their ideology, expose their lies and counter their appeals to potential recruits in the west and around the world. third, we must harden our

defenses and build our resilience here at home. we need to counter each step in the process can lead to an attack, deferring would-be terrorists and discovering and disrupting plots before they're carried out. host: hillary clinton in march, outlining what she would do to defeat isis. "wall street journal" this morning with the headline "isis kill list expanded." they report islamic state has distributed long lists of killing americans encouraging its followers to target those individuals, vexing authorities who are at odds who the list poses an actual threat or a scare tactic -- host: we're asking military only this morning. who would be your pick for

commander-in-chief? jeff is retired military in las vegas. ood morning, jeff. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. host: you bet. caller: we're talking about commander-in-chief just between hillary and mr. trump, right? host: well, would you like to see bernie sanders? he's still in the race. caller: he is in the race. like i said, i'm going to try to stay on task of what you talk about because i come from an intel background. erved on u.s. nassau, and with that said, i've always paid close to the intel community and have a little more knowledge of things that happen around the world. with that said, i have to bring it up because it's so obvious, but ms. clinton with the whole benghazi thing, not making the proper decision and given so ny chances, that, i think it

excludes her of even looking at her as commander-in-chief. because anyone that makes a proper decision in that position, i do believe trump in that situation if i'm looking at those two, he does make decisions. obviously, he has advisors at the ready but he's a decision-making person. he's not going to believe our troops or u.s. citizens at risk like that overseas. with that said, it's the whole process of who we're putting in the white house to be the commander-in-chief in the first place. that needs to be looked at so we can actually get people that are going to have a little more experience for that type of a position. it would be great to see someone with a great military background as well serve as commander-in-chief. host: ok. we're go to florida. jim, also retired military. good morning to you. caller: good morning. i'm going to vote for trump.

he's the only one throughout the primaries that has spoke about taking care of the veterans and also rebuilding the military. i'm a lifelong retiree with the u.s. army. and i just believe the past speaks for itself. if you look at what the cleveland indians did, bill clinton, -- clintons did, bill clinton, when obama got into it, it was the same thing. those polls show the reasons you're looking at third party because the republicans and the democrats have not given the military the proper pay raises that they're supposed to get they're supposed to get a 1.8% and the congress and the senate went along with cutting it down to a 1% and no percent. so if you look at the commissary situations and all of the things that both parties want to cut, that's why they're looking towards a third party. but trump's the only one that spoke about taking care of the veterans which that problem still exists very rampant and i

think your show should get back into doing some more shows on taking care of the vet and what's going on in the v.a. host: "new york times" report thought the army secretary nominee is blocked -- is being blocked by one senator. some g.o.p. colleagues oppose the stalling on a potential landmark appointment. and this is what the "new york --es" report michael schmidt

host: we're asking military only to call in this morning and tell us who your choice is for commander-in-chief. about about, please call in at 202-748-8000. retired military, 202-748-8001. patrick from new york, retired. good morning. welcome. you're on the air. caller: good morning. host: go ahead, sir. caller: oh, thank you. i would vote for bernie sanders first and donald trump second oddly enough for the simple reason that neither one has bought -- is bought and paid for. hillary clinton and this is part of the e-mail scandal out there,

received moneys from tunisia, south korea, formosa, all kinds of places for bill clinton and her global initiative program. this money goes into canada where it's not properly audited. hillary's es on into fund. and that's most likely why she's trying to stall. -- on letting people know. host: patrick, do you agree with senator sanders' foreign policy agenda? caller: i actually do. i think bernie is pretty wise. he understands we cannot simply become involved in war after war after war, that the establishment seems to like to get us into. host: ok.

patrick, that was a get setup for listening to senator sanders after the paris attack by ice is and the killings in san bernadino, california. senator sanders gave a speech in november talking about how he would conduct foreign policy. take a listen. bernie sanders: i will never hesitate to defend this nation. but i will never send our sons and daughters to war under false pretense or pretenses about dubious battles with no end in sight. to my mind, it is clear that the united states must pursue policies to destroy the brutal and barbaric isis regime. and to create conditions that prevents ideologies from flourishing. but we cannot and should not do it alone. our response must begin with an

understanding of past mistakes and missteps in our previous approaches to foreign policy. it begins with the acknowledgement that unilateral military action should be a last resort, not a first resort. [applause] bernie sanders: and that ill-conceived military decisions such as the invasion of iraq can wreak far reaching devastation and destabilization over regions for decades. host: that is what bernie sanders had to say about his vision of foreign policy if he were to be commander-in-chief ack in november.

there were contests in west virginia and nebraska for the republicans. here is where the delegate count stands right now for donald trump, the prum tiff republican nominee. he is at 1,59 delegates. e needs 1,237 nominations. he needs less than 40 to clinch the nomination. on the democrats side, this is here it stands -- host: on the contest, "new york times" this morning. hillary clinton suggests giving

medicare a buy-in option is on the front page. and it says she's stepping to the left as she tries to clinch the nomination, mrs. clinton is moving to the left on health care and this week, took a step in our opponent's direction suggest she would like to give the people the option to buy into medicare. -- host: that in the "new york times" this morning. and then there's this also in the "washington post." studies fault sanders on policy costs suggesting senator sanders would not come up with enough money using this approach and that is taxing the rich and that the poor and the middle class would have to pay more than sanders has projected to fund his ideas.

host: so that's an update with some policy pieces in the papers this morning. and then let's go back to calls. we'll go to mark next in the broncos -- bronx. you are retired, mark, and you're on the air. caller: thank you very much,

greta. thank you for c-span. i don't really like either of these candidates. one of the problems i have with trims his insistence that our military is going to be so strong that no one will mess with us. well, this has never proven to be true. if we go back 2,000 years to the romance which were the strongest army in the world, there for insurrections constantly. in 1775, the strongest army in the world were the british. and how did that work out for them here in the colonies? and in vietnam, i was in vietnam. the strongest army in the world was us. and there were constant -- well we know what happened. insurrection is not going to be deterred by the strength of the army. his thoughts, trump's thoughts that this is going to prevent

insurrection or isis has just not ever proven out. i am very insulted when he attacks john mccain. i can juice the same affect. i like my business people not to have gone bankrupt. i like my christians not to have committed adultery. and i like my war among rers not have gotten deferments. i think he's a hypocrite. hillary clinton -- all i can put vey! yiddish is to say oi what a choice we have for presidency. it's frightening to me. but that's my opinion and that's all i have to say. host: ok, mark. we'll go to detroit. bert in michigan. retired military.

who's your choice for ommander-in-chief? caller: i definitely support hillary clinton. and the simple fact is that donald trump is inexperienced and doesn't have a clue as to what's going on. and he's an entertainer, ok? he can talk about war and how strong he's going to make the military and the reason he's doing that is because he's never going or these are not his kids or his grandkids. he want people to go to war to fight battles for him. clinton is not squeaky clean but she's been in the political realm, she has experience and i trust her more than i would trust donald trump with the

nuclear weapons. host: ok. patty in virginia. patty, do you work at the pentagon now? caller: no, i worked there for 20 years. i now work for the director of national intelligence. host: so tell us, patty, who's your choice for commander-in-chief? what qualities because of your experience, what qualities does a commander-in-chief need to have and do you see that in any of these candidates? caller: yeah. i mean, i have been in washington working national security for over 27 years now. and i say that the first point i want to make about hillary clinton is the only choice for commander-in-chief is that she has lived through in the inside on dilemmas facing us over the last 15, 20 years, regarding the changing nature of warfare. she understands that counterinsurgency has nothing to do with the size of the military or the size of our weapons or

how many nukes we have or how, you know, how bolster -- boastful we are about our power. we are bigger than the next seven nations together in terms of our military. so to say that the obama administration has torn down the military is ridiculous. made it smaller, made it smarter, more sophisticated. hillary has lived all of that. i just want to make a point about benghazi because that's such a red herring for the right. she had nothing to do with the benghazi situation. the support wasn't there. the intel wasn't there to do any kind of warning for what was going to happen at that facility where the ambassador had chosen to visit. and they couldn't call enough military assets fast enough or enough surveillance assets to find out what was going on because they were all in the middle east in other conflicts.

so hillary does not control the military surveillance assets. so people are so confused because this has been thrown around like, you know, very irresponsibly that somehow benghazi was also fault. host: patty, can i ask you question? caller: yes. host: who would have been -- what about the c.i.a. that were in the area and this criticism that a standdown order was given? caller: a standdown from the state department? host: that -- caller: the state department doesn't control the c.i.a. assets in the area. host: right. caller: so, yeah. so whatever, you know, was going on which will probably continue to be classified was not in hillary clinton's set of responsibilities as secretary of state. host: ok. that's patty, pentagon -- former pentagon employee and now with central intelligence. is that right, patty?

caller: d.n.i., which is not quite the same thing. director of national intelligence. host: adam in arlington, virginia, active military. you're on the air. caller: hi. i'm active duty navy. served on the marine corps. i'm an afghanistan veteran. i have to completely disagree with the previous caller. the bottom line is even if hillary did not know about all the details which she did know is that it was not caused by a video and she and her direct people got on national television and lied to the public about what it was even though she knew. that alone is the problem with benghazi. if you make the wrong decision, you own that decision she want lied to the public. that's a problem. host: and is that why you would oppose her or are you opposing her for that reason? caller: i don't want to act like

i like trump. hillary and trump, there's both serious character flaws there. i don't believe that hillary is trustworthy. and i think that donald trump's a hypocrite and a blow-hard. but between the two of them, i would say this. i agree with the previous caller in her statement about the smaller military or the larger military not being a stronger military per se but i would say that under the current conflict, a lot of our military has been defanged. so our rules of engagement, our ridiculous, we got to wait till get --shot out before we that's ridiculous. i don't think trump would be as soft as the war fighting policies. i do give him that. and i want to comment on what the "military times" guy said earlier about the movement. it's kind of a joke among the

military but i don't think any of us necessarily think that he would be a viable candidate. donald trump is already super incorrect. he said some really politically incorrect things. he was too hardcore for the marine corps. so what does that tell you about his chances of getting elected president? host: i'm going to leave it there. roy in delaware, retired military. hi, roy. roy, are you with us? caller: hello? host: good morning, sir. you're on the air. caller: hi, good morning. actually, my name is darrell. host: darrell. sorry about that. go ahead. caller: that's all right. one thing i just like to say real quickly in regards to benghazi. if hillary clinton in fact had her server, how do we know for sure that her server wasn't hacked and the details of the security of the embassy in benghazi were not lifted off that server which actually

prompted that attack in the first place? i think that question hasn't been asked and i think it really needs to be addressed. host: ok. caller: and for one, we sailed that waters in that part of the world. we have a lot of issues not just in the middle east. you have to look at the south china sea, north korea is definitely making some noise. and we have to look at what the russians are doing in the baltic. if we surrendered the baltic waters, what's next? do we see the entire north atlantic? you're going to have to make some tough decisions in the future. -- as soon w that as that house bill gets approved and into president obama's desk. host: roy, who do you think could make those tough decisions? who's the best person? caller: well, i have to be candid with you, greta can,

donald trump is not my first choice but my candidate did not prevail in the process. so the board is going to be easy for donald trump. if you compare with bernie sanders or hillary clinton, hillary clinton's judgment alone , i can tell you for a fact that any of us who wore the uniform and took that oath and we've been as careless with these security information as she was, we would be enjoying a long tour of champagne and cake. so we have to ask ourselves as a country, facing -- facing a reality that we're going to have to see the person most likely to surround himself with the people that are going to give him the right advice. that's got to be donald trump. host: that was darrell, related to what he said, this is a headline in the "washington times" this morning. chinese fighter jet tracks u.s. war ships. navy seals, near disputed reef and freedom operation.

cat and mouse games over who controls one of the more strategic waterways escalated as china scrambles to track the s. warship by a disputed passage ground. and there's also this headline this morning. hiroshima ropes old wounds. some may see president obama's trip as apology for the nuclear strike. and it says american veterans group have urged obama not to visit her shima until the japanese apologizes for the wartime treatment of the prisoners of war. polls show most japanese expect obama to explicitly apologize for the bombings, many japanese are likely interpret his mere visit as an apology. the white house made clear tuesday that he would not apologize. a couple more calls. mark in columbia, ohio, retired military. hi, mark. you're on the air. caller: hi, greta. i might have jumped the gun. i'm not sure but i thought your

choice for commander-in-chief -- i'm a veteran of the united states marine corps for 74 and 79. host: we're talking to retired and active military. caller: ok. i'm not retired. i'm just a veteran. host: ok. caller: i wasn't smart enough to stay. but i have problem with hillary and the helicopter incident, the lying about the helicopter and dodging around. that's a total insult to all of our veterans who have had to dodge bullets, ok? that will just prove that she will make up something and do anything. how can you trust her? we can't trust her. and it's not for donald trump either, he's crazy but at least he's trying to in my opinion, put america first and stop sending our kids over to wars we can't win. i totally disagree with the caller earlier saying that none of them are going to send none

of their kids. neither is hillary, ok? hillary will not think about sending her only daughter over there. and that's what i think all of these candidates should consider. is when you vote for war, which one of your relatives will you send to that war? host: ok. randy in indiana, also retired military. i want to get your voice in. go ahead. caller: yes. i'm a conservative republican. but i won't be voting for either donald trump or hillary clinton. i will be voting for a libertarian austin peterson. host: ok. caller: and he's more conservative than donald trump ever thought about being. i see hillary clinton and donald trump as two sides of the same coin. host: and randy, and what is that coin? i mean, what are the sides?

caller: extremely liberal. neither one of them have military experience. neither one of them seem trustworthy in my judgment, as far as backing the military. donald trump was draft dodger morals. -- more or else. and hillary clinton, you can see with the e-mails and benghazi. i have no trust in her whatsoever. host: ok. that was randy in indiana. we'll have the leave the conversations there. before we take a quick break, we want to show you an update on president obama's nominee for the supreme court. merrick garland filled out the 141-page questionnaire that is custom for nominees to do and it is on the judiciary committee's website in case any of you are interested in going through it. as for the questionnaire, it is ainly a detailed recitation of garland's legal career, his

non-judicial writing, his professional affiliations and his record as u.s. court of appeals judge. when we come back, we'll speak with representative tom cole, republican of oklahoma, about the meeting between donald trump and speaker paul ryan and later, we'll continue talking policy and politics with new york democrat gregory meeks who sits on the foreign affairs and inancial services committee. >> book tv has 48 hours of non-fiction books and authors every weekend. here are some programs to watch for. don watkins, author of "equal is unfair." >> what we're not -- concerned

with is not how much money do you have, but how did you get it? did you get it through something that was fair or did you get it through a process that was unfair? and when you try to equalize people who earn their money honestly, that's something we're challenging and saying that's not a fairway to treat people. >> he says the american dream is threatened not by income and equality but by success. on sunday afternoon at 4:30, a war veteran and former c.e.o. of vets for freedom. he talks about theodore roosevelt, citizenship and a republic address and his rescission for americans today. >> this book is not about me, about roosevelt. it is a call to action. to me, it is meant to inspire, motivate and remind americans of every generation what makes america special and that it is worth fighting for. and some of us carried a rifle

and many in this generation still do, but you don't have to carry a arrive toll be in the arena. and it's our job to instill in every situation the principles that per we have wait an experiment -- perpetuate an experiment in human freedom. >> and then aaron mchugh and her book, "political suicide." >> it is filled with budgetary tight ropes and routines, ethical disappearing acts and clowns. instead, i becomes three rings of horror. we're so feeding by the time the mud is swung, the skeletons will come out of the closet and election day is over that we're often exhausted by our new legislatures before they had a chance to start their jobs. >> she recounts memorable political missteps in american history. go to book tv.org for the complete weekend schedule. washington journal" continues.

host: back with us is tom cole. let's talk about your district. i want to show our viewers this is "associated press" video of the latest tornado in elmore city, oklahoma. that's in your district. guest: correct. host: how are people doing? what happened? guest: they're doing well. these are always difficult. we had lost some lives. two people were killed. some serious damage, fortunately, most of this was in a very rural area. so it wasn't in one of these massive strikes in the metropolitan area in 2013. it's probably our closest calls called ways was the town winniewood of 2,000 people but refinery, oil excuse me. and so you always worry that catastrophic damage would come out. but it's the spring.

this happens pretty much every spring, someplace in the state and certainly someplace in the region. we're awfully good at it. and we get terrific support. our first responders are excellent. the state and federal authorities always do a great job and these folks are pretty tough. host: we saw the tanks. guest: yeah, that's massive. that's the largest holding complex for petroleum in the united states. there's literally tens of millions of oil there at any given time. host: what kind of vulnerability does the state of oklahoma have to these tornadoes? guest: a lot. tornadoes cause a lot of damage where they strike. but it's not like a hurricane. it's not like a sandy or a katrina. the bad one in 2013 was on the ground for a few -- a little over half an hour, 45 minutes, 17 miles long. inside that area, everything is devastated.

but immediately outside, everything's fine. so, again, not like a hurricane or something that could put hundreds of thousands of square miles out. host: this is a picture of a citizen cleaning up in texas but it says in the caption that mary foulen declared a state of emergency for 15 counties tuesday the day after two people were killed and the storm system raked the central united states. so because she has declared a state of emergency for those 15 counties, what does that mean for federal money and federal support? guest: well, the still has to sign off on it. and then it goes to the administration to make the decision. we've always gotten terrific response regardless of the nature of the administration, democrat or republican. people are sympathetic. they understand things like this happens. you are eligible for a variety of loans and disaster clean up,

the locality -- the federal government pays well over three quarters of the burden. so it's extremely helpful in getting an area back up on its feet. host: let's turn to politics now. the campaign, speaker paul ryan sat down with the "wall street journal" yesterday. here's the headline. ryan seeks unity for the republican party. was it helpful, hurtful that speaker ryan last week said i'm not ready to support donald trump? guest: i think probably helpful. i think the speaker put it pretty well went he said let's not pretend year all unified when we know we're not. but i think this is a very constructive way to go about it. let's sit down and have a discussion. find points of agreements. we don't expect everybody is going to agree on every issue, but, you know, i think this kind of dialogue, particularly between probably the two most important political figures are presumptive presidential nominee

and the highest elected republican in the country, the speaker of the house who is in line for the presidency. they need to be working together and be comfortable with one another. they clearly have not known one another. but i thought mr. trump's response was pitch perfect in terms of welcoming that kind of discussion and dialogue and sitting down. so i expect a productive meeting. process of getting to know one another and figuring out to know one another. and at the end of the day, i think they both arrive at the same point. honestly, they both need one another in the fall. paul's main job is to hold the house majority. and you're not like throw preside over a convention of your nominee and disagree with that or allow a rift to develop between the speaker and the presidential nominee in a fall campaign. that's just counterproductive to both mr. trump to win the presidency and to paul ryan. host: if it starts this way and as you just say, it goes on for

a while, doesn't that weaken the republicans in the general election? guest: i don't think so. we're all probably pretty shocked at the republican nominating process is over quicker than the democratic process. they're still in the middle of campaigns against one another. and running ads at one another. and so, you know, i think this stuff is pretty natural. it was pretty vigorous democratic primary in 2008. i didn't see that it kept people from coming together for then senator obama. i think the same thing will happen here. and there's something deeper at work here. there's clearly major changes going on in the electorate. and a common anger left and right, quite frankly at washington, d.c. and whether what has or hasn't been done. that's generated not only donald trump, but bernie sanders who is performing much better than most

democrats i know anticipated he would. host: what's your advice to donald trump to get folks like speaker ryan and other republicans who say there are principles that i'm not going to compromise on that make up the republican party and they are concerned that donald trump does not share that -- those same principles. guest: i think donald trump has to show himself to be what he is, which is, i think, a work in progress. most candidates change over the course of a campaign. and i don't mean that -- they just learn more and this is the first time candidate at the highest level. so i think you're looking for growth. you're looking for maturity. you're looking for inclusiveness. you're looking for somebody willing to listen to your point of view. i think those things are there. i don't think that's going to be -- it's hard to do. and you can never underestimate, frankly with all due respect, how well hillary clinton unifist republicans. so i think it's not going to be

hard. the choices comes in the post-convention period for everybody are pretty clear. you can vote for hillary clinton or donald trump or a third party which will be a dear vote is essentially meaningless, but each american will come to that conclusion. ryan, hese of speaker does have to think, and i know he thinks more broadly because he represents the house majority and 240 odd house republicans who look to him for leadership, so he has a special responsibility, but he has never done anything but discharges as possibilities with integrity and effectiveness, so i think he will do that again. exit polling from yesterday's nebraska primary for republicans.

ditch eyes with other exit polling during the process. -- it jives with other exit polling during the process. a significant number of republicans in nebraska are not wholly comfortable with donald trump in the office. four out of 10 say they would be scared or concerned if mr. trump gets to be president. think more are probably scared at hillary clinton becomes president. once the focus is on her, and that is what republican voters are thinking about, you will see that real quick. host: what is your advice to fellow republicans? what is your advice to the folks who are all up in november? .uest: to be prepared we have not lost a single the primaryet in season, so control things you can control. make sure your campaign is

operational and you have kept in touch with constituents and they know you reflect their views and values. in terms of the presidential, almost overwhelmingly the great majority will support the nominee because they will also be voting for the republican nominee for president. even in a few cases, people feel like they need to do other things out of principle or out of political expedience, given the nature of their district, i think that is inappropriate for them to do. i think mostpart, republicans will end up supporting the republican nominee. host: donald trump will be meeting with the speaker of the house as well as others in the house and senate on thursday. david, you are up. democrat, welcome. caller: good morning. you are doing a good job. i just want to say i think the media did a good thing. i have never heard the president

in my lifetime, i will be 66 month, talk billy donald trump talks. -- talks the way donald trump talks. he calls hillary crooked hillary. i cannot understand how in the world we can have somebody -- and i like some things he said, if he can do the things he says he can do, kind of like a lot of the other folk. if they are going to do all this stuff, but they don't ever do it. stayingng just keeps the same way. i don't understand it. what he talkst on about the name-calling. it is unbelievable to me. guest: it is not my style to call people names, but i think right now the tolerance for that is considerably higher because the voters are mad and frustrated, just like you are. they are ready for rough

language. there has been rough language from a number of the candidates, not just on the republican side. i cannot tell you that i particularly like that language. one of the reason i like paul ryan is he is uplifting and upbeat personality. ,opefully, it will get better but my hopes are largely centered on the other side of the election. people think the country is going the wrong direction and they really want to shake up washington, d.c., and they want to do that for the left and right. the rhetoric of the country has been pretty rough for the majority of the time. they called the president of the loser, thatr and a was harry reid talking about george bush, so i do not think this is new with donald trump. it is something i regret. host: cathy in georgia, republican, you are next. myler: thank you for taking

call. donald trump certainly is not my first, second or 15th selection. i am 58-year-old woman in georgia. it is a matter of conscience. it is going to be hard for me to and i have been a single republican conservative voter my whole life and it will be really, really hard. language, i think he is an opportunist, i don't think he is a republican. i voted for every other republican, but i will have to think more than twice to support him. he will be onpe his knees when he goes to talk to paul ryan. we need a true statement. i am ashamed to have him represent our country. host: can you respond to that? guest: that is pretty candid and

obviously heartfelt. . cannot disagree with anybody tothe other hand, i look guys like paul ryan and i have a lot of faith in him. he represents the future of the republican party to me and i hope the republic itself at one point. you just have to look through these things. that a voter with this level of concern will still go votes. i worry and negative campaigns tend to depress turnout across the board and they get disgusted with both sides. i don't think you will affect the process by not isticipating, so the caller clearly trying to work this through in her own way and to represent her country, and i'm

hoping she wants to make sure she boats and it is registered. we will let the process work out and wherever she ends up will be the right place for her. host: paul ryan, senator ted suspended his campaign, return to the senate. the headline in the wall street defiant ted cruz returns to the senate -- and he refused again to endorse a donald trump and he seems emboldened by his strong showing in the race and shows no interest in be more accommodating to the washington establishment to campaign against. what would 50 do for the party of senator ted cruz were to say, i am supporting donald trump and i went all of my supporters who voted for me to vote for donald trump? guest: it would be helpful. he did run a terrific campaign. he was the last man standing other than trump himself. d is a bright, articulate and able guy.

said,y, as mr. trump [indiscernible] i suspect he will weigh what he thinks is the right thing to do. he is a conviction politician. he will also need to think about are betterand it you off having played a role in helping hillary clinton become president, i do not think so. i don't think most republicans a want to look in the mirror after we lose the presidential election and say, i enable this. there goes the supreme court, the united states senate, we could lose the house in a bad election, so people have to work through these things. real that these are competitions, tough personally. i have had to do this several times. i understand. at the end of the day, if you're going to be on the republican ticket, either now or in the future and not just on top but on its, you ought to be supporting the other republicans.

you can certainly not be afraid to spell out the differences. at the end of the day, if the choice is hillary clinton or donald trump, for republicans, that will be an easy choice to make. host: polls that were released yesterday shows the kid being that connect between the front runners with swing states. take a look at florida, ohio and pennsylvania. you can see that right now, the party front runners are essentially tied. steve, independent, south carolina. caller: good morning. leave out, do not michigan and virginia, who have had more republican turnout in the primaries and they may flip this time. either way, i went to reiterate i am independent. i am a realist. i will go to the booth in november and push the number

with the constitution party and that is my way. oklahoma isst and going to be read and south carolina is going to be read. that is a given. we have local and state elections also. here is the problem. party seems to be in a state of disarray with so many people in the establishment coming out and speaking out against support of donald trump. however, we know that donald trump has energized people to come out and he is mainly responsible for the record voter turnout in the primaries. does the feeling amongst trump supporters that is really not most difference between washington democrats and the and thatn republican, is where the problem is. in the meantime, let me speak to the lack of support by people. here isford them down

my congressman. he has found not to support donald trump. his seat is coming up. jenny horne, who thousand to support him, will be running against him, and she gained national petition after the emmanuel conflict with the confederate flag down, so she is pretty popular. what does this say for the republicans? thatme about this notion there's not much difference between washington democrats and republicans and that is why trump is so popular. extraordinarys an amount of difference. you can look at any survey and voting patterns on the house and senate rolling and find they are farther apart today than they have ever been. some of the frustration is in the in a system of divided government. most of the things that people in my area are mad about where

the president is concerned happened in 2009 and 2010 when the at the super majority in the senate and a much bigger majority then we have today in the house. that is for you have everything from obamacare to dodd frank. if you look at republicans, they repealed them immediately but it is hard to get past. they also have cut the deficit from 1.4 trillion to only 430 billion and that is a pretty rapid rise. all the tax cuts expired while president obama was in office and that is $2200 more for every $2000, so makes the it was tax cuts for all americans. they also got the measure of entitlement from last year. i think we have been fighting the good fight. at the end of the day, you have to extract for the time. the other problem is what i

would put as an antiestablishment establishment out there today which spends a lot of time convincing republicans that the problem in washington is republicans, but the problem is barack obama if you are a liberal democrat or conservative republican. if you want to get things done and you want to change on a massive scale, one party or the other has to conform all three branches. the american people have been a little schizophrenic about this. they gave the president huge victory in 2008, overwhelming control of the house and senate. two years later, took the house away from him and narrowed the senate. then they reelected him in 2012 and they took the house and senate away in 2014, said that suggest a great deal of electorate andhe a lot of changes going on. 60% of the republican conference elected since

2010. the average age of the state senator fell by 17 years. there are lots of new basis and turmoil. i think we are in a prolonged time of realignment and at the are in ae day, people fiery mood right now. that is ok. sooner or later, they look at the combination that they like and they think is working. they have not gotten there yet. over time, the system seems to get to where the american people want it to be. i have a lot of confidence in it. host: sarah palin thinks that speaker ryan is the problem in washington and says that she becausek to unseat him he was not getting behind donald trump right away. [laughter] says he has seen a ryan'srm that support to comments but he has been favored

by 81% of republicans and gop leading independents who are registered voters. ryan and hispaul family has lived there for generations. he is well known, well respected, well-liked and unloved figure in his area. he is distinguished enough at 45 to be a vice presidential nominee and the youngest speaker since the mid-19th century. -- that is a heck of a record and i'm willing to in on my chips on paul ryan anyone trying to defeat them inside or outside of the district. i think the speaker has been honest about this and we should not pretend we are unified when we are not. we need to talk to these issues

and find common ground. i think that is what the is doing. he is leading us, which is what he is supposed to be doing. that is a good thing and not a bad thing. just bear with him. i think people who can watch them operate will note that those of us who have served with them in the house know, a person of great integrity, a thoughtful person and he does the right like almost end, 100% of the time. i don't know if he was an eagle scout, but he should have been. i respect his leadership and i think he will make us a better team in the fall election and that is what matters. host: we will go to cleveland, ohio, joe, republican. caller: good morning. thank you. i am and 85-year-old christian and i have seen a lot of politicians, but let's take politics out for a moment and look at the american public and

what they're looking at. number one, i don't know why people that are packing trump are not putting this out there. he just hired more people of diversity than any other person who has run for president in my lifetime. he has done more construction, he knows how to talk to tradespeople, the common man, the educators, he has built off courses, the people hired dark hispanics, asians and african-americans. he also has -- the people he has hired are hispanics, asians, and african-americans. this is an opportunity to be productive, not political, but production. the other issue is the socialist party or the democrats, everyone at the city's going through racism and murders in the black community end up falling apart economically are all the democratic cities and you make good points.

pointed out.e that is why the american public is upset. this man that came into office with the promise of making things better has made it so much worse and has stirred up so much hatred between the races. i have never seen anything as disgusting in my life. thank you and god bless our country. eloquentrtainly very remarks. i think the point that donald an exceptionally successful business guy is a big part of his appeal. time he has been outside the political system like the caller suggests and that is to create jobs and opportunities. he has made himself fabulously wealthy, but a lot of other people, too. americans like that. i have seen no evidence of discrimination of any type inside of his organization.

he seems to be surrounded by a lot of people that think highly of him with a diverse background and points of views. he is certainly not the traditional republican. no doubt about that. people always said they wanted someone who does not follow party lines. here is a guy that does not follow the party lines quite often. i think we will learn a lot more more than ween know today, and he will be confronted with a lot of questions and challenges, contradictions, and every candidate goes through this. particularly candidates at the highest level. the american people will see the candidates, make a judgment, and if they make a mistake, they fix it in four years. have a little faith in the wisdom of the american voter. they tend to get us to the right place. att: a tweak -- for cruz, the end of the day, it is the choice of supporting clinton or the "pathological liar,

narcissist, and serial philanderer." what to you make of those comments? guest: it makes the point that you ought to be careful of your language and the political campaign. 17 people were running for the you are going to be confronted with choice. you all signed a pledge, so i try to be measured, particularly in the contest with other republicans, because at some point, you want that friendship. if you are fortunate to be the playee or if you want to by the rules of the game, you will have to be willing to support the person your own party chose. each candidate has to work in their own way. i would be awful careful about rhetoric. you can be sharp about issues, nothing wrong with that. we have candidates that if you followed them over their career,

at one point, mr. cruz said wonderful things about mr. trump. trumpd not excuse mr. from this situation. basing to have given as good as they got, rhetorically, but at the end of the day, they will be offronted with this dilemma what you support hillary clinton or rally around the person that the party, that you are part of, chose? i think you're better off to play within the rules of the game and accept the verdict of the voters. host: we will hear from alice, democrat, ohio. caller: good morning. i have a question about supporting donald trump. what group could possibly listen to his language and except that as it being ok for their children to listen to?

that boggles my mind. if you could give me an answer, i would appreciate it. guest: i would agree with your point. i wish the language were different in this campaign, but if you are voting evangelical or not, why would you support americanwho put security at risk, frankly breaking their words to the president about that? why would you support some of you engineered a reckless work in libya that opened up isis? why would you support someone who [indiscernible] projecting power to the middle east in a way they have not since the 1970's and doing loop the loop's? i think there is a lot more serious issues here than just language. there are going to be sharp differences. no questions about that.

it will be a hard-fought campaign. both are entering the general election. it is the first time in american history that that has happened, that the boat is upside down. , about onel recently third of the electorate cannot stand either one of them. that goes from republicans, democrats and independents. they will decide who wins the election. you do not know if they will stay home, but for the lesser of two evils, change their mind, or come out one way down the ballot and another way? we do not know. as manynow that americans as possible should exercise and go to the polls and choice. this will be a consequential election. it will almost certainly should the supreme court for generations. control of the senate is at stake. i think in election this

volatile, control of the house is also at stake. if you liked 2009 and 2010, you may want to vote democratic. if you want to really change the system, i think some are better off with trump or a next her term of president obama. they could change status quo election. hillary clinton is very much the status quo candidate. she has positioned herself that way. the country needs to decide if they want to change directions. i saw something like this in 1980. you remember how close it was withen carter and reagan the republican split and john anderson running as independent. the american people will go up the day before the election and said, we have double-digit interest rates, double-digit inflation, i will try the cavalry, and they did and they liked what they got and they got change.

i did not know if this is the same parallel but i think it is the same volatility. host: richard, florida, independent. go ahead. caller: good morning. the people who have spoken to not want donald trump. if ryan cannot get on board, he needs to resign and you were talking about when the republicans took the house and senate, well, when they took the house, speaker boehner said that he was going to secure the border, which he did not two, he would be funded obamacare, which he did not to, and said he would cut the budget $100 billion, which he did not do. these two parties are basically one party. the overall objective is to keep the power away from the people. what thed up with government has friend, basically

by attorneys, that tried to convince people that right is wrong, wrong is right good is bad, bad is good. they talk out of both sides of their mouth and say the same thing. host: let's have the congressman respond. should speaker ryan resign if he cannot get behind donald trump? absolutely not, and first of all, i think he will, so i speculate, but the districts he is accountable to made him speaker. degree ofhigh confidence behind him. cut think john boehner did the budget by the way. the deficit is down on an annual basis. we are spending less money than we did in 2008 and that is what the caller was talking about. it was entitlements that did not

get reformed. in terms of these other things, i know john boehner, with all due respect, never made any claim he could secure the border. third --lled one excuse me, one half of one third and he did not have the senate almost every day of the speaker. tax cuts forent everybody, including the caller, he got entitlement reform, so it is a record to be proud of. you cannot promise that the senate is going to do, let alone with the president of the united states is going to do. if you want the kind of change the caller talked about, he needed to win the 2008 election. andot majority of the house that was pretty amazing given the scope of the victory, over 5 million votes. their appeal of

obamacare to the president and the be towed it. he vetoed the planned parenthood funding. the keystone pipeline, he vetoed it. it suggests to me that the problem is not what congress is doing. it is a different point of view. in our system, he has the right to veto legislation and we do not have votes to override it. is for the american people. the president got elected there and square. they are different parties and different points of view. host: jackie in georgia, democrat. coler: hi, representative , how are you? guest: very good, thank you. caller: good. my question is if republican policies are so great, can you tell me why all red states are the poorest in the nation?

guest: i don't think all are. we have 31 governors right now, and i don't think we have 31 poorest states in the country. we are successful in lots of different parts of america. with all due respect, i disagree with your premise. host: diana, virginia, republican. caller: i have a question in regards to someone is looking at donald trump's financial standing? he has seems that really spending so much money and he is not [indiscernible] and this whole thing with trump elected, ifif he is he is prosecuted or found guilty

is president, so i wonder if people are really looking into his financial standing and if that could impact him? because i certainly did not want the president that is a fraud. guest: there is only one candidate involved in an fbi investigation, hillary clinton and not donald trump, but believe me, there is enormous .crutiny under way every penny that is being spent, researchg being done, is being done by both parties. believe me, the fbi, the last time i heard, had over 200 members associated with the ,ntegrity section that looked particularly congress, but if there is something wrong out there, there is a pretty good chance it will be exposed. host: before you go, it is believe to-- i

refuse -- i refuse to believe that the last sane republican -- guest: i try to respect everybody in the process. with secretary hillary clinton. i do not believe she was a good secretary. and i havey disagree seen them moved further and further to the left as she has chased bernie sanders. you, you weresk the one that supported the idea of a contested convention and possibly having paul ryan as the nominee. guest: [laughter] i think that is dead. first of all, paul ryan to not want to do that. close does not count. it is not horseshoes. you have got to get the number, but with no opposition in the

field, trump had two states last night, note reason to think he will not have this before the seventh of june, so i think he is the presumptive nominee at this point. host: thank you for being here. we will take a break. when we come back, we will talk with gregory meeks and get his take on the democratic primary contests. continued with m.i.t. technology review. the story about new technology despite the self annihilating mosquito. we will be right back. ♪ a,this sunday night on q and

historian add them and his book -- a historian and this book on the spanish civil war. >> this happened in spain when all of the country and officers tried to seize power and in parts of the country succeeded in season power -- in season power and it sent a shockwave alarm throughout the world because here is a major country in europe, the right-wing military quickly backed by mussolini, who sent armed airplanes, pilots, tanks, take drivers and miscellany sent 80,000 grand troops. they made a grab for power. thate all over the world it thought to be resistant, if not here, where? sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span's "q&a." >> www.c-span.org is a video

rich library to your c-span viewing. most of our programs, like the house, senate and congressional hearings stream live on the site , so if you have no television, you can watch on your desktop, laptop, smartphone and tablet. c-span archives have all the programs online in the c-span video library, so if you miss an episode of "washington journal" or any program, find it online and watch at your convenience. in fact, the c-span video library contains more than 200,000 hours of c-span programs and the search engine helps find and watch programs going back many years. to watch on your television, just go to the on air schedule for all networks and the radio station. it is a public service for your cable or satellite provider.

check it out. it is on the web at www.c-span.org. "washington journal" continues. host: back at our table, congressman gregory meeks, democrat of new york. he is also the congressional black caucus chair. let's begin with foreign affairs. there was a profile of ben rhodes recently, who is president obama's foreign policy guru, theecurity aspiring novelist who became his foreign-policy guru is the title of that piece. national review says that this profile confirms what many experts have said that -- about the obama administration. the profile is important because it explains the unprecedented thick, deceitfulness and extreme partisanship barack obama's

security council and further reveals that the president has a lot his national security staff to run foreign-policy. guest: that is ridiculous. i think that if you look at, and i did extensive review and work several times on our allies all over the world as to what was important. importantremendously was iran not have a nuclear weapon. when you look at the policy that they have articulated, he has put in a strong policy were iran will not get a nuclear weapon. people forget it is the obama administration with the sanctions program that was unprecedented. to the point where they would get at the table and negotiate with iran, some believe it is as a result of not agreeing to have nuclear weapons. we've recently toward the middle east and even those countries,

that initially what a gift to the agreement, basically what they said was a disc important to make sure iran has no nuclear weapon and now it is important to work together to make sure that they appear to the deal and we must move on. we have other issues we have to deal with but i think that clearly, they are making sure that iran has no nuclear weapons and it is important for us and our allies. host: the speaker of the house wrote an opinion piece saying that iran is not adhering to the deal. this is what he writes -- everything the administration told us about the deal is starting to unravel. the administration assured us that they could reimpose snapback sanctions if iran cheated.

tash guest: i think we have to separate the facts from fiction. the deal we had was to ensure that iran does not obtain nuclear weapons. is atomic commission inspecting and iran has agreed to allow inspections and to make sure they are not doing anything allain a nuclear weapon and of that has still been adhered to. those agreements have been adhered to. the treaty is concerned, thus far, i know that one of our strongest allies also

has intelligence and is watching it iran tries to obtain nuclear agreements. israel, for example, [indiscernible] and no country has said that it has been violated. iranve got to focus on ballistic missiles and things of those natures. let them know in regards to other areas. host: we know that in five years to eight years, the international ban on weapons will be lifted. we know that in 10 years to 15 years, most limits on iranian -- guest: if we do not continue to

talk and negotiate, they say the only answer is war. what the obama administration is saying is we need cap an alternative to war. war is not good. to have that dialogue is positive. it is similar if you go back in time to where we were with the soviet union when their biggest enemy clearly was the soviet .nion, but we did not go to war we continued to talk and try to work it out to avoid war. if there are continued aggressions, and you have no options, then you have to be ready to fight, but this policy always comes first. i think what the obama administration has pursued is being opposed to war first, and then when you have to do what you have to do, with no specifications, then you are prepared. but dialogue, conversation,

working and trying to have a safer world is what is tremendously important. i think that is the right way to go. we saw it took place in iraq, should have learned from past mistakes. host: the foreign affairs committee having a meeting tomorrow on the risk of economic engagement with iran. what are the risks for you? guest: anytime we have diplomacy, there are risks that the diplomacy does not work. i can recall i was reading a book on john f. kennedy and an atomicrisk that bomb would go off. we were in school at the time and they were doing drills. and we try to figure out how to avoid it, so the risk is greater without dialogue, without diplomacy of having catastrophic

deaths and injuries with war. the risk oforth trying to have conversation so that we can prevent war than to just make it -- i do not like you and we're going to go to battle. host: let's go to joe in maryland, democrat. caller: good morning. i have been watching politics ever since eisenhower was promoted into office. person whor seen a is more qualified than hillary clinton and the democratic party is not standing behind her they are letting these unfounded allegations go by without even saying a word. why aren't the democrats getting behind her? because there's nothing the

people are saying that she has done that has ever stuck. no one has proven anything against her. host: what democrats are not getting behind her? caller: none of the democrats are getting behind hillary clinton. they are not fighting some of the allegations. the person that was set up to be the first speaker before ryan, he even came out and said that we are -- the things we're doing about benghazi are working against her. host: i understand what you are saying. you agree with them? guest: no. i think we are solidly behind hillary clinton. she has got more votes than anybody in this election cycle from democrats. it is clear that in democratic primaries, hillary clinton has won them and by huge margins. ofm a firm supporter

hillary's. you have seen what she did in my district in new york. anytime you look at her state and states that democrats, they are coming out and supporting her. i agree with the caller that mr. mccarthy gave away a secret and that was that republicans had a plan to come up with not substantiated garbage to try to get away from substance of issues, and that is not going to work and that is why hillary clinton will be the democratic nominee and the next president of the united states. host: what to make with bernie sanders and another win in west virginia? guest: again, i look at what the second-place of what 2008 at the same time. she still has a bigger lead them barack obama had on her at the time. you look at the numbers and the

numbers show you purely where it is headed as far as hillary being the next nominee for the democrats. i think bernie sanders has brought interest for young people and that is a good thing. wille and, bernie sanders urge his supporters to support hillary clinton, just as hillary did with barack obama in 2008. hear what the independent senator had to say after he won. [video clip] me be asnders: let clear as i can be. we are in this campaign to win the democratic nomination. [applause] and we are going to fight for every last vote in oregon, kentucky, california, the

dakotas -- [applause] we fully acknowledge we are good at arithmetic that we have an up hill climb ahead of us. but we are used to fighting uphill climbs. [applause] we have been fighting uphill from the first is this campaign when people considered us the fringe candidacy. [applause] anti-message to the democratic

delegates that will be assembling in philadelphia, while they may have many disagreements with hillary clinton, there is one area that we agree, and that is we must defeat donald trump. [applause] host: what you make of that last part of his speech? what do you think he is signaling? went: he is signaling that hillary clinton becomes the nominee, so he is keeping his people wound up and ready to go, and that is not bad thing, but in the end, i think he understands the numbers in the end. but he has got to do is to make sure we are together with one common opposition and that is donald trump. host: if supporters do not get in line, how concerned are you that that could get the election to donald trump?

washington times, trump closes gap between clinton in florida. 43% of sanders supporters in west virginia said that they would vote for donald trump if he is not the nominee. guest: i am not concerned at all. people hillary clinton's said that they would not vote for barack obama. when you put up hillary clinton against donald trump and you focus on the issues and what is important for the country, i am confident that the american people know that hillary clinton is better qualified and this is important. this is not a reality tv show and that they are going to vote for hillary clinton. ende is no question on my that we are not going to have to [indiscernible]

and he knows how to bring up tv ratings and that is what a lot of the cable television shows have higher ratings because they want to be entertained as supposed to the subject of debate. the you are talking about president of the united states, you cannot get away with just calling people's names. you have to look at the pattern of donald trump. anytime he is talking about budget, taxes, foreign policy, he gets tripped up and talks over himself, so to divert from talking substance, he gets back to personal insults, name-calling, etc. because you cannot build issues that are important to the american people. when we get into the debate, once again past the democratic and republican conventions, americans are going to zoom in. the rest of the world has already assumed in because most

of the world is ahead and they are amazed that he is gone as far as he has. gwen, alabama, democrat. caller: good morning. i want to make this point. i am so glad that you are bringing valid points this the news media -- because we are tired of the rhetoric the news media is throwing around. [indiscernible] got people not doing their jobs. point, it ise this not about hillary clinton but about white men. , a man that is going

to run for president of the united states to stand up and daughters,your granddaughters, mothers, nieces, are you going to vote for him? what does that mean about the man in america that you will not stand up against a man running who is holding all kinds of grudges? racism, donald trump is bringing out the lowlifes in the worst in america as voters. i will be real when i say this, it is not about hillary. bill clinton had an affair on hillary. not go out and lay down with nobody. i know nobody in america is going to stand up and allow nobody to say that when a man cheats on me, i am going to be over.

that you would take a woman and make her responsible for what a man due to her, what is wrong with these men in america? host: ok. congressman? .uest: i appreciate the caller if i was back home at my church, i would say amen. this is donald trump who cannot debate substance. he knows that. will not be able to defeat hillary clinton when it comes to these issues. what do you do when you know your abilities and you know you do not have the ability to do? a smokescreen and he throw something up in the air. that is exactly what he did in the republican primary. not onnot on's -- he won substance but party people names. he tells you. substance.

just think about it. any issue that he talks about, either he did not have an answer or he contradicted himself. he says one thing and he came back and said something else, so he is all confused with the issues because he does not now. what does he do? -- only thing he knows, type calling folks names, insulting said.what the caller he went after cruz's father in wife. you expect people to forget that? no. there are going to be issues that determine who the next president of the united states is. issues, that is what is important. that is the debate that has to happen. host: leonard, san diego, republican. caller: i have had my coffee, so i am ready. host: all right. a wake-up call

and i am a republican. although, i did prefer president kennedy. i thought he was probably the best democratic resident we have had in the past 60 years. this is a wake-up call to the republicans. hillary clinton will pick bernie sanders as the vice president, and that will lock up the nomination and i will tilt america completely to the democrats. and that is just the way it is going to be. host: i want to take your prediction. to you agree that hillary clinton should pick senator sanders? guest: i think that is absolutely up to hillary clinton. she will make the determination under she thinks of be the best running mate. i have absolute confidence in whomever she selects. she is a brilliant woman. she knows politics well. she also knows

how to get this country and keep it on the right path. themamazed when i hear talk about the continuation of barack obama or not, and i think about it. i think about when bill clinton was president. he inherited a weak economy from and he turned the economy around. we have the stalinist the economy have had. and that we had eight years of -- we had the strongest economy we have had. then we had eight years of george w. bush. and then we had the greatest recession since the great depression. 750 thousand jobs a month, so that tells you right there that bad economy, democrat , good economy, republicans, bad economy, and barack obama to not

create the bad economy, but he inherited it. lasthas happened over the eight years? unemployment has gone down to 5%. have increased. they still want to do more, but he has turned that around. gas prices are lower than they have ever been, so barack obama was inherithas done the worst economy since the worst recession caused by the and has turned it around. we want to keep this country moving in the right direction. -- we need top continue with hillary clinton. sandersat about bernie and his conversation? this year, bernie will have an even greater strengthening total of economic justice? hillary has except it was

good and that will be part of reduce.ly have to they have to keep up folks from being successful in our country. elias woman making $.64 on the dollar to a black man makes question mark -- makes? why are there still barriers there? those of the barriers that are left that have to be broken and that is what hillary is talking about. you can just talk about and that is what we need as president of the united

states. host: we will go to an independent. caller: listen, i am going to vote [indiscernible] they will negotiate [indiscernible] host: congressman? guest: number one, we cannot withdraw. what they have to do is make sure that they noticed the

weaknesses but he hasn't improved mexico's part in nafta, so the point is to look at what we learned. we have to figure out how to engage and we have to lead the world. , i keep not lead hearing individuals talk about china and we don't what china to and we have to do it smartly. secretary clinton has indicated there are things she wants to do to improve it. the president obama has we keep having the standard scale up and up. if you look at some of the scenarios that we have had

around the world, with job loss, a lot of them were traded agreements come it started in the 70's. i talked to amanda used to work in ohio at a car manufacturing job, he lost his job in the 1970's when plants started to close. that had nothing to do a trade agreements. i don't know if technology makes a difference, too, do we have to figure this out? and -- yes. we want to make sure we are preparing people for the new and high tech jobs. we have work to do. i have confidence that we will get it done. we have had these things before, when america chain from agricultural to manufacturing society. change, i not want to

have all the confidence in the world. we will make this transition, and we will be just fine. democrat in new york, go ahead. hillary made the worst decision in the history of our country by decision to go to war with iraq. that cause the lives of 4500 , when iraq had no weapons of mass destruction. when she called the affair with monica lewinsky a right-wing conspiracy?

benghazi, ation in every stage of her career she made wrong decisions. she is not capable of being president of the united states. everyone has a vote that he or she may want to take back. she said she is now looking back, that she wishes she would have voted the other way. i was one who voted the other way. i know that at the time i voted, i wasn't sure that it was the .ight float -- info i made a vote and i had people on my staff that were both ways. my gut told me the right vote was a vote no and history would tell you whether you voted the right way or not. you either did or didn't.

i think hillary she did what she thought was the right way then it turned out that it was wrong. she was strong enough to say she made the wrong vote, and made -- and moved on. worked with her in new york. i saw how hard she worked, i saw how diligent she worked. meetings,ame toward she was always prepared, she always had suggestions and recommendations on how we could make the state at her. there is no question that she is prepared and ready and will make great decisions for our country. which theyimes in wish they had made a different decision. host: republican, marietta, georgia. caller: good morning.

it pains me to hear you talk about the line on iran. were told that there would be an imminent war with iran. that is not the case. they are not a superpower. it's a disgrace, and what this administration did was fund terrorism. we are in a recession right now. the first quarter of this year was half a point growth, so i really think that maybe there are more problems with the economy then you what you are deluding too. inc. you for your time. group -- they, the we arewas two points, out of the great recession. any economist will tie you that -- will tell you that. clear, 74ce is

consecutive months of job creation. job growth at our and what our growth has been, it is still stronger than any other country on the planet. we are leaving in that regard. are we where we want to be? absolutely not. i believe we need hillary clinton to take us to the next step, that we don't go back to where we were. the policies of the republicans in the past dictate that we will lose because that is what has happened. economy, we bad were going into deficits. nobody has spent more than george bush. we had a balanced budget under bill clinton. it is clear to me that if you want to talk about the economy, all of the evidence shows that you need a democrat at the head. george w. bush's role in

the recession. he said can you do what -- explain what bush did to cause the housing bubble and inflation? we can talk about this, that you appoint and put in charge of the values agencies that we are supposed to overlook all of the scenarios that we had. and be able to discern that there was a bubble coming and do something about it. people important that you put in place with the regulatory agencies. george w. bush was the president at that time. placek a lot of what took , enough blame for everybody to take. the red-p gullet -- the weulatory agencies analyzed, could have avoided some of the problems that we had. host: the congress have oversight of those regulatory agencies? guest: and we did. we had eight years of george w.

bush, and sex of those eight years we had republican majorities. they control the house and the senate for six of those eight years. host: robert, connecticut, democrat. caller: thank you. i want to ask the representative that theu agree clintons do more to her labor than scott walker ever thought thereng and yet you sit and want to support her when bernie sanders does not take one

dime from wall street. host: mr. meeks? guest: you will see barry sanders and hillary clinton and all of the people who support sanders come together. we know that hillary clinton will be better for the economy, labor. if you don't have jobs labor cannot work. she will be better than donald trump. we are on the same team. bernie sanders and hillary clinton, we are on the same team. we understand that. there is a tough battle in 2008. it was one of the toughest races there was a weekend together. this is a tough out. we know that our core principles are the same. those who are supporting bernie sanders, those who support hillary clinton, we will be

together and focused and do the right thing for this country. hillary clinton is the best person to be elected come on america, this is the greatest country in the world. sickest person to be the next president. people make mistakes in life. nobody's life is perfect. justin, republican in akron, ohio. caller: good morning. pleasecould please pacific. i keep you in this same gray

matter from the republican party. are bear -- barriers to african-americans gaining equality. law,ou give me a specific what is it you're talking about that is stopping a black man or woman or anybody from achieving what it is they want to achieve. if you just go to some of our public schools, you will see that. i know there are not the same school system, the dollars that are into the schools that may or may not flow. you look at the criminal justice system. ,here are laws on the books that's why we have to have criminal justice reform. african-americans are disproportionately put into jails, where others whom may have had a similar background in situation are not. today in america, believe

it or not, we could have two people who are similar league -- we madeased upon a lot of improvements. i don't want to take away from the. to think that we are not a -- now a country that race is not matter, we are misleading ourselves. the key is confronting those barriers, discriminatory stillces, the laws are discriminating against people color. that's why we were to try to reform them and try to change them. to me, that's the beauty of the country. you can have something that is we have thet policies in place and the ability of place to change them countrythem and to make

the greatest country this planet has ever seen. had,ers that women have -- what women make in comparison to a white male. we have to change that. it's a barrier and it hurts families. if you look at what an african -- american male makes is less. that's a barrier. we have to change those things. we have the ability to do that. in some countries, the ability would not exist. we have made a lot of progress, but we still have a lot of work to get done. host: steve, a democrat in philadelphia. caller: good morning. i would like to ask mr. meeks a

question. why take the chance on a candidate like hillary clinton, that has all this baggage, and if she goes up against donald trump. excesshas all of this baggage like this morning, i just heard on the news that second to her, secretary of , all the information on his e-mails has disappeared. me, i want somebody who will win the campaign. and i wanted democratic president in there to do a job like the present we have in there now. my question is, don't you think that if she runs against donald trump she is going to be -- what

donald trump did to his primary republican party runner-up, runners, he is doing worse. there is no question in we will talk about who is the best qualified to be president of the united states. everyone will say it is hillary clinton. there is no question that the -- strategy,rategy because they know hillary clinton is the best qualified to be president of the united states. , as mynt about creating colleague kevin mccarthy talked about, benghazi, which they now that hillary clinton was not responsible. this was a way to try to just beat her up and go after her. so that you could try to go after her credibility. confidence in the

american people that they will see through that smokescreen. everything they have attempted to throw up against hillary clinton everything has proven not to be true, whether you talk hours answering questions before the committee on benghazi. a lot of garbage been brought up in proven not to be true. sometimes a they do is they continue to throw it out, the news media continues to report it. i am confident them only get into the one-on-one debates that the american people will see the substance of hillary clinton. the plan of hillary clinton, to break down barriers and to lead .his country she has had relationships with people around the world. with donald trump, all he can do is fling names. -- i don'tthe block

want someone who cannot talk substance who -- to lead the nation and lead me. donald trump is great at doing the donald. if you want someone who has substance to protect the country , and moving on with the great economy. there is only one person that is best equipped with the experience, the ability. only a person. and that's hillary clinton. call fromless forward, texas, republican. s kim how may jobs president obama has created. i don't think obama owns a private business. guest: you look at the jobs that

have been created for the eight numbers.cord months we have created president obama and the private sector has created jobs. it's several million jobs that have been created under president obama as opposed to george w. bush when he left, we were losing 750,000 jobs a month. i would rather take the average of $200,000 -- 200 thousand jobs jobs a than the 750,000 month that we were losing in the bush administration and six of those eight years, republicans were in control of the house and

the senate. i don't want those policies. those policies are not good for america. i would rather have a policy that we are creating jobs and the record speaks for itself. host: congressman, thank you for this morning. when we come back to magazine series continues with a look at m.i.t. technology review story on new technology to fight , aaria, the invention technology that can kill off mosquitoes and they could eradicate america. back after this quick break. on american history tv on c-span3, there has never been a

full public accounting of fbi to operations. this committee has undertaken such an investigation. >> real america, 1975 church committee hearing convened to investigate the activities of the cia, fbi and nsa. the commission questions , detailingtaffers fbi abuses including attempted intimidation of martin luther king junior. you have just 34 days in which to do it. this exact number is being selected for a specific reason, it was 34 days before the award. you are done. >> james adams admits to some of the excesses while defending a number of other cap practices. edited :00 in lectures in

ortory, we may see a death two. they see hundreds. they are the first see the pattern or shift in how people are going out of the world. they are the ones who sound the alarm. steven barry on the role of the corner on how they shed light on the emerging patterns of death within a society and spot attentional threats to public health. sunday evening at 6:30, john kerry who served in the vietnam war and later become -- became a vocal opponent of the war shares his views on vietnam in austin, texas. >> our veterans did not receive the welcome home their the benefits or the treatment that they not only deserved but needed. the fundamental contract between soldiers and government simply was not honored. >> then at 8:00, on the presidency. >> one person watching tv

watched reagan deliver this each , it was dwight eisenhower. he immediately called his former attorney general and said what a fine speech ronald reagan has just delivered. he then called a former special assistant and said what an excellent speech ronald reagan had delivered. back, aisenhower wrote multistate political plan for ronald reagan to follow your it reagan would end up following eisenhower's advice to the letter. >> the author examines eisenhower's behind-the-scenes mentoring of ronald reagan and the pivotal role the former politicalaid in his evolution in the 1960's. for the complete american history tvs schedule to c-span.org. host: we are back with antonio ,egaldo joining us from boston

the extension -- extinction invention and genetic technology that could kill off mosquitoes and could eradicate malaria. is it too risky to overuse is the question he poses. let me begin with just showing malaria by the numbers. these are 2015 numbers. twitter 14 million cases globally, for best 430,000 deaths globally. what is malaria? figurethere's another out there is that malaria has killed more people in the history of humanity than any other disease. singles -- single cell parasite, it is spread by

the female mosquito. spreads the parasite from person to person. it gets into your bloodstream and invades the red blood cells. causesroys them and that the famous symptoms of malaria, fever, sweating and headaches and in children it can cause death. there are drugs to treat it. how is it that mosquito started spreading this that hit has become deadly guest:? way back in time, the parasite probably jumped from ape over to men. sthat happened many of thousands of years ago. it is a natural lifecycle of this parasite. it needs a human host to live and it is spread by mosquitoes. host: why are so many killed in

africa? we have mosquitoes here in the united states, yet we're not fighting malaria here. why is it in tropical africa? mapt: if you look at a heat and the climate that is best for mosquitoes and where people are most,g it -- bits in the that's really where these mosquitoes are most active. but also, these are some of the poorest countries on her. they don't have strong governments, good health systems and the drugs are reaching people. mismanagement of of things that so many people are dying. last year a few countries managed to eradicate malaria including my -- morocco.

it's easier to push back malaria at the edges than it is in the center and africans. the u.s. got rid of merit -- malaria in the middle of the 20th century. his sermons of a problem in africa. host: is it a certain type of mosquito we don't have in the u.s.? guest: there are about 3500 types of mosquitoes in the world, 30 spread malaria. in africa, aroblem group of mostly related mosquitoes are to blame. in india and southeast asia, there are different. in the u.s., we don't have these pieces of mosquito and that's why there's no malaria here. host: you begin your piece for m.i.t. technology review writing, "the price tag for eradicating is expected to be $115 billion over the years.

." host: that brings us to this new technology. guest: the technology that we wrote about is called the gene d ri is inve. idea, it is a way to spread a gene through a population of mosquitoes. scientists working with mice, they can genetically engineer the maestro have it right there in front of them. if you're talking about mosquitoes, how do you change the dna? that's what this invention does, changereads the genetic through reproduction of mosquitoes. it is kind of like out locomotive and pushes through

the mosquito population. are talking people about most are genes that are , potentiallyitoes drive this type of merck -- mosquito to extension. host: a self annihilating mosquito. guest: the biggest funder of this technology is the bill and melinda gates foundation in seattle, the foundation of microsoft launder bill gates. he and his foundation have been funding this technology for a little over 10 years. they have spent about $44 million, which is not a lot from the gates foundation perspective, but it is a lot for technology. is run out of london out of imperial college. it is a big program.

they have concrete plans to release them in africa in the future. host: when could they be released? what are the risks? guest: there are a ton of contingencies, has a technology is only being developed right now. the gates foundation to put foundationbusiness -- a business plan here they are looking at releasing the technology and or by 2029. in africa. in terms of the risk, we are talking that something people have never been able to do before, change the genetics of all species, including eradicating them. the biggest risk is the unknown, it's never been done before. scientists really don't have all the answers, so people who criticize this technology will probably focus on the question of unknowns. what happens when you get rid of the mosquitoes?

are there birds that defend on them -- depend on them for food? a gene that kills mosquitoes, what if it jumps to another species is another concern people have. host: we are taking your questions and comments on this fight against malaria. , in theincludes zika news as well. our guest this antonio regaldo this morning. and, the article .s the extinction, invention you talk about disrupting echo systems. who would have or what country would have the moral or legal authority to do that that would

impact countries around the world? guest: even more about what happens if we get rid of the species of mosquitoes is the question about releasing a technology that was spread moves borders, mosquitoes in that will fly to one country and another. agreement oft the inrybody, especially sub-saharan africa, the biggest country. permission of? peoplethe big issue that will be talking about. the national academies of science is working on a report in washington on gene drives. they may weigh in. really the debate that we have never had before, which is who has the moral authority to eradicate a species on earth? host: is the u.s. or other

companies in the u.s. that are doing the miller work with mosquitoes -- doing similar work with mosquitoes, these other mosquito borne diseases? three or fourre different technologies that are involved in technology, to fight zika and malaria. jean drive is the most radical of them. a company there is testing another genetically modified mosquito, offspring said don't live -- live very long. you have to release millions of , you can the mosquito population. to beompany has applied trying it out in florida. there has been some opposition to that. the government recently put out an opinion that the technology looks safe, so that may go forward as well. host: you had a recent headline

in technology review, mosquitoes are quietly being tested in the united states. that speaks to the diversity of technologies that youout there, as soon as say anything is genetically modify, you people getting worried about it, and a lot more regulations. bacteria, a- and a lot of in six have this parasitic bacteria that just lives inside their cells. it has been added to the tiger it renders them still. because this is not genetic -- genetic engineering per se, it's regulated by the epa as a pesticide. nobody really noticed but that test went ahead. those mosquitoes spread some animal diseases, we don't have

that kind of intensity as thez ika. you also wrote in a different piece for technology review online about this asian tiger mosquito noting that the mosquitoes blamed for an out , 30 epa iswaii regulating it. the u.s. in is this in an effort to move ahead and preparation that zika does reach the united states? ast: bengay fever is also i -- is also a better problem then zika.

then't really know company's motivation for testing the insects in the u.s.. it's an interesting situation in florida. the main opponent is a real estate broker. concern is-- their they don't want these pests happening because it was; i had a disease problem. they think it is bad publicity for florida. let's get to calls. henry in pittsburgh. caller: good morning. why can't we use the technology we used 100 years ago to eliminate malaria in pittsburgh and chicago and that's ddt? a wonder chemical, very

effective at killing mosquitoes, still use in some parts of the world but abandon others. ddt, it builds up in the , we have a problem lots of bald eagles and environmental problems. get the technology that is very effective and yet it is not used everywhere because of these environmental concerns. host: oscar in vienna, virginia. good morning. caller: i'm just wrecked that this gentleman studies with m.i.t. or represents m.i.t.. bookt got the reading the the brothers. it's intriguing how they can infiltrate countries with companies like united --. in africa, these governments have toppled. you can read about it. you can attract

so much attention to mosquito, and yet you can't have a company go in there and help them grow fruit, if you can topple governments why are you dealing with mosquitoes. think about it. i guess i can answer that with a related antidote. bill gates is developing this mosquitoes, that would spread the deaths against -- the self annihilating mosquito. their plan is to put it in africa. they will have to get the african government to agree. in africa on the ground as well as the nonprofit and gao's come a lot of them are opposed to genetic engineering. just this year bill gates. a letter about but analysts -- but about bananas.

there was a huge opposition to this like it was the most evil thing ever. on the ground in africa, there are all caps at different points of view and not all of them are favorable to bill gates, genetically modified mosquitoes or bananas. are -- you write in your piece that officials in the u.s. and elsewhere worried that it might be a little too easy, this technology. the fbi is looking into whether gene drives could be misused to create a designer play. guest: that's what is a little bit scary. this is powered by a new technology called jean at a date -- gen editing. when i visited londone to visit scientists that have done most of the work in

the lab was a 27 euro kit. .e is done ---year-old kid he is in most of the work. that's the power of the technology, and it is a little bit scary and the government is looking into it. the power the individuals now have to reshape the environment through genetic engineering. it is a problem. the technology can be used for good and for bad. how do we control what individuals decide to do with that. right now it is restricted to university labs, students getting their phd's. you could never now. there could be a bad actor somewhere and the risk is the technology could be used for terrorism, for criminal purposes. host: you are right about a disastrous play. what can you put in a mosquito? you could change them

mosquitoes to poison people, someone said. that is never quite happened. imagine you can create a gene drive, you could release the plague if you wanted to on some other countries. the u.s. and most other the bios have signed weapons convention. we don't develop biological weapons. there is nothing to stop an individual from doing it and that is a problem. host: martha in virginia beach, good morning to you. caller: good morning. years ago, i worked in hematology lab. we used to see people that were , they foreign services would come into the hospital

where i were -- worked. i saw a tremendous amount of when youo had malaria did a differential. you could see it. we had a number of patients that had blackwater fever. know whether they still use that term or not. as far as i know, the man did not survive because it was so severe. people may not realize that if you don't have enough hemoglobin in your red cells, you could not support it. people with sickle cell anemia, for instance, if they went there their likelihood of getting malaria is very slim. beach,re in virginia

they are always spring for mosquitoes. i don't know what they are using , but i know we don't have any more fireflies anymore. people wondered about that. they kill off those as well. bees--have very few or butterflies. can you be sure that when you kill off mosquitoes, you do -- you don't kill off the bees? guest: could it spill over to another species? the gene drive is spread by sexual reproduction by the mosquitoes. is not going to spread to baboons. the question as how close a species do you need? i don't think the gene drive was spread from a mosquito thro

bobrow the -- through a mosquito to a bumblebee. that's the main concern. right now it is in the genes of the species. they have to reproduce together. that will happen only between closely related mosquitoes. on the other hand, it is scary to say you were going to release a two nature of this unstoppable the life to eradicate of the mosquito. if it did get loose and affected other forms of life, that would be a serious problem. host: another twitter follower wants to know, please address the potential dangers of upsetting the ecological balances. how long, if you did introduce -- how many ceos would you have to introduce? if you did introduce season two nature how long would it take them to die off?

are kindese questions of unknowns. when i spoke to the scientists, their project and was to start the chain reaction, they would only need four or 500 mosquitoes. that would start it and it would spread amongst mosquitoes. many and how long would it take. the faster a species reproduces, and they do that some 12 times the year, the faster it spreads. for mosquitoes, if you were to release it across an area, you might have a few release point. the estimates i have heard it would fill in the intervening area in one or two years. not very long. new technology could kill

off mosquitoes as a species in an effort to eradicate malaria. bill gates has already spent $44 million on the technology. right in new hampshire, you're next. is if theyconcern release this and africa and the african the use the rivers how will it affect the drinking water, and what is the effect on the human if the mosquitoes by the human, how would that affect us? guest: the change is in the music mosquito dna. it is an added jane. i don't see that it would affect the water supply at all in terms of biting humans, if the mosquito bite you, there is an

exchange of blood. there is no way for the mosquito dna to be taken up. there's no evidence that that would happen. there is no risk to humans directly from these mosquitoes. host: mary from texas. caller: hello. it's really nice to hear something other than politics. the gentleman who said why don't we use ddt? please don't bring that back. my dad used to spray flies right in the house and we sit there and breathe debt. but i have liver problems. i don't know if it caused that. i wanted to say that this type of science is going to be

explored and will eventually be used. i think well will have to have , some of the research is are doing it for the good of humankind. guest: all good points. these new genetic technologies are substitute for chemicals. the beauty of the technology is it is specific to the species, to the dna of the species. that is the absolute power biotechnology. we should encourage the

scientists to develop this kind of activity. it will be a substitute for things that are much more poisonous to the environment. as to whether they will do it in secret it is hard to control the technology. i don't know if they would do it in secret us if they want to pass a law to prohibit the technology, or move to another country. i don't think the u.s. in particular or the united kingdom , who wants to stay ahead of the technician want to ban it. host: could there be a world guest:?g body there is a united nation convention on biological diversity. there is a protocol which the trade and genetically modified organism. i don't think the u.s. is a signatory for this a lot of them are.

host: ramona and georgia, go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. antonio, are you aware that there are other studies about mosquitoes other than your institute? have you heard of professor anthony clements who are before the congress and wrote a paper the myth ofs about them spreading diseases, and the fear factor. where is the money come in? who is paying for this? is it a profit thing or a nonprofit thing? professor climate studied macedo, -- mosquitoes, and his results are totally different. who is pain for.

g is pretty new. is funding this. the u.s. government itself has not been funding the research yet. as far as the fair factor goes, media, arerus, the you saying does the media's turf fears of viruses and diseases? yes and no. yes in order to bring it to people's attention. right now you may not want to travel to latin america because this is spreading.

whether mosquitoes spread disease? these were some of the biggest breakthrough discoveries ever in the history of medicine to understand how these diseases are spread and understand that they are spread by diseases. part of the challenge and deploying the technology like for people who are flicked it -- inflicted in the area, they don't know how to spread. they don't know that standing water is a great buys for misty to -- mosquito eggs. this is an obstacle. i don't know who anthony clements is and if he is saying that mosquito cells are a disease or at if he is, it's not helping. host: denver, colorado. caller: good morning. i am ignorant as to the name of the disease so speak that we had here in colorado and wyoming.

deadly onad by -- is mosquitoes. , dr. a good friend maguire, that died of it. it took 10 or 12 days and you are gone. , i think it unique is just in the midwest area. bite, justquito certain mosquitoes, they spray for mosquitoes here. this man happened to be a golfer. host: have you heard of it? guest: i don't know which disease she is referred to, it could be west nile virus. what is interesting is that

there are a number of diseases in the u.s., including lyme disease, which is a big problem here in the northeast that could gene drives.by ,n the u.s., this technology potentially getting rid of them could be ideal for dealing with things like lyme disease. mentioned things like ina, they know milk banks an article says this.

edward, maryland, good morning. curious about the -- and mosquito, plans an event of a total annihilation on a specie killer, that you can reintroduce that species back into the environment? guest: good question. and there is. it's an open question about whether this technology would extinguish the species completely, or remain in pockets in nature. you can take some of these mosquitoes and maintain them about lab. you would go to try to treat the -- withn malaria malaria and one set was cleared up there would be no human

reservoir. you could put them back into nature after that. you could restore things to the way they were. host: brendan in maryland. caller: thank you. i'm curious about some of the , like the teske determined, how certain things were tried on the population companies anybody talking about the ethical problems of dealing s?th this caller western scientists will say use his technology, it will help you. we don't know exactly what will happen. the bill and melinda gates

foundation, they have a ground game already, that it gets to villages and governments in africa. to build aying consensus to uses technology in the future. then they will transfer the technology to african labs. they want to train african scientists to work with the , to develop the technology further, so they can make the decision themselves about whether to use it. host: washington, susan, good morning. caller: i have a very simple question for the doctor. would he prefer that this be done? thinge feel it is a good or a dangerous thing to do? as a journalist, i will refrain from giving you my

opinion as to whether it is a good or bad thing. it's very interesting pair host: host: there's a little bit of a concern-- caller: what was stop somebody , likedding a human genome a terminator seed where it could work with and humans? the bill and melinda gates foundation, it does work in eugenics or population control. my question is this, do you see any issues with adding a gene to a mosquito where it could be used to work the same magic? guest: the underlying technology which is called gene editing that does its magic and mosquitoes, it also can be used to change the dna of a human

embryo and a -- fish. they boarded tried it. in your family you have an inherited disease, you could try to change the dna of the embryos so they wouldn't have a, huntington's, cystic fibrosis. that's a whole different debate. the question is are we going to engineer humanity? as far as the spreading thing goes, the gene drive, that is not going to be a big worry and human just like it won't be a big worry and blue whales because we were reduced to slowly. too slowly. it will take millions of years for it to spread. and by then we will be able to undo that technology. dan on twitter at sign know about the possibility of the genes changing the house through replication errors. mutations occur over time

. the genes could change. for scientists, the worry is mostly that three mutations their gene drive will stop working. the mosquitoes want to live. evolution is still happening. if you let loose one of these gene drive, if even one mosquito shows up that is resistant, that mosquito will survive and soon its dna will replace all of the other mosquitoes dna and the mosquitoes were combat. is that thecern mutations will make the gene drive not work. more questions i could it mutate into something we did not intend ? it's possible. i have not heard that possibility laid out yet. host: conway missouri, make it quick. is ebola nine spread by

mosquitoes? guest: no i don't think so. it spread between bodily people --bodily fluids by people. host: we know that greenhouse gases when vaccines for us? guest: next scenes. the bill and melinda gates foundation has spent a lot of money on a vaccine for malaria, but it's quite hard to do. to develop aard vaccine that works. at this point, that foundation, the gene drive technology has happened before a vaccine becomes available. the extinction invention in case you want to check it out. gates is behind this new technology, spending $44 million so far and you can find it

online. thank you for your time this morning. that does it for today's opening -- "washington journal." enjoy your wednesday. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.] the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's room, washington, d.c., may 11, 2016. i hereby appoint the honorable jeff fortenberry to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, paul d. ryan, speaker of the house of representatives.