racialz will discuss discrimination and whether people think the u.s. will receive racial equality in the future. ."w, "washington journal ♪ u.s. capitol complex has 40 much quieted down heading into the fourth of july weekend. there was news coming out of capitol hill, including paul ryan, the speaker, who says there will be a vote on gun legislation and sweet, specifically as part of a broader counterterrorism package are and we will take a vote to prevent suspected terrorists from buying guns. that is next week. also, puerto rico, structuring its debt.

the bill has been signed by the president. we are also reading that donald trump will head to capitol hill to meet with gop leaders. lots to talk about this friday morning, including a warning by the cia director, john brennan, of an instanbul-type attack in the knot -- of an i here in the attack u.s. if you are a democrat, call (202) 748-8000, republicans, independents,, an (202) 748-8002. .ur twitter handle is @cspanwj weekbrennan, was out this -- this is the headline

is a warning for americans. yahoo! writes at least 41 people, and that number has been rising and moving. they warn that the islamic terrorists want to commit similar attacks in the united states. here is a little bit more of what he had to say. [video clip] >> we have seen isil carryout and insight an array of terror in the region directly and indirectly. isilld be surprised that is not considering tearing -- carrying out these attacks near abroad and far abroad. they're trying to destroy with

this poison as soon as possible, so it would be surprising to me that isil is not trying to hit us both in the region as in our homeland. i think you see, and the propagation of their materials -- the magazines, the beat that. want individuals to do it. 70 but here believes the u.s. homeland is hermetically sealed dashe or isil -- would not attack us, i would disagree with that. >> you think we are more hermetically sealed van before 9/11? brennan: i do. we learned pay phone -- we

learned painful lessons of the result of 9/11. we are working better today than ever before. there is a tremendous volume of information and data that is out there. some of it is accurate. trying to make sense of it all and put the pieces together is challenging. i think we are less vulnerable to penetration -- physical -- but as we have seen with, as i mentioned the internet and isil taking advantage of technology that allows them to community in a very serious fashion has certainly worsened. host: that was john brennan earlier this week. you can watch the entire event at c-span.org. a follow-up came from the dhs chief, jeh johnson, who said airports are setting up security over the holiday weekend, as you can imagine. we will hear from the secretary in a couple of minutes the mobile gym is on the line now from spokane, washington -- mi

is on the line now from spokane, washington. caller: thanks to c-span for having me on. i think he is misleading america, to be privately honest with you. host: how so? caller: well, there are a lot of problems going on with isil in syria, and there are allegations i the russians that smuggleas helping isil oil and other artifacts out of the middle east. know, thehs ago, you russians, they were doing some reconnaissance visions in syria, turkish shot the the jet out of the sky. i noticed that right after the turkish government apologized to the russians for his action.

these attacks occurred, and there has been a direct attack in turkey. i do not see the cia director mentioning any of this. host: ok. someone saying there is a connection between whose back between uzbek and care just stand -- between whose back is dan and care to stand -- host: they go on to say that through the years, "this is the that they have" provided a fertile breeding

ground for the islamic state, also called isis or isil. rebel fighters in syria have reported that the best snipers and the islamic state special the islamic state is at risk of losing a strategic position. art of the write up in the "new york times" today. john, froml from mississippi. go ahead, john. guest: what we are doing is being -- caller: what we're doing is being way too current, we are not looking at the history. we are fighting people that are angry because of actions in the past. if we stop killing people, then they stop trying to counter attack us. it is a progression.

and they believe that when we move the sea bottom their home thenries, refugee wise, what you do is you have the modulation of cultures, which are easier to -- the homogenization of coulters, which are easier to control by the multinational corporations. we need to return the locks to the hands of the people. capitalism is not democracy. we have entire corporations trying to control everything on the planet, and it has just gotten way too out of hand. corporations need to serve democracy, democracy nice we brought back to the people, and america and the american people and all humanity. thank you very much. host: thanks for calling. mike is on the phone from cleveland. caller: good morning. i concur with the last fellow. lives to congress right of front of god and

everybody. i do not know about you, but i don't feel a whole lot safer. fear-pedalingthis thing is good financially, but i ant from a two police town to 100 police town. host: mike, you said you do not feel safer. have you done anything different? caller: i just quit flying altogether. i would not get on a commercial plane for love or money just on account of the morons at the gate. host: do you think you will ever get back up on th in the sky? caller: not as long as we are playing gustapo. host: ruben is on the line. hey, ruben. around to all these different countries,

destabilize them, look at what syria,tabilize -- libya, back in iraq -- you created isi l. isil was created by you. you find it them, you recruited them, you paid them. on, man. -- come one,, man. stop deceiving the people. you are deceiving the people, brussels, paris, look at what happened in turkey. that is blowback. chickens coming home to roost. host: moving on to steve. are you there? steve is in indianapolis, democratic caller. to c-span.nks everyone so far has made a lot of good points, and i think the terrorists are winning when brennan gets on their industry -- whening a warning

brennan gets on there and is pretty much making a warning. a lot of callers have made a lot of good points about things that of ite done, and a lot i is our own response body, but -- kind terrorists have won our own responsibility, but the terrorists have won if brennan is on like that. airport, train stations or anywhere -- host: steve, what is your idea of vigilance? what does it look like? all we as individuals, can do -- i mean, i do not know, you cannot really -- you just try to keep your eyes open and do the best you can as an individual, but for most of the government, they bear most of the responsibility. they have to upgrade their\ intelligence into the best they

can in that regard. individuals, i mean, we can only do what we can do as far as keeping our eyes open, racial profiling is one thing, but it is hard to do that. you just have to do the best you our governmentk there's a lot of responsibility and the intelligence factor going forward. steve, thanks for calling. here is the headline from the story --, "the hill" airports are stepping up security over the holiday weekend ahead of travel season. they write -- u.s. airports can excite to see a stepped-up security presence days after suicide bombings killed 42 isple at turkey's i ataturk- istanbul

airport. here is a little more from the secretary talking about measures being taken not just that airports but beyond airports. [video clip] c. johnson: in general, my caution is that when it comes to public places and public events, we should not focus our attention on things like airports to the exclusion of other public places and public events. as we said in our national terrorism system advisory bulletin issued just about two weeks ago, we are concerned and on publicnerally events and public places across the nation, and in general, we continue to encourage the public , toravel, to associate celebrate the holiday, to holiday, the july 4 continue to go to public events, but be aware and be vigilant. public awareness and public vigilance can and does make a

difference in terms of detecting possible terrorist plots, terrorist activity. and: more of your comments, again you can watch the whole briefing, the whole hearing at c-span.org. yawn, nothing- we can do about it. i worry about the government manipulation on our daily lives by keeping us frightened. erik -- we are not immune from the actions of fanatics, and i will not live in fear of the day when fanatics go on rampage. is the placecspan to post those comments. we go back to the phones. philip, huntington, west virginia. thanks for waiting, philip. i need to let the world know that this is a spiritual war between good and evil. to beluminati wants there

a one world order. there are evil entities out here in this world that people do not want to believe. god states it plainly all throughout the bible. people need to wake up and see what is right in front of them. and gene is calling from houston, texas. what you make about the cia directors warning. ? caller: i believe that the way things are going, is going to happen again. my personal opinion is what i think we need to do is load up , take them up,

load them out, and that would stop isis. but it is all internet, everything is internet. we had a situation yesterday here in houston where they caught a guy on the internet with child porn. if they would not allow all of that on the internet, then how would these people find them and worship or whatever? i mean, i am a christian, but i just do not understand their reality as far as, you know, they will die, the three bombers anbul, i mean, ist they blew themselves up. host: you said we all know why this is happening. tell us why, in your view. caller: my view is, it is like the gentleman said before, it is theyigious war, and believe one way, and they think everybody should believe their way.

is allt saying it muslims, but there is a select few. i mean, it is in there -- i koran,it is called the where they want to kill the infidel. i hate to tell everybody, but hey, the americans are the infidel. if you're not with them, you are with the infidel. so why are they coming? they're coming to kill us. but being observant and watching things going on around you, that is all in time, but what if it is your next-door neighbor, you know, that does that. ? he may do that to you. he may walk into to your yard and shoot you or cut your head off, i do not know. mightyou said the trick be to send 100,000 u.s. troops over there and wipe them out, as you put it. do you think there is support here in washington and in the public to send the amount of troops out there? caller: i believe the public is, and i believe a lot the congressman believe it on the republican side. the democrats do not believe --

they never have believed in war, ok, in our whole history. but you know, war has to be. it is in our nature. we have been to war our whole life. but that is the only way we're going to be able to stop this problem. we cannot wait for them to come to us. we are going to have to go to them. host: one more question before we move on. big election year this year. does this issue of terrorism link in your mind in terms of the issues that you will be voting on? caller: well, i believe that terrorism should be number two in our voting rights because number one should be our economy because that is what makes us move in the united states, but to me, terrorism should be right up there, right on top of the list on what we need to do and when we need to do it. we cannot wait any longer. i mean, we have waited enough. took down --, they

look, you people they killed at the world trade center. i mean, come on. what does it take? "we will never forget." i understand it will never forget, but we need to do something about it. i am 69 years old. if they called me and asked me hey, will you fight isis, hey, come get it. i will go really well. host: gene, thank you for calling. we want to remind you that president obama has visited the site of the attack in turkey. he says terrorists are losing ground. he spoke earlier this week and of course condemned the attack in istanbul, suggesting that isis was responsible and pledging that the terror group would ultimately be defeated. but he said that they are losing ground, beyond killing are taking over come of this from the president,

they will be defeated in syria, in iraq, they are going to be on the run wherever they hide. that is from "usa today." next call from the district of columbia, independent caller. caller: good morning for all of the listeners. host: good morning. i believe 100% that the united states system has the wrong driver. cia -- i amson, the muslim, and in 2005, they designated me as a terrorist. the last five years, i am fighting for the judgment in this country. only one -- that opportunity, the united states, russia,

completely wrong in the middle east. they are running away. but the system of the united states is making me sick. in my life, family life, and everything, not giving the best opportunities to do something unless they go to the other side of russia. to go to thehere pressure because the system does not make up their own mind the last years. thank you very much. host: thanks for calling. randy calling from clearwater, florida now. republican. hey, randy. caller: yes, hello. host: good morning. noter: yes, i agree with the last caller but the one before him.

and this goes back to when we whenin the early 1800 was we were trying to do trade with took our people , and it hasthem gone on to the president, you not acertain muslims, billion muslims, you know, the and,als and the persians um, you know, to this day, so, um, and every time the president, uh, talks, you know,

he -- he, you know, says, you know, everything has gone better uh, hihs,ut, uh -- cia, uh, andn, the theysa, every hearing, uh, say just the opposite, and the generals and the armies. host: randy, that being said, how concerned are you, if at all, about an istanbul-type attack here in the u.s.? caller: well, in all 50 states, uh, in all, there's investigations for, uh, attacks being planned. um.

and also back to the president, hisyou know, with 65-country coalition, uh, you know, how many years does it know,o wipe out, you 50,000 or more? they just keep spreading. host: randy, thank you for calling. twitter, of the cia chief, he needs to retire. these are the secret police of the usa, and they cannot find any terrorists, yet they know an attack is coming? steve is calling on the democratic line. philadelphia will be very busy for this fourth of july weekend. do you have any concern about what the cia director does? think we are pretty

much covered by the fbi and security. i am not going to be coming you , you know, bullied by any kind of stress. my normal to lead life. i do have a few comments about one caller that called about democrats don't want wars. let's just remind you, fdr, world war ii, and truman, beating the japanese, the germans. and our president, president laden that killed bin secretly while he was making a speech. the thing about our president is quietly ands

, and when he stick does something, he does not tell the whole world. leaders, taliban leaders, big ones, little ones, a very quiet, covert war. you do not want to send 100,000 troops there. we try that in iraq, and it did not work. host: thank you for calling, steve. edwin writes, the awareness of key torroundings is the your safety. the director warning of possible attacks raises the fear level of the people. former presidential candidate, the headline here in the "washington times," says he confronted jeh johnson on the , andce of islam, the term

the reports. here's a look at the exchange in the hearing between secretary johnson and senator cruz over -called scrubs references to the term islamic terrorism. sec. johnson: this is very interesting and makes for good debate, but in practical terms, and our efforts here in the homeland start giving the islamic state the credence that won, to be referred to as part of islam or some form of islam, we will get nowhere in our efforts to build bridges with muslim communities, which we need to do in this current environment right now that includes homegrown violent extremists. they all tell me -- sen. cruz: my time is limited. hold on just a second, please -- sec. johnson: hold on, please. they all tell me --

times.uz: you have other my question was if you are aware that the information has been scrubbed. your testimony is that you have no idea and have no intention of finding out whether these dhs materials have been scrubbed, and you suggested just a moment essentially a semantic difference. i do not believe it is a semantic difference that when you a race references to radical jihad, it impacts the behavior of law enforcement and national security to respond to red flags and prevent terrorist attacks before they occur. hill, anderday on the there is the story on thehill.com. muslims from the tsa, this happened at an event in new hampshire recently, push the presumptive nominee to prevent muslims from working security.

the question is -- why are we putting our military retirees on the border in the tsa, the audience members said. hibijabies they wear on their head, she said, referring to hijabs. donald trump said, "we are looking at that." we have chris on the line, republican line, pennsylvania. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i was calling about a couple of commenters that i wanted to talk about. i agree with ted cruz. we have to say "radical islamic terrorism," and there was a muslim caller who called, and he is upset that he feels like he is getting treated badly, um,

but, you know, muslims are causing problems, um, and if we that, then itress is going to be bad for everyone. treating anyone unfairly. it is doing what is right for humanity. -- they are killing people -- host: host you say you say it needs to be addressed. how do we address it? caller: for one thing, obama does not say "radical islamic terrorism." i wantednal thing to talk about was the guy who talked about chickens coming home to roost. there is some truth to what he is saying, but also, what is the point? at the end of the day, are you siding with the terrorists? like, he doesn't think anything through. i wanted to say that that is --

these are people in this country who have these feelings. the guy who called on the democrat line, and he is for the terrorists. host: all right, that was chris. we have tony now from pittsburgh, pennsylvania, republican line. good morning, tony. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. host: you bet. thank you. caller: i am calling to say to the world like obama says to the world, obama needs to stand up for americans. obama needs to stop telling the world that americans are stupid. when he goes up and tells the that his hot dog in the doj does not know where the terrorist's wife is -- that is a sign of an confidence on the dod side.

-- of incompetence on the dod side. now they want to tell us that the dod met with bill clinton and they only talked about their grandkids. this is another way of showing us americans and the world that .e are so stupid when the president of america thinks we are stupid, what do you think the outside world thinks of us? they are laughing at us. host: thanks for that call your will get that story in just a moment. a couple of facebook comments -- "not a matter of if but when." john says run for the hills. dana thinks the warnings are vague. mike says obama says isis was contained. felisha says just "live your life." chip is calling in.

good morning, chip. caller: i am an active duty service member. i am an atheist. we christians in america -- i say "we" because we identify as christians -- forget that our religion is very violent itself, too. interpretation of the bible is more or less the westboro baptist church. we have dealt with terrorism since i can remember. i am only 24 years old your it i was in fourth grade when 9/11 happened. for someone to say let's send 100,000 troops over there, we will take them out, not knowing the rules of engagement that our servicemembers have to go by. it is more or less we are a police force in afghanistan or anywhere else. we are just there, and if they fire on us, then we can return fire. it is very easy for someone to

say, "send troops over there." they are not the ones who are going to do it. the muslim religion itself is very peaceful. we have all sorts of information, and people choose not to read on it. it is all, "muslims, they are all bad." did ahe catholics hundred years go or what goes on to this day in christianity and what the bible really says -- it war.holy that is what it is over, religion, this and that, and no one is ever going to come here and take away anything that we have. unlawful combatants will turn into lawful combatants workers and people know. do not knowot -- i what to do. it is a very complex issue, but i do not think sending 100,000 troops over there to solve the problem is going to do anything. you just got to live your life and hope for the best i guess, but war, i truly believe, is not

the answer. you are just giving them what they want. host: the voice of chip there, in maryland, active duty. the editorial page says a decade and a half after the 9/11 hijacking, with jetliners far more secure, they now attack airports and said. learning from each attack is essential. adding more armed police of the doors of major u.s. airports is smart. ataturk, the airport in istanbul ofad moved the first line security to the front doors, and the roving security guards likely incurred greater carnage. not wasting money on "security theater," as they put it. at o'hare, 300 aviation police patrolled the airport unarmed.

not every soft target can be protected, of course, particularly from suicidal terrorists who are not even looking for escape routes. the best defense remains a good offense according to "usa today 's" editorial page today. paul, new fairfield, connecticut, democratic caller. caller: hi. thanks for c-span. i agree with chip, the independent who was just on, that engaging military action is only going to give the islamists exactly what they want, which is a clash of civilization. we should not fall into that war. however, this is a it is a war of ideas, and that war is not being waged. this affects the entire world. it is not just about the united that thisd so i think is something that should be taken up by the united nations,

and what we need to do is to basically help the islamic world to reform their religion and support those moderates and pluralistse who are within the islamic states so that we can defeat the elements that is trying to hurt us and purge them, essentially, from the faith. host: what do you think the chances are of the united nations actually getting involved to that extent? what do you think? is it something that is reasonable? caller: i tried to be an optimist. you know, i am hopeful. at some point, who knows how many more mistakes we will make in terms of our trying to deal

with this problem, but eventually, i think people will come to the realization that this is a war of ideas, and we that war. i have read some other people who have made the comment that islam is a young religion. funnyms like kind of a thing to say, but to a certain extent, their point is the reforms that other religions, which are older, have gone through, islam still needs that to occur. host: ok, thank you for calling. more of your voices and a couple of minutes. other news out there, roll call and elsewhere, news from the hill last night at the house is planning a vote on guns next week. there is a bill going to the rules committee on tuesday. we think this might come up on wednesday as part of a larger counterterrorism package that will include a provision that prevents suspected

terrorists from buying guns. they will also vote on a mental health bill sponsored by pennsylvania congressman tim murphy. they remind us that ryan's decision comes a week after the democrats disrupted house activities, nearly 26 hours, sitting in, demanding action on gun control. even though this vote is going to happen, we are reading and other places that this alone will not satisfy the democrats. the story is far from over. despite any vote that will happen next week. anotherton post" -- military ban has been lifted. secretary ash carter told us that the military ban on transgendered people is ending. a year-long process that was bob's down by internal conflict bogged down by internal conflict and concerns

among senior service officials. here is more from "washington post" -- the president signing a bill to help the economy of puerto rico. here is the president at the bill signing. willsland leader saying it still defaults, however, on $1 billion of debt payment, but the larger bill is designed to help restructure a staggering debt burden. "new york times" follows up on this -- the new puerto rico debt relief bill is stirring colonial resentment, the idea being that there is a governing board that is going to be put in place to look over the affairs of the island. so they are using the word "colonialism." thisington times" and headline -- gop calls for loretta lynch to exit the clinton query. an earlier caller mentioned this. republicans are stepping up their calls for the attorney general to recuse herself after lynch admitted to meeting

earlier this week with former president bill clinton at the phoenix airport. she insisted the meeting was impromptu, touched on personal issues, not into the clinton'se on hillary e-mails. they are saying she is incapable of overseeing this investigation. chris has been hanging on in hannover, maryland, independent caller. caller: good morning. i had first seen the cia director had suggested that there was going to be an attack here, i thought that the least of the information was possibly good insight and attack. someone, a lone wolf, could go out, have an attack, and in isis could stake claim for it.

so i think that was just kind of irresponsible to say that. host: what is the flipside it the administration did not say anything? for lack of a better time, could there be complacency among people in the country? .aller: no, not necessarily the fire is burning so high already. people are already aware. we hear about this every day in the news, but when you hear that there is going to be an attack, , youst seems to me that know, if you have someone at home there was ready to do something, this is the perfect time, i will get the really good national headlines or i do something -- host: chris, there was a gentleman earlier who said he does not find more because of this. have you changed anything in your life? caller: no, i think that this

another thing. if people change their lifestyle, also, it is making people want to give up freedom. as years have gone on, we have given them more and more freedom. still are not able to get and like when they were investigating the black panther party, we can label anyone as terrorism, but as far as having on the information .here another caller talked about the u.n. getting involved. i think that may be something we could visit, someone who can be kind of in the middle of this because we can be kind of highest in the states against our own ideas and what we want

and what the powers to be want, so maybe it would be nice to have someone kind of mediate and .ry to figure out another way involved,et the u.n. they would get muslims to change themselves and their religion. is that realistic? think that will happen because we have to change our religion to because christianity has its faults, too, and we kind of her get that. christianity is the leading religion, but this country has gone through slavery, reconstruction, civil rights, gone through having problems with gays, so many different things in the states. it is hard. we cannot sit here. we have to be objective about ourselves and we have to bring up our faults if we're going to criticized islam people and what

they do. i think that is the problem. we do not say enough of what is going on in the states with us. last -- we just blast on what islam does wrong. host: thank you. jackie is calling from philadelphia. the republican line. caller: i was just listening to that man and i think healthy fear is a good thing. i have a muslim friend. i love this person very much, very kind to me. i also, if i see something, i say something. discuss talk, i do not and i am for donald trump, this person is definitely not for donald trump. see that this person wants to talk about world affairs and i will not do it. i am afraid. i am afraid, but i am keeping my eyes open and i think it is

important to have healthy fear, and i think donald trump is right. wanting tohristians kill people, i never heard that. thanks. last call, sand or in massachusetts, independent. that last caller said a healthy fear is a good thing. you agree? -- do you agree? caller: there's nothing to fear but fear itself. if you let it go and do let it go, and it gets bigger. do not fear it. go with it. do not be afraid. this country, that is what they want, they want you attacking each other. us attackingant other states or anything else. they want us to be fold and to go after each other -- they want us to be fooled and go after each other. they're not stupid. they're playing the game and the

game is, you will be afraid, afraid, afraid. no way, jose. host: that was the voice of sandra. thanks their comments. the first 45 minutes of the friday edition of "washington journal." we will bring up our first guest of the day, tom gjelten, the veteran correspondent for national public radio and he joins us to talk about his book called "a nation of nations: a great american immigration story ." , former, ken blackwell elected official of the state of ohio. he would join us to talk about donald trump's outreach to evangelical leaders. we will be right back. ♪ >> this fourth of july weekend,

look tv has four days of nonfiction books and authors on c-span2. today starting at 9:30 a.m. eastern, book tv features barbara boxer, discussing a political career. former pro basketball player weighs in on current political issues. and senate majority leader mitch mcconnell on his life and politics. 10:00 p.m. eastern on afterwards, science writer discusses her book "rise of the rocket girls: the women who propelled us from missiles to the moon to mars," in which she chronicles women and the contributions to rocket design, spacex portion and the first american satellite. she is interviewed by lisa brand. >> in the beginning, they did a lot of trajectories, said the calculated the potential of different rocket propellants and they did trajectories are many of the early missiles.

they worked on the corporal, the sergeant, and then things changed. things changed when the space race happened and nasa was formed. and then their roles begin changing and it became the last computer programmers and they had these incredibly long nasa, 40 years or 50 years, one of them still works at nasa today. >> in-depth is live this sunday with sebastian younger, and he will take your calls, text and e-mail questions from noon until 3:00 p.m. eastern, discussing his latest book "tribe: on homecoming and belonging." "war,"lso the author of "the perfect storm," and "fire." on cue and day, mark green. author of "bright, infinite future: a generational memoir on the progress of price."

on monday at 2:30 p.m. eastern, davidian shes harsh collection, the largest african-american literary collection in the midwest, housed at the chicago public library woodson regional branch. for the complete schedule, go to bootvktv.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: you have heard the voice for many years on national public radio. here is the face, tom gjelten, the correspondent who authored the book titled "a nation of nations: a great american immigration story." good morning and thank you. guest: good to be here. host: what is the book about? isst: the hook for the book the 50th anniversary of the 1965 immigration act. this past october, 1965, so it just that the 50th anniversary. i argued that this is many ways the most important law passed in the 20th century with respect to

the character of america because it fundamentally changed the profile in, ethnic the country. up until 1965, immigrants were largely limited to the limit -- to the european countries. 1960 five immigration act open american stores to immigrants of color from all over the world. in the last 50 years, the immigrants that have come to the country are not coming from -- nine out of 10 are coming from outside europe, so it changed the face of america. the book is about what that has meant that the country and what does it mean to be american? who are the people? todd they change the country? and have they been changed while coming here? host: forward the needs for the new law -- what were the needs for the what were people hoping for when the law passed? this: that the thing is

was in the midst of the civil rights movement. there had been an awareness in the country that our immigration policy was to discriminatory. it favored white people, people from europe and this had bothered a lot of legislators over the years, but it was only with thed-1960's and fever of the civil rights movement, when there was a real movement to end discrimination, it was only then that there was really a consensus that it was time to change it. host: let's put the phone numbers on the bottom of the screen for our guest tom gjelten who has written a book called "a nation of nations." the numbers on the screen, democratic, republican and independent and a fourth line for recent immigrants. i will read that number, (202)-748-8003. we would like to hear from you. thebook itself, a lot of focus is on the community that is not far from here.

tell us about this community and light decided to focus on it. county inis fairfax northern virginia, not far from here. i have to be honest and say one reason i focused on fairfax county is because it was convenient for me to spend a lot of time there because it is close to home. apart from that, it is remarkable. in 1970, at percent of the population was quite and about 9.5% african-american and 0.5% people from other countries. over the next 30 years or 40 years, that changed. -- three out of 10 people in fairfax county were born out of the united states, so this county was transformed by immigration. it was also a county going through desegregation, urbanization, so these really dramatic social changes were taking place there, so it is really a perfect place to look at how immigration has really

changed this country. host: is there a specific story from the community that struck you must? guest: i profiled the family from libya, olivia -- bolivia, south korea and el salvador. when i really looked for in each of these stories was what did it mean for them to be american? what had america come to mean for them? it is interesting because they had four different answers. the family from libya, i who only inm and the united states sort of discovered his isl. he came from a muslim country, but it was the religious freedom in this country that provided support for him to sort of explore his faith. i thought that was really interesting. , foroman from el salvador her, it's security. she came from a violent country.

the family from bolivia was economic opportunity, and the family from korea, political ideology, the democracy democratic values america represented three each of the families, i zeroed in on what america meant to them and i found that interesting and inspiring. in 1965,k to the law he said the legislation has forced americans to reconsider what it means to be american. how has that mindset changed? guest: i think that up until 1965, we sort of confused the idea of the american identity with a white european identity. that is no longer feasible. we are graphically -- we are rapidly approaching the point where more than half of americans of the nonwhites, so we have had to to find the idea and look at america more in terms of the values the country represents, ideology of americanness, and i think it is

forcing us to take a more broad view. we are forced to attach our thes from the country about racial, cultural and ethnic heritage that characterized the for 200 years. host: here is a map from germany, italy and mexico. you can see ireland dominating the eastern part of the country back then, and germans settled largely in the middle part of the country, mexico and what became california. you mentioned a couple of other countries of people who have come here. where else are the present date immigrants coming from? how many and why are the coming? guest: they're coming from asia. the percentage of immigrants from asia has exploded. more immigrants are coming from asian countries than from latin

american countries, which is sort of reversed in profile. we have seen a lot of immigrants coming from africa. immigrants coming from the middle east, muslim countries, all sources of new immigration. visas that the allowed you to come here as an immigrant really given predominantly to people who were in european countries. for example, each country nation was allocated 100 b says a year. whereas, germany had 10,000 pieces set aside. set aside.isas this enabled us growth of immigration from africa, asia and the middle east. in contexthis present day. we have legislation that cannot get past, a presidential campaign in which immigration is at the top of the loudness of many voices. put it in context related to

present-day conditions and where the country is headed. right now, about 14%, one out of seven americans, born outside of the country. in 1965, it was only 4%, so this is a different country than it was years ago. this is something americans have been forced to accept. i think this has created anxiety, tension, more competition for jobs, so the whole issue of immigration is seen differently than 50 years ago because it is much more of a reality. it was easy enough to be generous 10 newcomers when only 4% of americans are born outside of the country. now that it is three times are four times that much, it is more challenging time. host: lynn has been waiting in new york, independent caller. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call and

for driving the show. that in mye to say profession, i worked for southwest in the 1980's -- i don't know if you can hear me. host: we continue just fine. caller: good. anyway, i left southwest and came back to my northeastern hometown where my family was in the late 1980's. recently i said to my friends down here, how are things going? you really loved working down here when you worked here, but you would not want to work now. insaid, the immigrants come with a lot of medical conditions and disease and we immediately take care of them. from ake the bed senior, said the person knew us lived in the country whole time may not get the caregiving needs

because rick taking care of people to just come across from different countries and cap because we are taking care of people to just come across from different countries. there given medicaid. when my parents immigrated here back in the early 1900s, they came here, they worked, and they had to be allowed with a certain criteria of health, probably financial support. i do know that my family actually helped house incoming immigrants who were cleared to an assignment and had money, had health concerns cleared, and divided support that them so they were able to stand on their own two feet and our country with a job and continue grow in their own and their journey of independence here. as well as understanding and knowing the english language. all of that has changed. we are letting so many people come here who do not have to follow rules.

what do we have? a melting pot of people who come over and use the system. people are not trying to retire and the pie is getting smaller and smaller and it is not fair or rights. i do not believe anybody should be able to come here and get anything until they put -- until they are put in the system for five years or 10 years. host: thanks. tom gjelten? has a point, lynn a that immigrants do claim disproportionate share of welfare benefits. they're more likely to be receiving welfare benefits. however, that is only true in the first sort of phase of their life in this country. if you look at the point after they become integrated into society and assimilate in the take lesshey actually

than their share of welfare benefits. it is true that in the first few years that they are here they have problems with poverty, health and housing and all these things, and they do need a lot of assistance, but they do not remain in that dependent mode indefinitely. they actually are able to gain independence. one of the things about emigrating is that it is a self collecting process. it is the people most willing to take risks, who leave their country. it is very hard to leave your country. the idea is you are going to take a risk in leaving a risk in leaving the country with the reward.ion of a future it seeks out the most experiments of people, often the most adventurous or innovative. thosea couple of years, attributes exercised themselves and people get successful in this country. says is true in the short-term term but not

necessarily true in the medium and long term. host: john in florida. good morning. caller: i have to disagree with what you just said. this whole idea of comparing immigration of 100 years ago to today is erroneous. 12 million people came tell assignment from -- came to ellis island to the early 1950's. 12 million was [indiscernible] you have to make that distinction. when you talk about immigrants, i always hear that word, we are all a nation of immigrants. we are not a nation of illegal immigrants. we do not have the welfare stamp five years ago, as this woman who just called pointed out. when you talk about how the nation's changing, why do i still have to listen to press one for english and press two or spanish? and then you go on to talk about we are going to become a nation

of colored. if i go to the each and i get a tan, does that make me a person of color? martin luther king, we don't even remember what he said. buyer we judging -- why are we judging the pigmentation of their skin inside of the character that they have inside them? that is what makes the american dream, if you believe in independence and the individual. there is no melting pot. i do not see anyone and washes the spanish people -- and why should the spanish people become part of us? host: tom gjelten? guest: let's just take the last quotes, why should spanish people become part of us? that theshington said bassam of america is open to receive not only the respectable

and opulent stranger but all nations and religions. this is the idea of america from the beginning. it was not put into practice for many years, but this has always been the idea of america. not just the country for people of one race or people of one language. immigrantss that from non-english speaking countries have always come here speaking other languages. it has always taken a long time to learn english, and it is often the second generation that becomes fluent in english. there is nothing new about the fact that immigrants have trouble speaking english. my own grandparents came here. my grandfather was 19 years old when he came to the country and did not speak english. it was years before he became fluent. you have these ethnic communities that are in the cities, little italy, chinatown, etc. if you went to those communities, hollywood here is

that foreign language, so there is nothing new about the fact that immigrants speak other languages. the greatness of america is that over time, we have always managed to emigrate people from different backgrounds. now they are coming from even backgrounds, and they are coming from nonwhite countries. it is part of america's mission in the world, to integrate people from different backgrounds. host: our guest tom gjelten has been with npr since 1982 and covers issues of religion and faith. and hases of belief authored several books. here is a tweet -- ahead of the 9 -- how did the 1965 immigration law affect african-american employment then and now? guest: that was vigorously debated in the 1960's and it is still debated. there was a lot of concern in the african-american community about the impact of immigrants

on particularly those workers at the lower end of the wage and education spectrum. there was fear immigrants would compete with african-american .nd other working-class workers what we know from looking at research on this is that in fact, there has been some affects at the very low end of the training and skill spectrum. example, nativeborn workers who lack the high school education have lost out in the competition with them. if you look at the economy in broader terms, you see that immigration has had net effects and some positive effects in terms of innovation, growth and so forth. now we see african-american leaders generally embracing

immigrants and seeing them as sort of natural allies in the struggle for social and economic justice. but there has been an ongoing issue since the beginning. host: there is a table here that we can show you from the few organization-- pew and they break down the sources of immigration to the u.s. by year and talk about 1965 until present. , 16illion people total million people from mexico. southeast asia, 14 million people. europe, 6 million. africa and the middle east, just some of the numbers. the next section goes deeper into history with southern eastern europe, the way that led by italians coming over and germans coming over. we will look at these numbers as we take the next call from race in utah. a republican.

caller: good morning. that they one thing are getting to is why don't we talk enough about the fact that undocumented immigrants pay taxes? we're not talking federal taxes. we're not talking about federal taxes and economic policy. in 2013, undocumented immigrants paid $7 billion in sales taxes, 1.8 billion dollars in income taxes, 3.3 billion in property taxes. they will not see the very welfare system that a lot of people tend to worry about them taken advantage of. now, wecountry right are not having a sensible discussion about the best way to deal with it. do not get me wrong. i do not when people in masses continuing to come to the united states without holding a

partisan block. we give that foreign aid to countries like mexico and south america to try to help sustain those governments for people to be ok, but it is not working out. how come we cannot come to a sensible policy that if we are taking so many of the illegals out her year, why can't we take some of the foreign aid we are giving them? in turn, the people in our country, why do we talk about the more positive thing that without the taxes they are paying, we kind of falter a little bit worried that is all i believe i have. i should say that first of all, i have been primarily interested in the book on legal immigrants. i was interested in the official decision of the u.s. government to open america's doors to countries from a wider variety. i am primarily focused on legal immigration in the country, what to do about undocumented

immigrants, illegal immigration. there is a much more vexing issue and it is what i do not get into in this country or book. debateow, the biggest actually does not have to do so -- it has to do with the undocumented workers who are already here. what you do with people who have come here, gotten here, who are working in a shadow economy, their children are citizens and they are not, these are the tough issues. i try to stay away from the policy debate about what to do about that. thinkmake a point that i has been made and partly by others, which is that it is a myth that undocumented workers or immigrants do not pay taxes. they do pay taxes. they may not see the benefits of those taxes because they are here without an official status,

but they do pay taxes. host: where did the idea for the book come from? guest: i was overseas for many years and i came back with a curiosity about this country and what made it different, what made it stand out. i was looking to write a book about america's character and identity. i was looking for what would be a good way to get at this and i saw this anniversary coming up and i decided to seize on that one moment, the passage of this act in 1965, as a transformation moment. it gave me the opportunity to explore america's identity and character in a deep way. host: some of the points of the 1965 immigration and nationality the origineplaced quota system. what was that system about? visa ton order to get a come to the united states

legally as a resident, he had to fit within a quota. there were quotas set aside for each country in the world. if you're coming from scandinavia country, like my grandparents, or northern europe, germany, there were thousands and thousands and thousands of visa slots ready for you, so was not that hard to come. if you are coming from africa or asia or the middle east, you had to compete for a few dozen the says. -- visas. demand to move to the united states was great and the doors were essentially closed. the key act was the elimination of these quotas that you just mentioned. after that, every country had the same: bill, so all countries, all nationalities or put on the same basis. that was the single most important change in the act. was granted 7000

thousand of total visas in the 1968,n hemisphere and in the western hemisphere was given visas0 viasa with no -- with the country limits for it was this hard legislation to get through? in 1964-19 65, there were a lot of important laws passed. the voting rights act, civil rights act, their housing act, this was in the after -- the housing act, this was when the huge majority, so it was one of those times in american history when the president and his party in congress were able to get almost anything they wanted. that is not the case anymore. that is why he was able to achieve that in 1965, when presidents truman and even

eisenhower, a republican, had favored this change, but they had not been able to do it. host: here is congress and , this is the johnson treatment aboard air force one on a trip to cleveland. he put heavy pressure on him to support the new immigration legislation. that is from the princeton university library. below that, young senator kennedy. ronnie inn to tennessee. a democrat. good morning. issue ofhe real kennedy supporting this was nothing more than political. over after theen democrats had been elected in 1964. it was another voting bloc

because even jackie robinson would not support the candidates in the early 1960's. the immigration issue was simply to set up a voting block for the .andidates to run for president his brother was going to run in 1968 and he was eventually going to follow him, so even today, we talk about the bloating -- the voting block of immigrants. you have to have the immigration votes, so it had nothing to do a job opportunities or anything else that your author is proposing. it was only for politics so that all of them would return and vote democratic and they would be able to control most of the politics in the coming decades. thank you. host: any reaction? guest: very much sort of hindsight kind of analysis of this. it is flawed. on mostenator kennedy had no role in drafting this legislation. he came in at the end is a floor manager.

this is the work of congressman manny seller, who had been working on this for 15 years. michigan,il hart from and it actually had more support among republicans than it did among democrats in those years. the 1965 act got a higher percentage of republican votes than for the democratic caucus. another thing is that immigrants did not necessarily both democratic. for many years, they actually tended to vote republican. including in the years after 1965. there was no way to know in 1965 that these new people that would come and would be reliable democratic voters. if you take immigrants from muslim countries, some estimates of immigrants90% are voting republican. it is easy to say, it was all political and this was kennedy's

or this was a popular analysis but it requires hindsight vision of history and it does not conform with the facts whatsoever. host: jim in delaware, republican caller. caller: good morning. i disagree. the 1960's, [indiscernible] it totally changed the country and it was done for political aim. i remember at the frustration over the fact that they were andting interest groups lack of groups and things like that. look what has happened to the civil rights act, and this immigration act, most of the small towns in this country are ghost towns and a lot of the inner cities are bombed out shells of what they used to be and the only thing to revive them is federal spending in this allows the federal government to

be a great the bias on because they created these news interest groups. host: let's you from our guest. guest: you are saying that the civil rights act, passage of the civil rights act, which ended publicmination and accommodations is somehow responsible for the deterioration of our cities with the passage of the immigration act is responsible for that? essentially what both of the laws it did was and discrimination in the country. -- end this commission in the country. in the 1960's, there was a lot of opposition to the passage of the civil rights act. there was opposition to integration. at that time, there were people thateard or who argued america was fundamentally a white country and should remain a white country. i am not saying that those are not arguments. i am saying that the counterargument that discrimination had no place in

america was the one that won out but it was a bitter argument at the time and a lot of people and they preserve correctly saw that this act was going to sort of change that status. host: on to connecticut, stephen. independent caller. caller: did he just say 90% of muslims were republicans? 10 years ago? guest: yes. caller: that is amazing. i think johnson was an amazing president. i think the stuff he got through was unbelievable, but the foreign immigration today is changing politics, not only in the united states but across the west. u.k. just went down because of all the immigrants pouring out of syria and damascus and pushing out of the middle east. all because of immigration.

peanuts.gn aid is i do not think we give any money. in mexico, leave the mexicans alone. they are on our border. are rebuilding baghdad, but we cannot do something for our friends in the south? it is unbelievable. what do you think about what is happening with the immigration today? it is putting incredible strain on the west and why can we move legislation along? what is going on? is one thing to remember. migration, let's call it migration, people moving from one part to another. migration has been part of human history for one million years. when people find that the conditions where they live are to sustaindequate them, they move. this has been true forever, and

it always will be true. right now, because of improvements in mobile communication and global transportation, it is easier to move than it used to be. it used to be that is required in on this effort to move, particularly across the ocean. now it is easy to move. i think there is a kind of inevitability that this. it is a challenge that we will have to deal with and there is no question that it is problematic and we have seen this in europe. europe is much as it to africa and the middle east than we are, so their receiving the brent of this. can you put up walls and enact policies to keep people out? you can, but it will be partially successful because the pressures to move are going to be there and they will build and build. i think the caller has a good point that you really need to have an internationally focused policy that aims to improve the

conditions in those source countries so that it is less urgent for people to move. that is sort of the only long-term practical solution to this problem. host: a little flavor on this from the president with an event in ottawa where he held a news conference with the leaders of mexico. a question from a mexico reported that had to with donald trump's anti-immigrant remarks. [video clip] president obama: we have at times about history where and immigration sentiment is exploited by demagogues. it was directed at the irish, it italians,ed at poles, and you can go back and read what was read about those groups and it is identical to what they are now saying about mexicans, guatemalans, salvadorans, muslims or asians. same stuff buried there are different, they're not going to ,it, they will not assimilate

they bring crime. same arguments. if you go back to the 1800s, the language is identical. guess what? coming.t and they kept coming because forica offered possibility their children and grandchildren , and even if they were initially discriminative against, they understood how our system will over time allowed them to become part of this one american family. take some of this rhetoric seriously and answer it you shouldarly, but not think that that is representative of how the american people think. host: any thoughts? guest: he is right. there is a lot of this in my book.

if you look at the end of the 19th century, there was something called the immigration restriction feed, and argument that that group was making was all most identical to the arguments made right now, but president obama is right, the focus is not and on asian immigrants are accident immigrants, it was on the slavs, greeks, italians, people considered to be un-american in some sense or coming from countries that were not part of america's heritage. wasrhetoric against them almost word for word identical to what you here today. host: steve in phoenix, democratic caller. good morning. caller: good morning. my question is pretty mild. my question is just, when did job qualifications start being considered in the immigration process? guest: that is a really important question.

in 1964, when johnson first opposed immigration reform, he said that america should be open to countries, to people, to immigrants, not on the basis of where they were born, but on the basis of what they could do for the country. the original idea, that immigrants would be selected on the basis of the skills and education that they brought. the ones i would begin clarity where the ones not necessarily of a particular race or ethnic background, but who had skills that were considered advantageous to the united states. that link which got changed during the negotiation. instead, the emphasis was put on immigrants who had relatives already living here, so this is what produced the family unification provision, so priority was given to those not on the basis of the skin they had but on the basis of how many

relatives they had in the country. the idea was that this would favor those groups who already were well established here, which would be another way of keeping america largely white .nd european what happened was that over time, with all the immigrants of other countries, you only need one or two immigrants from an asian or african country getting here, and then they would bring in their brothers, sisters and their brothers and sisters families, spouses, and the spouses brothers and sisters and before long the, you have this explosion of immigration from nontraditional sources. hindsight, there are a lot of people who say that we should not have made that change and we should have kept skills as the most important criteria for immigrants. this is a policy followed in canada, and as we discussed immigration reform, this is an idea that will combat.

host: here is another chart from the folks at pew. as a guest mentioned in 1965, when the immigration and nationality act was passed, a be about 10 million immigrants in this country. about 45 million, roughly, not projected to go to about 78.2 million. 78 million by 2065. what will that number mean for the country? this commone seeing stages. one thing that is important to remember or take into account is that the millennial generation is already way more diverse. only 45 percent of millennials in this country are from a nonwhite, non-european background. if you take children in this country, children under five, already the majority of american children under the age of five are nonwhite, the majority, so is as these

generations grew up in the country, it will be a different country. not surprisingly, they're much more accepting of diversity. there was a hole that just came out this week that showed the breakdown of the attitude of taking refugees from syria and other middle eastern countries. two out of three millennials strongly support taking immigrants from these other countries, whereas, people in my generation, 55 or older, much lower percentage. the younger generations are much more diverse and more accommodating. they are not bothered by diversity. this country is changing and will change, whether people like it or not. it will continue to change in that direction. host: a couple of calls, connecticut, independent caller, richard, good morning. caller: good morning. i keep hearing everybody talk about immigration. they do not want to separate most of the times legal from a

legal. -- legal from illegal. in connecticut, we are facing a big deficit, and we spend 15% of our budget on illegals. in this country last year, we spent over $120 billion on illegals. you say they pay taxes, but they also get tax credits. i read an article that said $54 billion was sent back to mexico from illegals, so how are illegals helping this country? host: richard, you said connecticut spends half of the state budget -- no, 15%. that is $3 billion on the a $20 billion budget. host: thank you for clarifying. guest: i do not know. to say that 15% of connecticut's state budget goes to undocumented workers, that is

hard to believe. i would have to see the source for that. i am not convinced of that. and the moneyy and document it workers sent that, he is referring to remittances, which is that people who are here illegally continue to work and they continue to earn money, and a of of them, the majority what they earn, they send it back to their families, so it is not that we are spending tax money back, it is the immigrants sending their own money back to those families. again, i agree with richard that it is important to separate the issues of legal immigrants and illegal immigrants. what unfortunately happens is that there is a lot of resentment for people here illegally for understandable reasons, but some of it becomes more generalized against immigrants altogether, so immigrants who have waited their and and come here legally

worked legally, sometimes to get the brunt of this hostility. all the people that i write about in my book came here legally, are here legally, so i try to keep the attention on ism, and i think it unfortunate that they sort of stuff for consequences of this hostility that is directed against people who have come here outside the law. host: one last call from florida, ann, republican. caller: how are you all this morning? host: doing fine. did youin the book, happen to look into the history of the peace corps and its relationship into the educational component? helped programs in the peace corps during the kennedy administration and actually got a letter from the kennedy administration, and they decided to quit that program. it helped people coming from other countries and people who are here from different

backgrounds assimilate into the program in universities and higher education so that they could get qualifications are jobs through testing and find out what their aptitudes were. these are important things to help people assimilate and the kennedy administration abruptly stopped the program. host: thank you so much. thank you for calling. guest: i am not familiar with the program. look back at the 1960's, a lot of the programs have proven their importance and have been the source of controversy, and that was the so-called society period, when a lot of the welfare and social programs of areas kinds and education .rograms were enacted as i said before, the immigration act was a much a product of that whole reform spirit at the time. host: our guest has been

longtime correspondent for national public radio and author of "a nation of nations: a great american immigration story," tom gjelten, thank you. guest: the fourth of july weekend, 7000 new u.s. citizens coming into this country this weekend comes at an appropriate time to talk about this. host: have a great weekend. we are about halfway through this friday edition of "the washington journal." seniorup, ken blackwell, fellow at the family research council. he will talk about the recent .eeting with donald trump the meeting he attended with evangelical leaders. he will take your questions on the related topics. we will be right back. ♪ >> on american history tv on weekend,his july 4 this evening beginning at 6:00 p.m. eastern, american history tv is live that the air and

space museum for the 40th anniversary. we will toward the museum and see one-of-a-kind aviation and space artifacts and speak with the museum director. we will also talk with museum curator and the chair of the museum's space history department. you can join the conversation. we will take phone calls, e-mails and tweets. at 8:00 on saturday night, on lectures and history -- onshe increasingly focused her position as a mother, which is the driving support for suffrage, and her position as a mother, to say that women are different than men. that women can really do society better than men have done. >> boston college professor heather cox richardson on the new roles women assumed in the work horse and politics during the late 19th century and the growth of political organizations run by women that focused on issues like prohibition and women suffrage. sunday morning at 10:00 on "road to the white house: rewinds," the national convention.

>> resolute without being done without beingong arrogant, and that is the kind of america that will help build the peace of this world. the time has come for us to leave the valley of despair and climbed the mountain so that we may see the glory of the dawn. and you glory for america and a new dawn of peace and freedom in the world. accepted the nomination . monday evening before 7:00, supreme court justices share stories about the current supreme court food traditions. >> whenever a justice has a birthday, the chief brings in wine and we toast the birthday boy or girl and sing happy

birthday and we are missing are the there because truth be told, most of them cannot carry a tune. [laughter] willpreme court curator talk about: there a customs dating to the 19th and 20th centuries. for from -- for the complete holiday schedule, go to www.c-span.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: our next guest this morning is from cincinnati. he is ken blackwell, senior fellow of the family research council and former elected official in the state of ohio, mayor of cincinnati and treasurer and secretary of state for ohio. good morning. guest: good morning. good to be with you. host: thank you for joining us. the reason we ask you to come on is that you and others attended a meeting with donald trump in new york. a meeting with christian leaders. tell us about the meeting. but was the goal?

how many people were there and what was it like? a series ofs meetings, some small, one large of about 1000 social and christian conservatives. it was a conversation with donald trump. one in a larger group, and others in a series of small conversations, where folks were sort of taking his measure. this was not a meeting or series of meetings for the objective of endorsing donald trump, nor was it an inquisition. filled, ait was conversation basically trying to provide an opportunity for social and christian conservatives, leaders in their own right to take the measure and see if they could get comfortable with the candidacy. there were those who had already

the meetings,of but the large majority were undecided, and this was the opportunity for them to interact and take as much. that one of the themes was religious liberty. what did mr. trump say about that particular topic and what does it mean to you? guest: let me give you context. aristotle, folks have been concerned about the organized power of the state and the tension with individual liberties, and within the context of religious liberty and the american context, religious liberty is one of the most important fundamental human rights that we exercise in this country because it is not only worshipingving are

in a church, it is about how we can live our lives in the public with ournsistent seeefs, so folks wanted to if he was up to the measure of putting the harness on the organized power of the state, which we have done for over 240 years in constitutional governance. the constitution is harness on the intrusion and concentrated power of government, so we wanted to take his measure. casey constitutionalist -- is he a constitutionalist? does he believe? in the limits of the constitution places on government does he believe in the separation of powers -- does he believe in the limits of the constitution places on government? does he believe in the separation of powers?

i think that was answered because he had preempted that question by announcing his list of prospective candidates, so people wanted to take a look there. they wanted to see if in fact he was ready to defend the practice of religion in the public square , but most of the folks there were christians, so they wanted to see if they would put me halt to an assault on the little sisters of the poor or on christians who were small business owners who want to have their business is guided by the fundamental beliefs, so for me, going back to your question, religious liberty is one's ability to live their faith in the public square without the fear of the heavy hand of

government. i happen to believe that religious liberty is an expression of the human conscious, and as a former u.s. ambassador to the united nations in charge of the human rights forfolio and apathy fundamental rights like religious liberty, i was there to see if i can get comfortable with donald trump's position on religious liberty of the constitution and restraint on the power of government in particular. host: let me put the phone numbers on the bottom of the screen. just two numbers, one for evangelical voters, (202)-748-8000. everyone else, your number is (202)-748-8001. we get to calls in a moment for ken blackwell. just continuing this laminate, -- continuing for a minute, did you get comfortable with what you heard from donald trump?

i will point out that in may, you wrote a piece urging a slow walking embarq embrace or your embrace of mr. trump. but did you take away from this? comfortable more with donald trump and his position on the constitution, his position on restraints on judicial activism, and i was taken by the fact that he never pretended to be an evangelical himself, but he did profess belief in the bible and most importantly, he was ready to our rights to exercise our legislative or the in the public square. i am from the old school. i will defend everyone's just sotional right

long as their exercise of their religious liberty doesn't pose a violence ort of restraint on the practice of religion by others. i wanted to be very comfortable with his concern about islamic jihadists and make sure that strokesn't a broad against muslims in general because you cannot profess to be for religious liberty but then be against, in general, the practice of islam, judaism or hinduism, so i can away watching how he had started to calibrate his concern about religious liberty as it applied to his concern to protect the national security of the country and the

safety of americans in their home in neighborhoods. host: calls in the moment for ken blackwell. does this mean you and organization are endorsing donald trump at this point and who did you go for the primaries? independent in the primaries. i was an advocate and a principal advisor to an organization called our principals, who was in fact looking at all the candidates against fundamental principles religiousutionalism, liberty and limited government, so that was my job to at least put up the screen for folks to judge the candidates in the primaries. how close areor you to an endorsement of donald trump at this point? clear let me just be very , elections are about choices. isnow that hillary clinton

running on a third term of barack obama. that means she is running on increasing the debt, increasing the intrusiveness and size of the government and the welfare state in general. she is running against the interest of people who are actually wanting all of the freedoms of the constitution, including the second amendment, that given those choices, donald trump, hillary ,linton, i will go with trump but that is not enough and i am sure we will get into it on the balance of our conversation. to be engaged with him enough to go out and convince 10 more folks to vote for donald trump, and that is

what i am trying to get comfortable with right now. there is no question who i am going to vote for if given the choice of trump versus clinton. he is my default candidate in november. i do not want him to be just a default candidate. i want him to be candidate that i can enthusiastically go out and work for and convince other voters to vote for. he cannot afford to have the same number of evangelical 2016. stay home in host: first call from al in cambridge, ohio, you are on the phone with ken blackwell. hower: i just wondered christians would feel regarding this political [indiscernible] you have on your show today. this man has been in and out the revolving door and republican

ohio,s from beginning in and his significant role in guiding the reelection of george w. bush, arguably the worst and most corrupt administration in the history of this country, and plunged this country into the fascist state that we see today -- host: let me jump in. we have heard that, but talk about the evangelical voters and donald trump. any thoughts there? caller: how would christian voters feel about a political hack such as what you have on here, that i have described in detail? host: let's hear from ken blackwell and give him a chance to defend himself. guest: good morning, al.

i do not defend myself against the ridiculous accusations. that we just give your viewers some understanding. i grew up right here in cincinnati, grew up in public housing in the early part of my childhood. andad was a world war ii there was a housing shortage when he came back and we moved into market housing, was educated here in public schools, and then went on to the university, where not only did i and academicessor -- excuse me, administrator of the vice president level, but i served on the board of trustees at xavier and as a consequence, grew up being an advocate for changing the cycle of poverty that 70 people were locked into. being a strong advocate for

life, got elected to sydney council, became mayor of the city, and then was elected treasurer and secretary of state . in between those, i was a secretary with my buddy jack kemp and i was a u.s. ambassador to the united nations, as i mentioned before, the human rights commission. look, and all of my collections, people understood that i was an elected official running with a party affiliation, and i was not i was theublican, conservative republican and became the first african-american elected to a statewide office in the history of ohio. as a consequence of that, i in fact was true to my principles, true to my party and i was successful.

race foro in the 2006, but i have stayed engaged in the political process working with public policy groups like the family research council, and i stand in the public square as a defender of religious liberty, small government, and free enterprise. i served on the boards of the national rifle association and the club for growth and the national taxpayers association, and in honor of my father, i am proud to be a member of the board of trustees of the world war ii museum in new orleans, so have always had political opposition, people who disagree with me politically, religiously and so on, but that is what america is all about, the enable to compete, win, lose

, get up, dust yourself off and win again. folks barkingd to being concerned, -- myis is what i know dad used to tell me, dogs did not bark at parked cars, so you stay on the move and do what you can with what you have and where you are. bill onr next caller is the line for evangelicals in ohio. good morning. caller: good morning, gentlemen. to blackwell, i am afraid say this, but what you are doing is sickening. you are trying to get religious people like myself to abandon their morals, abandoned their values, abandon god and vote for a guy like donald trump. the guy that i see making fun of

a disabled person. he says he cannot get a fair trial because his judges mexican. that is sickening. i will not put the republican party ahead of my morals and values and that is what i need to say. host: let me add to that the voice of shawn king from "the new york post" who writes "to see these men and women who claim to be ambassadors for the prince of peace get in line behind trump and fond over him was utterly disgusting. it actually says more about them than it does about trump. christian conservatives clearly do not represent morals or decency. donald trump is the antitheses of all of those things." what is your reaction to that quote and the call? guest: that is fascinating. like i said to you earlier, it is about choices. let's talk about our choices. we had donald trump, who is not

the perfect candidate, who we are basically slow walk in, but we have another choice and that is hillary clinton, who we do know a lot about. we know that she is in support of abortion on demand. we know that she is trying to trample on the religious liberty of those a bus to practice christianity in our life. we in fact know that this is a gross that has shown incompetence when it comes to protecting the national security of our country. here is a woman who in fact once america to become a nation without borders, and as a consequence, we now find an america that is at risk. we see a woman who wants to expand the welfare state as opposed to creating a growing

where we are producing jobs, giving people a way to get off of dependency of government, so i have to make a choice. i know it hillary clinton is. i know what she professes that she wants to do. she once to be that their term of barack obama, where we now have one of the lowest labor participation rates in our recent history. we see that our debt is $19 trillion and growing, and one of the things that we know about that is that when government continues to get a good and take her and the welfare state close, we chase capital and opportunity out of the country. that is what we have $2 trillion of capital sitting on the fence because those owners of those

dollars to not want to have them unfairly taxed, so they will take them someplace else where it is a better tax plan. as a consequence, we are seeing anemic economic growth and as a consequence, more and more americans are falling out of the workplace. look, give me a break. .e is not a perfect candidate i am slow walking might embrace of him, being very critical, inspecting every aspect of what he stands for, but i know it hillary clinton stands for. in fact, that is more antithetical to the interest of bible believing christians, who want to practice their faith in the public square. he is a default candidate. i would like to meet to be able to be enthusiastically supportive of him because of what he is for and what he is demonstrating he is for, but i have no question about whether

or not he is a better choice for the future of america than hillary clinton. host: let's get to another called. forink that graphic was "the new york post [indiscernible] from chicago, how are you doing? caller: can you give me a couple of seconds? i listen to mr. blackwell said he know what hillary clinton is about, but donald trump tell you every day what he is about. he says he once to destroy isil and if he cannot get to the men leading isil, he wants to go to their children, kids and wives. you talk about evangelical, but if you go to that rivaled, it's -- go to that bible, it says thou shall not kill. muslims have arrived to believe that faith they believe in, just like christians have a right, but to a parallel between the two. use a muslims chop off people's

heads, gouge their eyes out, kill them. let's go back. probably some of your people have run up on these atrocities. back in america, christians, not muslims, in the 1960's, quite christians on the way to church throw bombs at black people's houses because they were black. if they did not buy -- if they did not die from the bombs, they shot them coming out the front door. thinking black men from trees, skinning them, laughing about it, standing on the trees. are barbaric for doing that, what do you call christians? simply with is not the bible because he said corinthians. how can he be so christian but they get on tv and talk about different people? host: thank you for calling. we went to get ken blackwell's reaction. questionsk, no one

the history of america. lincoln said, we are not a perfect nation, but we are a professed abomination. we went from those periods she described to electing the first african-american president. in many -- in many countries, that would not be possible because of hardened prejudices and ideologies. , i startedof the day out by saying, i have no reservation about defending somebody's constitutional rights to be theologically in disagreement with me or theologically wrong, so that is where i am. notve in fact worked with only donald trump, but with other republican candidates, to make sure that they zero in on what is a direct threat, and

islamic jihadists, islamic terrorists are a direct threat. if you are not able to say that, there's no way you will be able to come back from the threat that they host: the house is have a pro forma session. the right back.

as we know, they are looking for a vote. the house speaker says there will be a vote next week on gun legislation, specifically, he told members it would be part of a broader package on terrorism that would prevent suspected terrorism -- terrorists providing guns. you can watch that live on c-span. we had been talking with ken blackwell of the family research council. his senior fellow there. mr. blackwell, let's take

another caller from michelle in wisconsin. good morning. morning.ood i am calling because i am having a hard time understanding why the republican party and the in village eligible voters -- republican party and the evangelical voters have a hard time keeping church and state separate? i have my religious police and idle push them off on anybody else. yet, republicans who are evangelicals who want the evangelical voters, they tend to cater to them without reservation for other people's religious believes. attack. planned parenthood, i did not have insurance at the time, this with years ago.

women cares,re for and they were the ones that fell my cervical cancer. it was already at stage four. i had just treatment and everything that they helped me through and they were very supportive. host: and what is your question? why themy question is evangelicals believe their religious beliefs be upheld over everybody else's. i have my religious beliefs, and yet, my religious police get trampled on. host: thank you very much. callerguest: i will say for thed time that i will defend everyone 's constitutional right, even if they are wrong. remember the american experience of those who would just come

here from england where the state and church were one. a notion that you separate and state and you elevate religious freedom, that means that families can practice their religion in the public square in the place of business. when that sort of practice of faith becomes under direct attack by activist courts at all levels, i think organizations like the family research council , are important as being those who will shine their light in the dark corners of the sort of thing. parenthood and the services that this woman god, i ate -- the services that this woman got, --

when you have an organization that has been demonstrated to sell baby parts, that is a practice that needs to be condemned, and in fact, we need to make sure there is no public dollars, incredible dollars we need to make sure there are no public dollars going to that organization. we need to make sure taxpayer dollars are not used to harvest baby parts and kill babies. int: let's hear from andy north carolina. caller: i want to make a couple anpoints if i could about article about trump versus cruz. mr. blackwell, i wonder if you saw the article toddled -- article titled "evangelical christians are selling out."

talking about how evil evangelical christians are. i am glad you read that. i would like you to respond. it makes a lot of good points that they have this cynical subordination of faith and politics. how eager they are to be exploited. he talks about them being on the wrong side of history in the civil rights era and how they are doing it again today. it is not about putting christ back into christmas, it is about putting christ back into christian. there is a whole lot to that. there is a whole life christians need to look at. trump,o the cruz versus there is a lot to that. trump is basically just an

bigot, and it shows with the evangelical christian's values are. they did not hold any deeply held religion. they went with the candidate that least represents christianity, including hillary. and how he could be your default choice, i do not understand. he is the least christian of all the candidates. maybe he might show a pandering attempt to defend christianity, which he has nothing to do with. principleyour overall of protecting all religious liberties, clearly he is not prepared to do that. host: thanks for calling. . we understand the point -- we understand the point. let me talk about this headline

from a recent poll that says donald trump is not generating zeal. do you sense that? do you agree with that? guest: absolutely. that is why i found the last caller's comments to be fascinating and best, and ludicrous at least. look, evangelicals are not monolithic. all of the indications are that folks who went to church regularly and labeled themselves as evangelical, actually did vote more for ted cruz then donald trump. but elections are about choices and the people spoke through those elections. now i have to take a look at who donald trump is up against. veryichael's article is fascinating to me because is he

suggesting that we go for years, clinton, for 25 has demonstrated that she is willing to wage war on the traditional family? there are those of us who believe that the traditional family is the incubator of liberty. her attacks against on life come on family, -- on life, on family, and all religious liberty. a greats article was academic piece, but michael now has to tell me that he is going to vote for johnson, the independent, or hillary over trump. his he has to weigh conscious because we do know the measurable works of hillary clinton against those issues that are important to us as we go forward.

host: do you think fundamentally donald trump is pro-life? fundamentally he has evolved into a position that is pro-life. terms of where i am in the exceptions. he has more exceptions apparently than i do. , i have to look at him against the other choice. johnsonr two choices of and clinton, and by all measures, he becomes a logical choice for those who want to defend life. most notably because he, and fact, has put out a list of judges that would in fact defend life and get us off of this track that we are drifting

towards of being more and more anti-life, and empire religious liberty. .ost: let's hear from caleb caller: good morning. mr. blackwell. vet a muslim without using a religious standard? what doesn't mean to how we should view the separation of church and state? thank you. actuallyll, look, you process,screening which we were woefully lacking. you look a geographical areas. you look at organizational affiliations. matter, a question of, it is a question of activity and behavior and association

from a particular geographical area that is known for its harvesting of jihadists terrorists, period. lenka from santa monica health area -- santa monica, california. are you there? caller: yes. in regard to color from before -- in regard to the caller from before, i feel for her. now. am talking about because heing trump had dr. james dobson blessing --and he is a christian. we know that for sure.

for the last eight years, it is been totally chaos, ok. glad thatell, i am so i was able to hear him. dr. james dobson, focus on the family founder. he is definitely a christian. trump.sed blessing, ii's looked at that. we don't want the same things. hillary is not going to protect isis, killing, our beautiful men and talking their heads off walking on the beach, with and tied in the back

--with hands tied up in the back. i can't stand it. and they are killing children and women and putting churches on fire. that is what i'm saying. donald trump is going to protect us with that situation. i am in favor also to not have them coming into our country. i came to america when i was 18. and i have always been in love with jesus. host: lenka,, thank you for calling. we are running out of time with ken blackwell. james thompson, the founder of focus on the family. here is a little bit of dr.

dobson on the screen. we were reading about donald trump's conversion in his face. what have you heard about this? is it something that you noted? what does it all mean? read the comments of dr. dobson, who was in one of the smaller meetings with donald trump. he might have been on a one-on-one session with mr. trump. as a consequence, he has walked is abelieving that trump born-again evangelical, or christian. i haven't been able to witness that. the family research council are concerned about the advancement of public policies that strengthen the family,

advance religious liberty, so we of candidatesst to make sureffs they have the right policy prescription. that they know where to advance protection of religious liberty. at the same time, that they also know how to get government out of our lives, making decisions their moms and dads should be making, as opposed to the government. and providing us with alternative forms of education, cleansedfact, we have our children's education to any reference of faith. that is what we have concentrated on, our public policy issues and matters. and again, when you start to weigh up his prescriptions and policies versus what she has in

fact been advocating for 25 years in the public square at the national level, we see a clear choice. basicallyk dr. dotson , any broader context, is saying his policy of prescriptions and the policies, that he is advancing a more consistent -- that he is advancing our more consistent of the interests of evangelical christians and lovers of liberty in general the hillary clinton. one more lesst call from pete in california. caller: good morning. i would like to say, first of at, with trump -- you look what any independent ranking shows is that trump will be much worse on the deficit then hillary clinton. the other thing is i find it

ironic the organization that mr. blackwell is with is called and most of them have family values and mr. trump does not have family values. finally, i have a question for mr. blackwell. what does hes think about donald trump questioning hillary clinton's faith? he said she never mentioned anything about religion. it is well known she is a methodist. she says that in her biography. is religious freedom questioning someone else's faith? host: pete, you put a lot on the

table. any reaction to that caller? guest: the family research council is a 501(c)(3) organization. we advance policies and that our constituents and followers judge how candidates look against the policies that we advance. now, within individuals of the are individual, political rights. in terms of hillary clinton's , i fundamentally don't questionher faith, i whether or not her public policy pronouncement further religious

ethic, ande pro-life defense of the natural and traditional family in america. on all of those fronts, i can see her positions the antithetical. so you question those public policy pronouncements. i am not here and nor should donald trump question her face. -- question her faith. host: ken blackwell has been our guest. he is in cincinnati, ohio. he was mayor of canady and treasurer and secretary of state. he is now senior fellow at the family research council. mr. blackwell, thanks a lot for taking time to talk to us. guest: good to be with you, paul. host: we have 30 minutes left on this friday's edition of washington journal. we want to get your thoughts on

what the pentagon announced yesterday. they are opening military service to the trans-genders for the first time. the defense department will allow transgender people to serve in all branches of the armed or says, eliminating the last barrier to any and all u.s. citizens to serve in the military. we have about two minutes of tape from the defense secretary, ash carter. we will look at that now and take your calls. here are the numbers on you are watching --202-748-8000 if you are a democrat. republican, 202-748-8001. and if you are and what independent, your number is 202-748-8002. the topic, the military is lifting the transgender military ban. here is ash carter. >> i am announcing today we are ending the ban on transgender americans in the united states military. effective immediately, transgender americans may serve openly, and they can no longer

be discharged or separated from the military just for being transgender. questioning the gender identity of an individual when not barred them from any program. taking these steps, we are eliminating policies that can result in transgender members being treated differently from their peers based solely on their gender identity, rather than an ability to serve. that we willming apply the same principles, standards, and services to all members. when i heard from the transgender service members, they do not want special treatment. they want to be held to the same standards and be treated like everybody else. as i directed, the study identified practical issues that arise with respect to transgender service. it developed an implementation

plan to address those issues. let me briefly describe that implementation plan. that in thishasize case, as in the department's decision on don't ask, don't tell, simply declaring a change in policies is not effective. that is why we have worked hard and the implementation plan and must continue to do so. these policies will be implemented in stages over the next 12 months. starting most immediately with guidance for current servicemembers and their commanders, followed by training for the entire forests, and then beginning -- for the entire force, and then beginning to an act. implication will begin today. starting today, all of five is members can not be discharged or denied reenlistment just for being transgender. days fromater than 90

today, the department will complete an issue a commander's guidebook for leaders of currently serving transgender members, and medical guidance to doctors for providing transition related care if required to currently serving transgender service members. host: again, your numbers to lifted one ban transgender people in the military as ash carter mentioned -- 202-748-8000, democrats. 202-748-8001, republicans 202-748-800. independents, 202-748-8002. the decision marks the latest way in which the military has blazed trails in the last two years on issues that have divided the country. in 2011, the obama administration repealed the

don't ask, don't tell policy from prohibiting gay members from serving openly. for decades, the pentagon consider transgendered people be sexual deviance to be discharged from service. making it tougher to force out those who came at as transgender. many service members have been living in limbo. statistics that we will bring to you on all of this. but let's get to your calls first on what the pentagon announced yesterday. brenda, republican. caller: i have a couple of questions for you after i give you my answer, which is i don't have a problem with the trans-genders in the service. i have a problem with the military paying for any surgeries.

and the reason for that being is we have 22 vets dying a day and we have vets dying every day now.are not getting care i think this is another way for obama to confuse and put more information out there just to make him look good. and the one thing i would really like to know about c-span is who funds you? and who owns you? host: the cable industry provides our funding. so it's really a few pennies out of every cable subscriber per month. why do u.s. -- why do you ask? caller: because i've been watching you the last couple of years. i've noticed you lean more towards programming for the democrats. i'm sorry. i'm sick. becauseon i say that is come up when there's important

hearings going on that should be aired that you put online, you repeat old stuff that makes it look like they are not working. year-end the forest one about 15 times. i've complained a lot about the programming. i was afraid, if we were paying for it, that i should the -- that that should be investigated. a event may run five seven times, certainly not in the teens. brenda.ou feel better, dee is now calling from livingston, texas. caller: good morning. -- shedy is kind of needs to change her cable if she

can't stand what you are putting on there. host: she has an opinion. caller: bless her heart. i've been watching you since you began and listening to you on the radio before you are on the radio. -- on the tv. i'm old. [laughter] so what if someone is transgender? they can put their life on the line like any other person. host: thanks for calling, dee. caller.publican caller: i think c-span is rather balanced. that of --ht-year eight-year vet of the u.s. navy. i did not do a lot of shipboard duty. i was in aviation.

an airplane can land on a boat. anyway, the military is closed quarters living. you don't have the luxury of yourg your own sweet -- own suite. you live in very close quarters. i come a one, don't have any room in my orders for anyone that is not the same sex. male, ok? if i was a female, i believe i would feel that i wouldn't have any room in my quarters for same-sex, a that is woman. this is ridiculous. what's next? host: let me ask you. do you trust or do you not trust to the military to figure that out? haven't had they had to go through this in other phases? caller: they spent $500 on a

toilet seat and they are figuring this out? no. no, no, no. just because they have a bar on their shoulder or a star on their lapel doesn't mean they have all the answers. this is appalling. now this is the way society is going. i don't doubt that. it is definitely going the wrong way. we are going to run this country straight to the ground. itate to come off like a big bigot or alike a hater, but this has to stop. they said they were going to look at this. tell me one thing. please somebody explain to me why we have, i think, 2000, 3000

a hundredmaybe thousand -- it's not that many -- but i believe there is maybe -- or 10 times for everyone to call them -- i don't even know what to call them -- but there are typical people in the service, male and female. tell me why they are doing all this training and all of this review and all this mess? ok, greg. we are going to let you go in get more callers in here. we get your point. mort from sebastian, florida. caller: my reaction is i am a veteran of two wars. we did not have women aboard ship at that time. but we had people who were transgender.

and i'm listening to your phone calls. i see hatred. men, hatred of women, of and anything else. it is impossible. we had a second world war. we had nurses who gave their lives. those were wounded looked up and said mama, oh, my god, if there mother had known that he was transgender or something else. we are talking like we want to bring back the ovens or discrimination or firing squads. note -- and i have one more comment. i always hear about evangelicals who you had on. i want you to remember one thing. how many [indiscernible] how many have been cheating on their wives? would they stand up there instead -- and swear to god that they did not do it?

there is a very fine catholic priest in chicago, father, and, who used to write books -- father conlin, who used to write books. father, were you celibate before you got married? and he answered no. then the same woman asked him, father, are you celibate now? and his reply was that is for me to know and for you to find out. host: thanks for calling, more it. john mccain wants hearing on the lifting of the transgender van. here is the -- transgender ban. here is a little bit from the senator on fox news talking about this. [video clip] mccain: we received no heads up. chairman of the

armed services committee. it is customary to give members, particularly the chairman, a weefing and say this is what want to do as far as for policy changes or other events. this administration doesn't do that. i just heard about it when you have. it is very hard for me right now to make a judgment. i will be calling up the chiefs of the services, those men in uniform who are the heads of the military, and asking their views, including the cost of implementing -- i'm talking about the fiscal cost of implementing some of these changes. hearings.l be having so it's hard for me to make a judgment to start with. but this administration is the least communicative with congress on any issue that i have seen in my years in the senate. host: and more reaction from "the washington post."

in a little bit more there from florida,." thomas, democrat. yes, on this transgender think and i think what they are to do is have men's restrooms, women's restrooms command transgender's restrooms. let them do what they want. you can pass all the laws you want, but people ain't always going to listen to them. the man was saying about abortion and all that, if your religion is strong enough, you won't participate. the law does not say you have to

get an abortion, but they are making it available to people, which is what they are supposed to be doing, doing what they can to please the populace. but the people don't have to get an abortion. you go people -- people can have guns, but that doesn't mean you have to kill with them. sure, you have religions that are crossing -- forcing other religions to accept things that are against their teaching. and that's not right. catholic who as a believes in the bible and believes in the 10 commandments, why should i be forced to accept somebodies transgender or whatever the heck it is? host: thanks for calling,

thomas. pamela from philadelphia, think you for waiting period you are on the democrats line. caller: yes, my name is pam. i'm just letting you know that i am transgendered, and i'm so happy i live where i live because the fact of the matter being that i can news -- i can use the women's restroom without any problems. and when it comes to this transgender thing, we are just like everyone else. we go in there, do our business and come out. i haven't heard any complaints from women of me going in there. using the women's room and just coming back out. i don't bother looking under stalls or anything like that. i do what i have to do and come out. host: so, pamela, what is your reaction to the dead -- to the

defense department's announcement. caller: i'm all for it. i've served my country. then, i was transgender but i didn't want to say anything because i was afraid of what would happen if i came out way back then. so i'm happy this is happening now. removes the final barrier to the algae bt community. host: thank you very much for calling. alabama is onm the screen. we have steve on the line this morning from california. using money for the

medical practices, expensive. the same right. that's my view on it. host: anything else? caller: i think it should stop. you're pushing the political agenda. it doesn't help. dolorous, tennessee. caller: yes, would like to say that i am for lifting the ban on transgender people. people intransgender there right now that having come out. but they are fighting for this country to help keep us safe. they are just like the rest of us. and too many people judge others. -- know, judge not leave judge not lest you be judged.

i think it's time we help each other and stop the hate. i mean come on that god do the judging. just go about your business. lead your life. put every day, help everybody and stop the hate. and john mccain, he was a good soldier, a good man. but he's got to change his thinking. stop blaming president obama for everything. work together. and just think before you speak. and he is talking like a racist. i mean, we all know that he is mad here lost to president obama. from day one, the republicans said let's make him fail. do they think that the people have forgotten the promise that they make? we are watching them. we are listening to them. they are doing wrong and they

should not be supporting donald trump. host: thank you for calling. i want to get some other viewpoints in. a democrat from colorado calls twitter. victory on that atagon chief said rand study found that there are about 2500 transgender service members among the 1.3 million active members of the military and among 1500 in reserve units. the upper end of their range found that there are 7000 transgender in active kitty -- active duty and 4000 in reserves. they also point out the details

is a compromise between some issues. notably, people who want to join will be required to wait 18 months for a doctor to certify they are stable in their new genera for they can . ken is calling from illinois. what would you like to say? caller: i would like to know why the american taxpayers have to transgender sex change when nature made man a man and a woman a woman? host: diane from auburn, pennsylvania. good morning. caller: good morning. host: what would you like to say? caller: i would like to saycaller: first off i am a

lesbian, a gay woman and i'm from pennsylvania. i have friends who are in the military and i have some very real concerns here regarding the fact that the -- regarding the buddy system in the military. i spoke to some of my male friends who are in the military and they are very concerned with their own lives with the buddy system if they were put on the field and the fact that i would not be able to carry their weight with my pack on. i am not going to hold a christian agenda against anybody. to reach his own. we pay in the end to our maker what our choices are in life. but when it includes in other lives that we are putting on the line, like the gentleman earlier brought up tax money being used for the services of changes of also, iteing a nurse

has been found that the problems they are saying that go on within ourselves, which is have --is worked out and there are 22 veterans a day that kill themselves for a lack of money in the system. so i guess it is a two full thing that i wanted to say. the transgender issue out of the field is putting straight people at risk. how about our government, they want to include everybody in the service like that, how about we have a unit that is transgender only? let them go out on the field themselves and back each other so they are not putting other men and women at risk? and secondly, i do not agree with using taxpayers money for these operations. no. host: thanks for calling. more about the rand study. providing medical care would cost $2.9 million for the

pentagon, which spends $6 billion of its $10 billion budget on medical costs for -- $610 billion of annual . i want to point out another new york times story this morning. it is about something that a couple of callers mentioned earlier. this meeting that happened with loretta lynch and bill clinton at an airport.

host: i'm sure we will be hearing more about that. reynoldsburg, ohio, independent caller.

go ahead. caller: i have some comments about the transgender coming to the service. there is no question about it. if you can allow the gay and lesbian to serve, why stop with the people from serving the military. this is a free country. everybody should be a lot to do whatever they want to do. i wish we would accept people the way they are. they do have to consult with the president. we should just accept everybody the way they are and let people serve the country and do whatever they want to do. that's my comment. thanks for calling, sammy. the loretta lynch statement will be at 11:00 eastern time this morning. you can watch it on www.c-span.org.

taking calls on the transgender ba lifting. to say all going five points real fast. bottom line, all over the world, we have major countries, including israel, that has transgender people in it. we've always had people who were gay or lesbian in the military. the problem is, if you ever found at, you could kick them out. in other words, if they worked for 20 years,ves, and you found up they were gay, he could take their pension. you can take everything from them. i wonder what the average age of the callers who are calling in our. they may have forgotten. that fbi director hoover was a cross-dresser. the may not remember that training in the military defines your ability to be able to protect and defend the interests of the united states.

somewhere along the line, i go to the v.a. hospital and i end up finding out that someone is going around to the tv set here in florida and they are turning it to fox news. maybe people are becoming one-dimensional. as. far as the lady who called up about funding you receive, quite honestly, no matter how much money those pennies that you are receiving, when you go to any of those major networks, they are receiving subsidies as well from us taxpayers because they are getting, tax relief. in all honesty, i think you're doing a great job. i think you are trying not to be biased. i think you're listening to the callers. and i don't think there should be any scrutiny in regards to your integrity. happy fourth of july. host: thank you, nathaniel. scrutiny is perfectly fine if anyone wants to call in and ask. this is exactly what we are here for.

brexit wakehe reaches the u.s. so much not talking about economic issues, but saying that americans, by an overwhelming 4-1, the decision to leave the eu is a form of anger. just 60% call it an isolated referendum. he speaks to anger quite a bit. washington post, gingrich and topping donald trump's list for vice president. we will find out about that soon. gathering toimes," test strength of gop support for trump. they are talking about a meeting of conservatives in denver, colorado. if he fails to win over conservatives, he could be july for the presidential nominee in cleveland.

the nation's largest gathering of conservatives outside of washington, d.c. we have a call from barbara from baltimore, democrat. caller: hi. another armthis is of the strategy to weaken america. this is nothing new. but why now? and why do we all have to be [indiscernible] we don't care what people do. but when it affects our pocketbook, it is a different story. host: ok. we have lisa from columbia, maryland, republican. caller: good morning. i'd like to point out that surgery or cross-dressing does not change someone sexual inclination. these new laws are putting men and -- uppity women and children at risk. men are not usually at risk of being assaulted by women. but if men go into the female dressing areas, attacks of women and children do go up.

people exploit the law, whether they are gay, straight, whatever. if they can go in whatever bathroom they are -- they want, there are going to be problems. thank you. washington,, olivia is on the line. thank you for calling. caller: thank you. i was in vietnam. let me tell you a quick experience. of another party soldier and we went with our wives. i walked into the kitchen. when i walked into the kitchen, there were two men kissing each other. i was kind of stunned about that. so i went out there and i told my friend. i said, you know, we need to go. he said, what do you mean? i said, look, this crowd is different than what i'm used to seeing. and i don't belong here. they do what they do, that's fine, but i am not interested in that. so we left.

so the next day, i was there on the dock and one of them came up from behind me and put his hand on my shoulder and started to give me a lot of guff because myself in this other individual left. my thing is why? they wanted to do their thing, that's fine. i wasn't interested in that and i left. so why should i be confronted? and this other thing this lady mentioned earlier, hey, if they want to serve, go ahead and have a unit of just transgender people, ok? let them do that. obama said he is going to transform america. let me tell you something, he has done a good job. that is the only thing he has done that he has kept his promise on. and you know what, it has really diluted our country and our military and so -- in so many different ways it's not even funny. here's the thing. if you look at our constitution and our bible, which runs parallel.

all the answers that we want to have for everything we are looking at, it is already right there in front of us, ok? and just follow the laws that we already have. we don't have to go around making up things, ok? host: all right, george, thanks for calling. want to get in one more story and one more call. sturdy -- a story out of says the body, the ford seven-member human rights counsel, voted to a point an independent expert. passed 23-18 with six abstentions, the voting coming after a heated debate. last call, justin, baltimore, independent. so i wanted -- there are

a few points and wanted to address. there's been people calling in and i want them to go on youtube or go back someone the archives and listen to the arguments that were made against the integration of blacks into the military. mexican -- i am an african american, baltimore, maryland. i served in iraq. listening to the people with these arguments that are hopped up on nonsense and utter nonsense don't stand. when the one lady who was asking about tax dollars being spent on transgender when they are not being spent on veterans, the military budget is completely separate from the veterans budget. and the veterans budget does need to be increased a lot and it could be some judicial cuts made to the military budget.