political journalist and the huffington post reporter. former white house senior middle east advisor dennis ross examines u.s. efforts in the fight against isis. washington journal is live, next. host: president obama and hillary clinton make their first joint appearance in north carolina today. the events starting at :00 live on c-span2. "politico" reporting today that house speaker ryan is expected to meet tonight with representatives john lewis of georgia and john larson of connecticut. they led the house floor sit-in over gun legislation a couple weeks ago. this as the house is expected to take up gun legislation this week. first 45 minutes we'll revisit the release of the house committee report on ben zazzy. the report contains new details about the activity of the state department then led by hillary clinton.

democrats saying no new information was produced. we want to hear from you the effort and the report that came out, was it worth it? here's how you can let us know your thoughts democrats 202-748-8,000. republicans 202-748-8001. and indpends. 202-748-8002. if you want your thoughts know on if it was effort, do it on twitter and post on our facebook page at facebook.com/c-span. go to the website for the house lect committee for benghazi.house.gov it gives you some of the findings. there's the findings. here's some of the facts that came out from the report that was released. this saying the following facts were amongst the many revelations found in part three of the report as it's known. during deliberations in the state department whether or how to intervene in libya in march, 2011, jake sullivan stated,

avoiding a failed state, also found the administration's policy of no boots on the ground shaped the type of military assistance provided by the state department personnel in libya. executive secretariats for both the defense department and state department exchanged communications outlining the diplomatic capacity. where the defense department team would serve to wear civilian clothes. also found when the state department's presence in benghazi was extended in 2012, senior officials from the bureau of diplomatic security were excluded from that discussion. that's some of the elements that came out from the report that came from the republicans. when responding to this, the day before, the democrats putting out a report of their own taking a look at it, one of the things that came out from the democrats on the committee included this statement saying republicans excluded democrats from interviews. and sealed exculpatory evidence, withheld interslew transcripts, leaked inaccurate information,

sent armed marshals to the home of cooperative witness, and even conducted political fundraising by exploiting the death of four americans. that's just. so back and forth that came out from the release of this report. found online, we want to get your thoughts on if that effort as worth it, 202-748-8,000 for democrats. 202-748-8001 for republicans. for 2-748-8002 independents. larry, what do you think about this report? caller: what the benghazi committee was about, it was a way money. bringing downhillry clinton. i don't understand why people don't understand what the man said. he said out of his own mouth on television what the committee was about. he told the truth. and the republicans tried to get him to back down after he told the truth.

they didn't want it to come out. that's why they don't want the democrats involved in it. they wanted to -- to hang mrs. clinton from the highest tree. that's exactly what they did. have a nice day. host: republican who led the committee on this effort was tray gowdy, when the press release of the report came out, press conference came out, he was asked directly by a reporter about the benghazi investigation if it was about hillary clinton the here's what tray gowdy had to say. >> look at the resolution. the resolution doesn't mention secretary clinton. speaker boehner nor speaker ryan have ever asked me to do anything about 2016 presidential politics. speaker boehner asked me to find out what happened to four of our fellow citizens. i believe that is what i have done. you are welcomed to read the report. i hope you will. i know you will. if you at the end of reading that report can conclude that it is about one person instead of about four people, i will be shocked. >> i'm asking the opposite

question. do you believe after doing this for two years, spending all of your time and millions of dollars, do you believe that based on this that the american people should look at this and see the woman who wants to be president -- >> i was with you until the last clause of your statement. i think the american people ought to look at t they ought to look at it because fellow americans died and were injured and went to heroic lengths to save other americans. what conclusions they draw after reading it is up to them? >> do you disagree with mr. pompeo? >> i wrote the report that i think is centered in the facts. i have a background of who, what, , when where. i don't have a background into why. host: republican tray gowdy of the house select committee talking about his take on the report that came out. your take on if it was worth it. the lines will be on the screen, florida, independent line. hello. caller: yes. that was a complete waste of time.

that was investigated through the armed services. so the senate had to investigate, congress had to investigate. the f.b.i. got to investigate. i guess we had a county sheriff investigate next, right? host: why do you think this latest effort was a waste of time specifically? caller: it shows -- if the armed forces didn't get it right, they know what happened over there when it first happened. they say they was going to do that -- that situation was going to jump off. they did it in texas. they did it in paris. that was all about a khartoum. all that other stuff was pure foolishness. wasted our tax dollars. host: carl in west virginia. republican line. carl, what do you think? caller: good morning. well, i'll tell you what we did not find out. we did not find out that obama was sound asleep and there was no one to order the military to

intervene. another thing we found out that they lied to the american public for political reasons telling everybody it was a video that caused this when it was actually a terrorist attack and hillary clinton told her daughter the same thing. it was a terrorist attack. when a president stands up and looks into the camera and tells the public a lie, knowing it's a lie, for political reasons, that's not good. and another thing we found out that hillary clinton had the private server, putting top secret information on a private server that was vulnerable to being hacked. i found out a lot. i don't know what you guys found out. i found out a hell of a lot. host: did you look at the report yourself that came out, actually read what was on the website? caller: yeah. i read it. yeah.

host: so you learned -- the things you listed, did you know those things before or did you learn those things specifically from the report that came out? caller: no. i knew. i knew the president was sound asleep because he had a political event on the west coast the next morning. and he went to bed early so he could get up and go to that political event on the west coast the next morning. it's common sense. host: hear from john in spring, texas, independent line, good morning, john. caller: i think it was a waste of time. junior bush and cheney sent 4,500 troops to their death. american troops are being on disability. they never went to jail or investigation once. this is the biggest bunch of maloney i have ever seen in my life. it's unfortunate that these people died over there, but we

need to close about half of these embassies anyway. ose were just outpostings -- joust posts. they were stirring up trouble in some cases. .e got to stop running around host: rob is up next, new york. democrats line. rob, tell us about your thoughts on the report. did you think it was worth it? caller: you know, i'm listening to some of the previous callers. so what if the president went to bed early? so what if they blamed it on a video. just imagine the millions of dollars spent, the time spent. it's a political distraction. again, it takes us away from more urgent issues. it's, again, republicans wasting our time. the clintons, political

witch-hunt since whitewater or even before. t's not like secretary clinton knew about this in advance that there was some kind of smoking gun or whatever. it's enough already with all of this same political posturing, political witch-hunt on the part of the republicans. i urge the republican listeners to be fed up with their party and vote for mrs. clinton. this next election. thank you for c-span. host: we'll hear from somebody on our republican line. this is michael, new kensington, pennsylvania. hello. caller: thanks for c-span. thanks for taking my call, pedro. i completely disagree with the last gentleman. and i'm tired of republicans getting blamed for everything, including for the four people that died in benghazi. i think that it's unconscionable that we should have an ambassador that was left, hung out to dry, that did not have

security. they did not have a lot more stuff could have come out of this investigation than did, but for the obfuscation and recals transof the democrats on the committee. who strictly looked at this from a political light. i don't think the republicans looked at it from a political light. i think that it's just a shame that people can't look at it from an american point of view whereas you have to respond when you put your own americans in danger and then i think one thing that came out from the committee, from the hearings, is that we could have responded and they kept saying no. the military kept saying, no, we couldn't have reached those assets. there's no way we could have gotten there in time. well, they could have. they didn't even try. they didn't even lift a finger. i think that is horrible. and it condemns the administration and hillary clinton for what they didn't do.

and for what they did do to prevent this -- prevent the military from rescuing these people. host: twitter, said libya is responsible. diplomatic missions are allowed to allow their own protections. and the investigation into the incident was a desperate attempt to bring downhillry clinton. don from cannonsburg, pennsylvania, hello. caller: hello. $40 million the republicans spent on the whitewater going after the clintons. and ken starr, look what happened to him. another self-righteous republican. hillary clinton, i know this is another waste of money. as you can tell the fox watchers by their comments this morning. you can tell the people that watch fox. they have opinions. opinions. everybody has been opinion. it's ridiculous.

host: why do you think it was a waste of money, then? caller: because it's a waste of money because that's going to be what they are going to spend money on, look at the mess that bush and cheney caused for nothing. in iraq and afghanistan. sorry for raising my voice, when they go to afghanistan after bin laden and the taliban, ok. but they went into iraq on a lie and look at the unbelievable mess that they caused. they didn't even care about them before they wept in there. they thought we're going to go in there, everything will be fine. i just think that either people that hate the clintons and that's just all there is to it. and she's going to be president and they can't deal with it. host: a report from iraq is coming out coming from the perspective of those in britain. that's the iraq inquiry committee. that's out of london. will release a report wednesday about britain's role in the iraq war. the report is a product of seven years of work likely to be the

definitive assessment of a conflict that's rightly seen britain as the worst war blunder since 1956. the war claimed the lives of 179 british troops and more than 4,500 funs service members. some of the key issues out of the report will be intelligence failures are expected to be a focus. reliance by analysts on flawed sources of information about saddam hussein's weapons program and the use of intelligence as part of the march to war. the reporters also expected to look at how the military intervention itself was carried out and the failure to plan for iraq's future and the aftermath of the invasion. more generally the report will examine the decision made within white hall. it will also be seen as a verdict of tony blair's tenure as prime minister. that report coming out wednesday. the benghazi report coming out last week. we're getting your thoughts on the information that came out of it and getting a sense from you if it was worth it. 202-748-8,000 for democrats. 202-748- 001 for republicans. for indsean, 8002

hello. caller: yeah, i would like to ask the question. there have been comments about bush and all that. why don't they just go back to when u.s.a. first experienced with panama where they bomb the -- bombed the poor side. shoiphoip stick to the benghazi report. what do you think coming out? what do you think came out of it? caller: it's a joke. i mean a waste of time. host: why do you say that? caller: come on, man. they politicians. they are all politicians. host: owen from victoria, texas. republican line, you are next up. good morning. caller: good morning. c-span, and good morning, ladies and gentlemen. i just flipped over to c-span from fox to c-span. fox just on this benghazi, yes,

investigate, investigate. now, the plane that hillary and obama will fly up to wherever this morning, air force one, ost $207,000 per hour. $207,000. host: but sticking to the topic at hand as far as the benghazi report, specifically what did you learn from it, what did you get from it? caller: i got from it that washington is incoherent. they can't pour, excuse my language, urine out of a boot with directions wrote on the heel. they are inhe competent. host: we'll hear from arnold in north carolina. democrats line. arnold, go ahead, you're on. caller: good morning, pedro. i think it was a terrible. it's a waste of money and time. one guy said earlier, that mccarthy, kevin mccarthy even

spoke about it that they was doing it to bring hillary clinton down. this congress is set up right now they investigate, investigate. what about legislation? our infrastructure is that of a third world country. landing at la guardia airport, any airport, see how terrible it is. we just -- we waste time on investigations, stupid investigations. the democrats had george bush dead to rights when they took over in 2008, 2006. they didn't stop to investigate him and go through all this. host: arnold, as far as the report that came out, you're saying nothing new at least to you. you learned nothing from the information that came out? caller: nothing came out in the report. it just showed them that they was on a partisan witch-hunt. host: did you look at the report

personally yourself on any level? caller: yes, i did. i looked at it on the computer. host: even from everything that you learned, nothing new out of that? caller: nothing new. nothing new at all. when they interviewed her for 11 hours on the committee, it was just like you could see the venom and the attacks on her. it's just outrageous the way they are wasting our time and money in congress. legislate. you are there to legislate. get legislation done. get the country back up on its feet. host: hear from see seal -- cicil, good morning. caller: good morning, i'm just, i am just beyond -- i can't even believe that this is still being a discussion. it hillary clinton has been just attacked for years. this whole benghazi thing, she

was interviewed for 11 hours. nothing was found. but they just -- the republicans just keep coming after her and after her. they keep saying they were asleep. it was 3:00 in the morning. actually when benghazi occurred, it was in the afternoon here in the united states. so that right there just astounds me. it's so funny because i'm now an independent but i was a long republican and i'm 62 years old. and when the whole obama thing came to light, i dropped being a republican because they are so out of touch with reality and they are just getting worse and worse. they keep investigating her, but yet nobody says anything about

the fact that bush and cheney made so much money through halliburton when they sent them over to the middle east. unbelievable. host: orlando, valley, alabama, republican line. go ahead. caller: yeah. this is orlando. my big problem was when hillary came out i saw it on the news one morning when the plane was landed and she walks out there and speaks to one of the family members as they are rolling the coffins out and says we're going to get the people who made that horrible video. she told one of the family members that on the tarmac as they was rolling out the casket. that woman to be able to do something like that when she told her daughter and told the president of egypt that it was not nothing to do with the film but terrorist attack. that takes some kind of gumption

. but all through her lifetime -- once in a while it could be a witch-hunt. but all the problems that woman's had and clinton meeting with the lawyers -- i mean the d.o.j. supervisors that's investigating that, i think it's a crying shame and i think, yeah, they should be investigated. everybody that allows one of our diplomats to die, everybody should not have a partisan person in it. but even now they are not even going to do anything about the lady at the d.o.j. meeting with president clinton. you know it's got to be wrong. i try to be an honest, decent human being, and try not to take sides, i admit i'm a republican but i'm a republican because i believe -- i'm a republican because of the abortion situation. this here is nonpartisan with me. any time our diplomats die overseas and somebody tells a

falsehood about it, they throw their self in a whole bad situation. host: let's hear from rose, monroe, michigan, democrats line. caller: yeah. i'm a democrat but i don't -- i agree with the republicans what they have done and investigated because when hillary clinton starts lying and lying in a big way and she doesn't have the guts to tell the american people the truth just like obama, and i know all you obama out there thinks he walks on water but he doesn't. when you let americans die in a foreign country and they are sitting there scratching their heads on what uniform to wear, that is preposterous. host: that's rose. monroe, michigan, democrat who is calling on the benghazi report that came out. we'll take calls on that. if you're on the line hold on. if you still want to make your thoughts on it known, you can do

so 202-748 shall 8000 for democrats. 202-748-83001 for republicans. and independents 202-748-8002. president obama and hillary clinton will appear jointly today. charlotte, north carolina, it's their first joint appearance. joining us on the phone to talk about that appearance, jim morrill, from the "charlotte observer," a reporter covering and taking a look at this. mr. morrill, good morning. thanks for joining us. guest: hey, pedro, how are you? host: why charlotte? guest: charlotte is a -- north carolina is nor north carolina as a battleground state. it's getting to be more of battleground state. the clinton people are already investing pretty heavily in here. they spent over $10 million or $12 million already on tv ads in the state. and priority u.s.a. action has also spent money and committed to spend another $9 million or $10 million.

they are sort of the only game in town right now. trump hasn't spent anything. nobody has spent money on his behalf since he became the presumptive nominee. i think the democrats are looking to contest north carolina. host: tell us about the event. what do we know specifically, what will happen, where will it take place, what's expected in that general area around as far as security and traffic? guest: security will be very heavy. will traffic. people will have a hard time getting to work downtown. i'm sure a lot of streets will be closed off, at least temporarily. the president and mrs. clinton arrive at about 2:00 or 2:30. the event starts at 3:00. at the convention center right downtown. motorists are going to be a little inconvenienced twheen -- between say 2:00 and 5:00 when they are scheduled to leave again. they are scheduled to speak to a

rally at the convention center and there may be another event that we don't know about yet. host: what do you mean by that? a separate event at a home or something like that? guest: i don't know. the associated press reported that there may be something either by the president or secretary clinton or both after the speech at the convention center. we're not quite sure what that might be. host: do we know anything about the theme of the event? the focus of it? anything as far as content? guest: i don't think so-so far except to show that he supports her. his popularity is going up, as you know, in north carolina. i think it's 50% or higher now. i think it helps her to be on stage with him. and certainly he continues to have a lot of supporters here, particularly minorities and democrats.

if he can excite them for her, that will help her get them to turn out in six months. host: as far as legislators, do we know of anybody here as far as the delegation that's going to be part of this event or attending or local legislators there? guest: yeah. i'm sure a lot of -- some of the delegation will be here, but more importantly for north carolina politics, the democratic gubernatorial candidate, roy cooper, will be there. as will the democratic u.s. senate candidate, deborah ross. i don't think either one of them was with secretary clinton when she was in raleigh a couple weeks ago, literally a couple weeks ago. incidentally donald trump is in raleigh, north carolina tonight. it's sort of a trifecta, presidential trifecta. host: as far as the trump infrastructure there in the state, how would you stribe it? guest: pretty nonexistent so

far. it's building up. to say they are building it is the right way to say it. but all they have is a state director that we know of so far. they have been pretty tightlipped as the trump campaign has been in a lot of places. the joint campaign committee for the republicans are said to have a lot of people on the ground. that's people from the party who are here working for all the candidates here, including senator burr and governor pat mccrorry. trump people alone not so much. host: jim morrill of the "charlotte observer" on the phone talking about the event today in charlotte. if you look on the website his piece in "charlotte observer" website, some things to know about tuesday's clinton-obama raleigh in charlotte. jim, thank you so much. guest: thank you, pedro. nice to be with you. host: that event at 3:00. you can see it live on c-span2. if you go to our website you can go for more information about

this joint appearance by president obama and hillary clinton, 3:00 this afternoon. watch ton c-span2. sheila from georgia, up next. independent line. good morning, go ahead. caller: yes. pedro, i'm here. as far as the benghazi, all that's hearings and everything, studies and us everything, no. wasn't worth it. they have much more important hings to do. pedro, if people would go back still n darrell issa was stevens' n, chris mother put a letter in as testimony, and you could tell that he did not want to read

that. took notes on that hearing. people would go back and review er testimony about chris stevens, you'll find that -- no. and all ese hearings this baloney was worth it. host: benghazi website is the select committee on benghazi. benghazi.house.gov where you can find the report, a summary of the report. on the democrats' website for the committee as well, their response to what came out last week. gina from mississippi, republican line. thanks for calling, go ahead. caller: good morning, pedro. to be frank i don't know if anything is worth a hearing anymore because democrats just

accept lies even when they are proven, and it doesn't matter to democrat voters if their constituents lie or not. she's been caught in so many lies. it's just overlooked. that's because a lot of the democrats, especially young people that they are pulling in to vote, don't even know anything about history. they don't know anything about the news or current events. it's a sad state of affairs that we live in now. i agree with the last two callers that called about just the lies. one of the things i'd like to say to the democrats out there is that why doesn't hillary clinton good enough to vote in the last two elections? she doesn't good enough, but now all of a sudden she's supposed to be the prime candidate. she's supposed to be an excellent choice. i'd like you to ask yourself the question, democrats.

host: "the washington post" this morning, story, taking a look at that bombing that tack place in baghdad in recent days with the death total topping 200 now saying that iraq is regularly struck by suicide bombings that turn its markets and streets into scenes of horrors, but it was sunday's attack unusually brutal even by a country torn by violence. one of the worst bombings iraq has seen since the 2003 u.s.-led invasion and most deadly carried out by the islamic state militants. more than 250 injured according to health officials. they said the figure only included bodies that had been brought to the city's hospitals and injured who had died in them. another of the head of baghdad's orgue there said 30 or 40 more unidentified bodies had been brought directly to the morgue, bringing the total death toll to 222. louisville, kentucky.

independent line. caller: yes, i'm a vietnam veteran. it disturbs me when we can have people attacked and been told come rescue them stand down. i'm one of these people who is calling in who don't think it's a big deal. i think we bring the draft back and put their babies out. we don't come rescue them. the democrat party is putting the party first not the country, thank you. host: wanda, silver spring, maryland. democrats line. go ahead, you're on. caller: hi, you know i have listened to a lot of the callers this emember when benghazi horrible thing happened and the people were rioting all east. out the middle there were things happening all over. the benghazi compound was manned

by contractors which were the basically the war was paid for by contractors. there were no military there because the president was trying to wind down. the ambassador was a good friend of hillary clinton. that was her deep friend. he lost her friend that day. unfortunately the investigation had to go on because you have to find out what happened. but that war was a war of mercenaries. george bush and dick cheney made ure that money and profiting became the priority.

it's a very, very sad day for everyone in this country. host: republican line, salem, oregon, ron, go ahead. caller: yeah. i don't believe what's going on. everything hillary says and obama they are liars. cronyism. the i.r.s. scandal. it's just butter side up. always lands butter side up. benghazi, the last lady that called, hillary sent those people in there. hillary didn't help them people. hillary had those people killed. host: 10 days working days left in congress before they take their august break, one of the things being considered this week is legislation that would deal with guns. "politico" reporting that they'll vote on an anti-terrorism package that includes a gun control proposal that was similar to the one offered by senator john cornyn, republican of texas. that was rejected by the senate. the house rules committee meets today to mark up that

legislation. the process of putting it out to the floor. that you can see live as the rules committee meets and discusses over the legislation. live on c-span2. that will start at 5:00 this afternoon. the house rules committee, counterterrorism, and gun legislation being on the agunneda. their markup meeting. again, 5:00 this afternoon on c-span. albert up next, bethlehem, pennsylvania. independent line. caller: good morning. first off as a south carolina resident i'm embarrassed that trey gowdy someone of our representatives. secondly, even though it was a huge waste of money it kept him distracted from doing other bad things. my main point is that the benghazi story is indicative of how the failure of our defense industries and the failure of the private contractors, i think we should fire all of them. fire all the mercenaries. they are there to profit. not there to protect our contry. if marines had been guarding that post this would not have

happened. that's the biggest story that's being missed out of this is how the private contractors just -- they don't win military conflicts. they continue them on and on and on and they are there to make money. they are not there to protect our flag. thank you very much. host: the full report is at benghazi.house.gov. some of the summary that came out from the release of the report includes defense department, report saying that it did not meet its response times, deploy military assets to benghazi and follow-up to ensure americans were rescued in a timely fashion. the c.i.a. missed looming threat despite warnings and wrote faulty intelligence reports after the attack. secretary clinton state department failed to protect the benghazi outpost. there was confusion about the u.s. allies in the region. and americans at the c.i.a. annex were saved by gaddafi loyalists not militia groups. and one of the other findings amongst many, some participants on post attack videoconference were unsure about what each

agency was doing to rescue americans. again, benghazi.house.gov you can find a full summary of what republicans put out including a democratic republicans and their report on the investigation. bethlehem, pennsylvania, albert, go ahead. caller: i just did. host: thank you, albert. move on to judith. st. paul, minnesota, democrats line. caller: hello, this is judith i'm calling with regard to the democratic report for the benghazi committee. i simply want -- i just wanted to comment that it seemed to me that when they were talking about the manner in which they had been excluded from the committee participation, we have no way of absolutely verifying that since we were not in the committee and were not participants, it struck me how when representative gowdy came out and also the members who spoke with them how hostile they were and aggressive instead of objective in reporting that.

it seemed to me to bear out at least in terms of their reflection and how they handled themselves that much of what the democrats said probably was likely true. i wanted to say this is my first call and i wanted to thank you for taking my call and tell you how much i enjoy c-span. host: we appreciate you watching. thank you for calling in. some of the democratic -- some democrats' response to the report includes a press release that came out last week saying that the claim that secretary clinton was considered -- considering a trip to libya in 2012 and the department wanted to establish a permanent facility in benghazi was reported three years ago. the claim that no military assets were deployed to benghazi on the night of the attacks was reported three years. the claim that secure videoconference on the night of the attacks focused overwhelmingly on a youtube video was reported two years ago and debunked. a team headed to tripoli ordered to change out of their uniform into civilian clothes several times the morning after was reported three years ago.

it goes on. that more information you can find on the democrat on the select committee on benghazi. karen, thanks for holding on, from georgia on our republican line. caller: yes. i just want to say that i don't like being lied to and i believe i was lied to. i know i was lied to. and i believe they are guilty of murder because i don't really care what happened that night, i care about the months before when they asked for security and were told no, no, no. they told them know for political reasons. they wanted their narrative to be that everything was ok over there. it wasn't they are guilty. they are guilty of murder. host: from wisconsin, richfield, wisconsin, martin. democrats line. hello. caller: good morning. pedro. thank you for c-span. my comment is simply this. as a lifelong democrat, i am really, really frustrated and disgusted with both parties, all

the candidates we currently have. we should be doing much, much better as the united states of america. thank you. host: martin, before you leave, about the report, what did you get from it? he's hung up. from oxford, pennsylvania, independent line. robert, good morning. go ahead. caller: good morning. thanks for c-span. i really enjoy the show. the guy from wisconsin was -- independent, i think both parties, both parties lie to us. there's no doubt about that. if you really want -- going to talk about lies, if you have the tape when powell was at the united nations getting us into the war in iraq that was nothing but filled with lies where we lost more than four people. four people is too many. but my goodness gracious look at the people that's lost their lives to the lies. host: robert, specifically to the report then. what did you think about the information that came out of it? caller: i listened to it while

she was under investigation under the hearing and she talked for 11 hours. host: did you watch the whole thing? caller: yes, i watched all 11 hours of it. host: ok. caller: i was impressed the way she handled herself, but i thought to myself the one republican congressman that said that it was all about making her look bad, he was probably right there. she's not my favorite person. but neither is trump. but i appreciate c-span and thank you so much. god bless america. host: this is manny from randallstown, maryland. independent line. manny. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. first of all this was a partisan call. how many democrats stood with gowdy? nobody.

that should have been fact cited. if you go back in 1983, there shyite that e, killed 63 during the reagan administration there was no investigation by the democrats. all they had toe do was come together and find a solution to all these problems. that should have been what should have been in the benghazi select committee. the republicans are there for a witch-hunt. i'm not in favor of hillary. i'm thinking of voting towards her. the republicans are in there -- she stood firm for 11 hours. everybody applauded her for telling the whole truth. she asked for money to protect people over there. nobody did that. they should go back and come out

with a good information for her to protect the american embassies and consulate everywhere around the world. thank you. host: suicide bombings in saudi arabia the subject of the story in "wall street journal" this morning. the recent ones saying that looking at some of the attacks, one attack that took place as worshipers gathered to break their fast in the mosque opened courtyards killing four guards, wounding five others. footage circulating on social media showed a car in blames. everything was so quiet as everyone is eating and then there was huge noise and the ground started shaking, including -- according to one witness. i panicked, people around me calmed me down. the u.s. embassy in riyadh said there were no casualties or injuries among u.s. consulate staff and urged american citizens take extra precautions when traveling in the contry. the u.s. consulate general guilting was the twite of a 2004 al qaeda attack that left nine people dead. host: one more call on this

topic. omar from louisville, kentucky, independent line. caller: i'm calling from louisville. i'm actually from new york. my mother was from turkey. i have two uncles and three cousins all of whom are in the turkish military. we stay in close touch. all the questions about benghazi really ridiculous. you have to ask yourself, what was a large c.i.a. presence in libya? what were they doing? the men who fought at benghazi, they were black ops, just men brought in to defend it. but you have to ask this question, why did stevens go to benghazi? and why was the turkish ambassador in benghazi shortly before that attack? what was really going on? ok. why was the benghazi compound attacked? it was attacked because there were warehouses about three miles north of benghazi, and those warehouses held military

equipment. those are the questions, the reason they took so long in coming up with a story like the video wasn't to protect themselves over the election, it was to protect themselves from what they were doing in benghazi. why was that turkish ambassador there? what happened to that military uipment in those wear -- warehouses. host: omar, louisville, kentucky. that's the last call we'll take on the topic. the house working on gun legislation this week. senate also doing activity in these days before the summer recess takes place. two congressional reporters joining us to talk about that activity. seung min kim of "politico" and laura ba ron lopez of the huffling-u hufflington post will be on later to discuss the topics. what can be done to the united states according to what's going on with isis in the middle east. joining us, dennis no, sir, former middle east advisor will join us. that as "washington journal"

continues. >> this month watch c-span's coverage of the 2016 republican and democratic national conventions. and every saturday night at 8:00 eastern, we'll look back at past conventions and the presidential candidates who went on to win their party's nomination. this saturday, we'll focus on incumbent presidents who ran for re-election. dwightizen hour at the 1956 republican convention in san francisco. the 1964 democratic convention

in atlantic city with lyndon johnson. richard nixon at the 1972 republican convention in miami beach. the 1980 democratic convention with jimmy carter in new york city. george h.w. bush at the 1992 republican convention in houston. bill clinton in chicago for the 1996 democratic convention. and the 2004 republican convention in new york city with george w. bush. past republican and democratic national conventions, saturday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span. >> if we're going to invest an additional $100 million into higher education in the commonwealth, we have to change the way that we deliver education and we also have to expect more for the dollars that we're getting. >> sunday night on "q&a," a.e.i. resident fellow gerard robinson talks about the state of education in the u.s. >> there is a body of literature that's clear that there are

certain corresponderses should take, math, science, english that should be in place if you expect to be in college. to accept students who haven't gilled that obligation is doing a great disservice to them and it's selling the effort of affirmative action which is something i support. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span's "q&a." >> "washington journal" continues. host: talk about the week ahead in politics on capitol hill. two congressional reporters joining us. joining us is laura bar roan lopez of the did -- barron lopez of the hufferington post. sun min kim of "politico." the one thing we do know on the house side discussions about legislation concerning guns or at least guns being a part of it. laura, tell us what's going on in the house today. guest: it's counterterrorism package that won't come to the floor until later this week.

and within that couldn'ter terrorism package is a gun provision. that gun provision would prohibit suspected terrorists from purchasing a firearm. what it does is it gives the attorney general about three days to prove probable cause. that's a key provision -- key element of this gun provision, something the democrats aren't going to like. and it also mirrors a provision from senator john cornyn in the senate. host: why are democrats not going to like this? guest: democrats say putting the responsibility on attorney general to prove probable cause you have to hold a hearing, it would take too long. they don't like that it would only delay the purchase by three days. so their view is there should be an out right ban on anyone who is a suspected terrorist or no-fly, no-by list, any terrorist watch list. that's what they would like to see passed. but republicans are very adamant about including due process within the gun provision.

host: ms. kim, do we see that response to the cornyn legislation on the senate side? guest: yes, as the senate voted on about four gun proposals and a different -- two different gun proposals later in the week a couple weeks ago, almost immediately after the tragic orlando shootings on june 12. so the legislation written by senator cornyn did get the most votes. however it did not reach the 60 votes needed to advance any sort of legislation in the senate. so most republicans supported it, but it was the same reaction, democrats said, look, this probable cause standard is too high. the national rifle association, so we're not going to go along with t host: how much of this is overshadowed by the house sit in and how much will it influence today? guest: i think the sit-in brought attention and pressure on speaker ryan to hold some sort of gun measure legislation. and what's interesting to me is actually the house democratic caucus wanted to meet with speaker ryan directly in a

caucus meeting. obviously that's very rare. almost unprecedented. he is actually going to be meeting with congressman john lewis of georgia, the civil rights icon, who led that protest, wells congressman john larson of connecticut. he'll meet with them privately later today. obviously about guns. we'll see what happens from that meeting if there is a way that democrats can get a gun proposal that they say is more than just window dressing. host: ms. lopez, do we see a repeat of that? guest: there is talk of that. democrats are saying they'll pull out as many stops as possible. whether that's procedural tools they can use to draw attention on the floor asking parliamentarian questions and so things of that nature. when they went back this week, they were on recess right before the july 4 holiday, and they tried to hold little sit-ins, whether they were in public squares, within their districts.

to deep the -- to keep the attention on gun violence and gun control issues. so house minority leader pelosi going to do are whatever they can to keep pressure on republicans to get the votes they want. they specifically said they want the no fly, no buy. a vote on that. as well as a vote on background checks, requiring background checks for gun purchases at gun shows. as well as online. host: is there direct disagreement on those approaches when it comes to gun purchases? are the republicans ok with that approach and could possibly give democrats some cover as far as this effort is concerned? guest: these are two provisions supported by democrats themselves as well as by gun owners across the country. some 70% have said that they would support passing measures like this. and also there are republicans that support these measures as well. the no fly, no buy list was authored by representative king

of new york who is a republican. there's also in the senate the toomey bill which would require background checks. there is support. it's whether or not leadership wants to bring it to the floor. host: that would be desire of leadership to do so? guest: they don't want a gunfight at this point. they realize the very emotional tragic nature of the shootings that their message since the orlando shootings and their focus has been on combating terrorism. the shooter in the case, purportedly pledged allegiance to the islamic state right before the shootings. they say our focus needs to be on that. that's why you see the gun pressure coming into-n a broader counterterrorism package today. host: to talk about this and other issues with congress coming become before the august recess. you want to ask questions 202-748-8000 for democrats. 202-748-8001 for republicans.

202-748-8002 for independents. how many days until recess? guest: we have about nine legislative days, about two weeks until full recess. that's when the republican national convention begins in cleveland. that's it until september. host: aside from the house efforts on guns, what kind of work activity are we expected to see in those 10 days or so? guest: we have a mix of messaging bills, particularly in the senate, and also trying to get more appropriations bills done. over in the senate tomorrow we have teed up two votes on immigration, actually, which is an issue we have seen fade away. at least legislatively from vong over the last several months. -- congress over the last several months. it's a bill on sanctuary cities where local officials don't cooperate with federal immigration enforcement. let's say an immigrant is picked up in a jail, the feds want the local jails to inform them when this immigrant is supposed to leave the jailed so they can deport them, a lot of jails say this is a violation of our

constitutional rights and we're not going to abide by these regulations. but obviously republicans want these cities to cooperate with immigration enforcement. senator pat toomey of pennsylvania, republican, has written legislation basically forcing these sanctuary cities into cooperating by withholding funding from them. it's a big issue for him because philadelphia is actually -- is what's considered a sanctuary city. he's made a big issue in his re-election. it's in one of the most competitive race this is year. we're voting on -- the senate is voting on legislation to advance that bill tomorrow. tomorrow, wednesday afternoon, in conjunction with that. they are voting on a separate bill targeting sanctuary cities, basically kate's law, written by senator cruz of texas. he made it a very big issue in his bid. what it does is toughens mandatory minimum sentences for immigrants who repeatedly try to enter the united states illegally. host: on the house side, what kind of work?

guest: they are going through a slew of different lands bills today and they are going to be getting started on the counterterrorism bill. that bill what it largely does also it would require the department of homeland security to identify the threat as radical islamist terrorism. something that republicans are irritated with the administration for not calling it by what they say is it's true name. then the bill would also require the d.h.s. to create scenarios nationwide that would then make them practice when an individual is it leaving the u.s. to go work with terrorist organizations, or terrorist organizations are infiltrating the u.s. so gaming out the scenarios is another thing the bill would require. finally it would also require revoking u.s. passports from individuals who have aided, abetted foreign terrorist organizations. and so that's what this larger package is. with the gun provision tucked in.

there's also the possibility that they will motion to go to conference on the national defense authorization. and then they are also looking to opioid conference to try and combat heroin addiction and opioids. that conference is meeting this week. it's been taking a while. the house passed that legislation back in may and then the senate two months before that. that's something that they definitely want to get done before they leave for recess. host: we have calls lined up for you about issues about congress. first call from barbara. from new york, you're on with our guests on the independent line. go ahead. caller: good morning, pedro. good morning, ms. barron lopez and ms. kim. my question is when nancy pelosi was speaker of the house and democrats had control of the legislation, what gun legislation did they pass at that time? thank you. guest: i think that's a criticism that actually the democratic -- house democrats have gotten a lot over the last couple days because when nancy pelosi was speaker of the house

and they had a pretty hefty democratic majority, at some point 60 votes in the senate, obviously president obama in the white house, they didn't advance gun legislation. and that's what republicans have been pointing out repeatedly over the last several weeks. if you kind of recall the makeup of the house democratic caucus back then, the reason why they had such a large majority was because they had a lot of these so-called blue dogs. they are very moderate house democrats hailing from these swing districts. almost red districts sometimes. and who i know a lot of these democrats did not favor stricter gun control measures. when the elections of 2010 and subsequent election since, you have seen a lot of these moderate blue dog democrats wiped out which is why the house democratic caucus has gone considerably to the left and they can really unify behind these stricter gun control measures. host: does nancy pelosi get asked these type of questions? what's her response? guest: she is asked that

question and her typical response is that well, we need to act now. we have seen all of these instances from orlando to san bernardino. and that it's something that needs to get done now. if republicans are willing to bring these to the floor, then democrats are right there to do there. host: let's hear from north carolina. this is on our republican line. robert, go ahead. you're on. caller: good morning. i guess i'm one of the n.r.a. members who do not support the terror watch list, what the democrats are espousing out there. they just want to blank check, put people on to the terrorism list and they have no due process, no way to get off it. that's completely unacceptable. until you do something like that to make sure that people have a way to get off that list, law-abiding american citizens, we all know there's law-abiding american citizens on the no fly list and terror watch list. we know that. that needs to end.

also, as far as the background checks for the gun shows, how many weapons from gun shows have been used host: any of those are open for discussion. guest: speaking to the due process, that is something that even if you democrats have trouble with. understand the republican argument that there should be a way to help people that have been put on the list that clearly should not be on the terrorist watch list, so when this debate was going to the senate, senator feinstein was trying to find ways to put into her amendment elements or help for people who were on the terrorist watch list to make it counsel, appeal to the fact that they are on the watchlist and the biggest fact came to, look,

we do not have the time and three days is not long enough to delete a firearm sale. the bipartisan coalition of senators did try to look at that watchlist issue. can sweepat this list up people who should not be there, and former senator ted kennedy was on their, so the bipartisan coalition of senators has really try to deal with that issue and said, instead of broaderat this federal database, let's try to never this, where people on the list are probably on there because they should be on there, so by having a smaller select terror watch list, they created a list that was more tailored and selected, so you had between 100,000 people on those two lists and that is only about 2100 u.s. citizens and they said

this was a narrow and tailored list that really the people we are going after, that many republicans are so concerned about the issue. is mary, mobile, alabama, democrat line. go ahead. supposed to bet a democrat anymore because i was a john kennedy-robert kennedy democrat, but to get through to your line, i had to call back my old number because i was refused on the independent mind. -- independent line. i was upset with c-span's coverage lately of how have been covered and they have been very pro-left. however, i wonder these two wonderful ladies to tell me the benefit of century cities and this guy was murdered in san

francisco. ,hen we have a serious question they smile. i watch it on talks, cnn, all the left people, when we criticize hillary, everybody just sits there, gives a snark and last set benghazi. goodbye. host: that is mary in alabama. to katehe was referring steinle, unfortunately, her tragic death was one year ago on july 1 in san francisco, and it really triggered the century city debate. she was a woman walking along a san francisco. their father -- i want a san francisco pier with her father and she was killed by a stray

anlet that was fired by illegal immigrant who had been deported several times, and it really brought on this issue of century cities because federal authorities had asked officials to tell us when this guy is leaving, let us know that they did not and that triggered the entire debate. donald trump talked about it excessively in the beginning of his presidential bid. so-called century cities to not abide by these rules, i think there are only 340, is because they believe this is not their role. this is local police, jails, sheriffs are not deputized to be enforcing federal immigration laws. that is a job for federal immigration authorities, and there is a circuit court decision that we had several years ago that said this type of corporation could be considered unconstitutional, which is why saw a lot of these cities and counties, and a lot of led by

democrats or they are more liberal leaning, and that is why you saw a lot of their back often say, this is not our job. host: to have parallel efforts when it comes to century cities in the house? guest: there have been in the past, but so far, there isn't anything up for the next two weeks, but they have until july 15. they could take a cue from the senate and decide it is something they want to bring up shortly after the bills come to the floor, depending on how successful they are. host: do we see any other immigration that efforts, especially in the election year? guest: anything with immigration reform? no. when it comes to the house, what i think they are focusing on our lot of appropriation bills. they are working on this counterterrorism package and they are also, there are things that they need to get done when it comes to the zika conference. the report just came out and the

senate started working on that and that is another thing that needs to get done. host: why is the zika conference , it seems i can have been several holdups getting final legislation happening. guest: there is. last week, the senate held a vote raced off of the conference support. that would provide $1.1 billion to zika efforts, and it failed because democrats were upset about writers that they call ls in the bills and extra data provision that confederaterevented flags from being flown on veteran cemeteries, so democrats did not vote for the bill because they said they were too many partisan writers. senate majority leader mcconnell was saying, i cannot change this bill. it came out of conference with the house, so you guys a lot this it on it over the july 4

recess and then i will bring it back up and see if you change your tune. host: what happens between now and then because any changes on the senate side that could happen? guest: it depends on what democrats have heard from their constituents, but i don't think they will be changing their minds. they are also backed up by a veto threat from the white house. president obama said he will not support the bill at the comes to his desk processing for those reasons, so senate majority leader mitch mcconnell is hoping that the hometown pressure over the recess got to the senate democrats and he is saying they will not renegotiate but senate democrats say there's no way. host: you just heard from min kim and laura barron lopez. birmingham, alabama, richard. independent mind, go ahead. caller: i would like to say that showsopholes and the gun is a real big thing that they have to close out because i see people coming and buying these

machine guns. 20, they take them to the middle of chicago, pittsburgh, milwaukee, where is where most of the illegal guns are coming from. it is these southern states. what theyask them think about this and how it can be stopped. host: ms. kim? guest: i think democrats look toward comments like the caller loophole in the gun law has to be closed and there was an effort three years ago led by the senator from virginia and pennsylvania. withs methodically written exemptions, but that would basically close these so-called loopholes for gun sales. it did not pass the senate and

it got the support of four moderate republicans, however, there were -- there were a lot of red tape democrats in the senate and a lot where not advancing the bill. this is about two months after the tragic shooting at sandy hook elementary school in connecticut. that was kind of the closest chance of the senate had in advancing gun control legislation, but even with the democratic-controlled senate, it was difficult. host: as far as the support, it seems that because it was supported by the nra, that is why it had some traction in the house side, at least among democrats. democrats, closing the gun show loophole, as well as the online loophole, is something they support wholeheartedly. it is something they want to see past and they won it brought to the floor. because the nra is not supportive of that division, it would be difficult for the

republicans rallying behind that. host: walter from pennsylvania, democrat line. hello. caller: good morning, everyone. youthful day. -- beautiful day. my first question would be simply, can't we recall all of weapons happened is to be due by the u.s. by the gunrunning in libya? on top of that, wouldn't it be just as simple to go through your by door and confiscate all of the weapons that are out there? host: ms. lopez? guest: i think it's efforts like that were taken under way, it would definitely not bode well for democrats or the administration when it comes to hearing back from their constituents. ae gun debate in congress was

very fierce debate. it is something that has only given thehe past year different attacks that have happened on u.s. soil, so parties are very divided on this. sees not an issue that we much bipartisan work on. the closest thing that people seem to support is the mention to me bill, which is something you see republicans and democrats working on, as well as sandra collins' efforts to find a compromise when four amendments came to the for a few weeks ago to try and bring in some of those loopholes. any efforts by the administration to try and make this an issue going into the election would likely only hurt , asary clinton's chances well as of the democrats better fine for reelection or trying to unseat republican spirit guest: i think that is took -- republicans.

guest: i think that is totally correct. it can turn into may be if president obama is trying to take your guns of the, but this is a second amendment right to own weapons, so this is why it is a tricky issue. you are bouncing constitutional rights, but at the same time with very awful shootings that occur very often and congress has really struggled and failed to find a balance of those competing interests. host: there is a story this week saying that donald trump is having a visit with the house republican conference. what does that mean? still about likely his rhetoric and messaging. we heard earlier in the months leading up to house speaker ryan's endorsement of him, i would like to hear him tone down the rhetoric that he is using on the campaign trail, and recently, he did get in a little bit of hot water over the etweeted orn he r

used imagery of hillary clinton with the star david next to it. we will see if that comes up, if he could tone down his tweets a little bit, especially as we are closer to the general election, and trying to see if his entire this entire agenda speaker line is trying to push forward will show the america people that they are series on these issues from economy, poverty, to counterterrorism issues and trying to pad that as best he can with donald trump's message. host: what is it like for house speaker ryan's since the endorsement? guest: [laughter] , he had tondorsement deal with the attack on the judge she was american-born but

mexican-american parents. so he got a lot of questions saying, you want him to tone down the way he is speaking and is even going to listen to your advice? senate majority leader mitch you know vineland counted backwards, i will not be talking about the campaign every single day. i am trying to get business done here. i think that we need to rally behind our nominee and that he is improving and that he is starting to go more on message. far as theim, as senate side this morning, inc. reports that the sender from iowa have had discussions with donald trump. what has been the general response, especially the reaction on the senate side? outt: we are hoping to find what it is like later this week, but i think the senator is very well respected within the senate republican conference issues. when she kind of rode out of

third-place to unexpectedly win her primary during her 2014 campaign, she was regarded as this rising star. marco rubio backed her. she took away a seat that had been had by iowa for one decade by former senator tom harkin. she was such a star that mitch mcconnell tapped her to deliver the state of the union response in her first year, basically in her first month of senator. a big role for her, and she hate us from iowa, which we know is the first in the nation caucuses and it takes a role in the nominating residential process. we did get a statement from her yesterday. she did not mention the word vice president in her statement. she said she has had a chance to talk with donald trump, tell about the issues concerning iowans across the country, so we are trying to read the tea leaves. another thing we are watching our ports showing that senator bob corker of tennessee is actually campaigning with donald

trump today and senator corker has also been mentioned on trump's vp list. another personal respected, very outspoken, so we will see how much this feels the vp chatter even more. host: ohio, republican line, selma. go ahead. caller: yeah, when democrats started this crap on the hill, you know who sat down first? it was the black senator. they are starting this gun stuff. by don't they take the guns away from the gangs? the gangs are killing people. oh, my god. they had taken over the united states. there are gangs in every town. why didn't they use force to take the guns away from them? they are killing little kids. what is wrong with these people? can't they see what is going on?

the gangs are taking over with their dope, the guns, wake up, america. they are taking over. host: as far as the senate was concerned, what was your thought when it steadily from the house side? guest: look -- caller: look who sat down first. it was a black person. they are the ones who are killing our people. host: let's move on to frank in pennsylvania, democrat line. caller: yes, hello. i am a retired law enforcement officer and have been listening to this entire discussion, and i have been following this entire thing for a long time now. i am a little bit stunned that my own party is refusing to even talk about the fact that orlando -- it is finedino to talk about gun control, and

then control is important, but we are being attacked by the islamic state. it is a pattern attack. they did it in france, dubai, kenya, all of those places and dozens more, where nobody is armed. the entire population is disarmed and they had no problem getting four or five guys with ak-47s and shooting hundreds of people. the only thing i am hearing for my own party is that the thing to do is to disarm all of us so that we cannot be sitting ducks for a bunch of isis terrorists. you guys really need to get serious if you want to save lives. to gun control, that is fine. but if you want to save lives from islamic terrorists, you have to get serious about really fighting this issue and doing something about it. that is all i have to say. thank you. host: focusing on isis, where is the house and senate as far as

efforts to get the administration to increase activity when it comes to isis? guest: the biggest running debate on this is the authorization to use military force, and that is something the obama administration sent to over one i want to say year ago, and the house said, look, you are restricting your powers. we want to be sure that whoever comes into the white house next is able to have the powers that they need to combat this and argument is that it would expand powers for the president too far and it would allow them to which unilateral authority. when it comes to the isis element, the thing that the house is going to work on this week is the counterterrorism package. speaking to what you mentioned in the phone call, i think when outcome he was talking about the san bernardino and orlando shooter and how they

were radicalized, but they were not directly connected to isis. at least two of them were american-born and they were people who then in the course of the years had become more radicalized and decided to carry .ut these attacks document by republicans is, let's give this a name, and that is a big element of this legislation because that is really what they have been trying to hit democrats on the must. guest: i think the biggest step by congress could take is the authorization of military force, and there have been efforts by some senators, particularly on the foreign relations committee, to really push this. i do not know how long they have been saying, we need to have a .ull debate and give we cannot just complain about the president not giving the power as their own parameter for efforts against the islamic

state, but in the house, leadership believe the president already has powers under the act against the islamic state and they debate that they have not shown that they want to have, and that is why you see congress take more of the narrow and tailored approach, especially after these terror attacks. we have legislation in the house later this week, so after the paris attacks in november, he saw that legislation passed quickly that could more sections on the visa waiver. we saw a lot of that terrorists in the paris attacks hailed from countries where you do not need a visa to travel to the united states, and they could very easily could have come to the united states and we would not know who they are, so you will find congress acting on the narrower approaches and things that they can do that will not happen in [indiscernible] host: from georgia, independent line. two questions for the

young ladies. first, i would like for them to explain to the c-span audience their own personal experiences in attempting to purchase a firearm, either at the store, online or at a gun show and if they had any problems doing it. two, could they tell the c-span audience the name of any nra member who is either a mass shooter or a terrorist? in other words, i do not think the nra is responsible for any of the mass shootings or terrorism. as a matter of fact, most of the political affiliation of the mass shooters has been a member of the democrat party. thank you and i will listen to the answer off air. guest: i have not -- i cannot speak to my own personal experience trying to buy a gun, but it was interesting. there were a couple of stores after the orlando shootings where journalists kind of had the personal experiences on buying a firearm. guest: one was from the

"huffington post" and it took about 30 minutes in florida for a few reporters to purchase an also, and then there was one in the news outlet in philadelphia and it only took them seven minutes. those were a few articles that came out, especially in the lake of orlando. host: for the "huffington post" reporter, 30 minutes with checks and it would be involved? guest: exactly. host: what was the reaction to that? guest: there was a bit of surprise that it did not take that long, and people who have never owned guns previously were able to purchase them that quickly and did not really have to go through much. host: greg, michigan, republican line. good morning. caller: good morning to you and to the two lovely young ladies. i would like to ask the questions. number one, the amazement i had

of the fact that the democrats are all for allowing total the united into states but they want to restrict your right to keep and bear arms, which is a right under the constitution. the individuals who killed [indiscernible] was that an immigrant but illegal immigrant. immigrants are great people. illegal immigrants need to be controlled, just as the guns in the hands of criminals. to an earlier caller from pennsylvania, not a police officer, the one before him who proposed going door-to-door trying to confiscate firearms, those who own the firearms would not surrender them peacefully. you would have super wars in the streets of america. as for the rest, i do not know where to start. i would like to thank you for taking my call and i wish you both a wonderful day. thank you. definitely the

suspect in the kate steinle case should not have been here. he had been deported seven times in the united states, and yet actually multiple felonies on he was the kind of person here illegally who should've been supported. i think the administration acknowledge that, democrats of knowledge that and it has been a tricky issue, particularly for democrats. happened in san francisco, so the california senators or under a lot of pressure at the time. senator feinstein, working with the senator from california, started drafting legislation targeting sanctuary cities, and she got a big earful from immigration advocates and said, you cannot really back down because of this one incident. -- he was in the united states illegally and he should not have them here. the administration was trying to figure out where the key medication lapsed, but a lot of it was san francisco did not want to deal with federal

immigration. guest: how it just add the gentleman mentioning that there would be the civil war in the u.s. this gives a little bit of insight into how charged the debate is and how it is so difficult to even past bare minimum within the u.s. congress right now. host: george, tampa, florida, democrat line, you are on. caller: good morning to all three of you. , have so many things to say but a limited amount of time. just two issues, the immigration issue and the gun issue. i believe that america is , pre-1963 and post-1963. everyone will not admit it and i will tell you i am a foreigner, i am cuban, and i am caucasian looking and green eyes and i get to hear so many things that ofves to me that a portion americans are anti-immigrant

because they are not germans, scandinavians, it is against latins. latins are mixed people. the point is that i understand that we have to have documentation. we cannot have the legal people. no country can, but we cannot take all the immigrants. i am -- almost every hispanic i see my life, nicaraguans, mexicans, they go to work every single day. they loved their family, they take care of their family, they are good people. if we have a problem with the middle east, the people in the street, us, the american people, we will not be here to fight that. we had to work out things with our military, our national police. on the issue of guns, man, someone on c-span said not long ago that he needed his m-16 or ak-47 or whatever because what happens is when you shoot pigs, they walk in groups comes a have

it made few of them and no sense. it almost made me laugh. if all of the democrats want is to have some control over weapons, they will kill mass amounts of people. host: george, thanks. miss lopez, you want to start? guest: speaking to the gun issue, it goes back to the fact democratse house, want to see these bills come to the floor. they went to see votes on them. they are understanding. right after this it in, representative clyburn was very emotional and said that it reminded him when he and representative john lewis for marching back in the 1960's and thiswould talk about how issue -- they are just asking for a vote. they're not even completely -- they are realistic, pretty positive, but they may not have the votes there, even though there are some republicans who buyupport the no fly, no

bill, but this is something the market people should be able to have come up voting on basic measures, whether they go down or succeed. guest: on the immigration point, i think they are speaking to that there are so many people in these immunities and they go to work like the rest of us and participate and contribute. they take care of their family, to go to work, they participate in the day-to-day life of the communities, and i think that is why democrats have pushed for immigration reform and many republicans over the last several years. president obama did take executive action about 1.5 years ago to try and shield these people who have no obvious come in the records, who have passed background checks to allow them to stay here. they do not get legal status, but they do not get supported and they can work legally. that decision had been blocked repeatedly by federal courts and the supreme court on the deadlock that we're going to let

the lower court decision stand comes of this is a big part of president obama's legacy backup legacy that got -- legacy backup locked. immigration has been a very charged and tricky issue. host: since both of you cover the senate, how concerned is the senate right now, especially republicans in the senate that it might turn over the democratic hanscom november? -- democratic hands come november? guest: there are concerns, especially since there were certain races that they thought were safe that are now coming into play, namely senator chuck grassley of iowa, who was ofrting to feel a little bit the heat from the democrat running against him. and then there is the very vulnerable senator such as senator rob portman of ohio and senator ronald kirk of illinois and senator of new hampshire, so they are trying to push issues,

like the gun provisions, which and number have supported. and then they are also trying to see the opioid legislation gets sent to the president because that would be a big deal if they were able to say, look, i was in the senate and i helped pass this legislation to combat heroin addiction and to try to push treatment, to try to push the solution more toward treatment and medication toward recovery as opposed to lawinence of really strict enforcement tactics. that would be a big win for them if they were able to get it through, as well as efforts to combat the zika virus. they are definitely feeling the pressure and that is why they are trying to speak to the leaders and say, look, let's get these bills across the floor so that i can go back to my state and say, look at what i was able to do. host: miss kim? also concerned, even if they want to publicly, that there is concern that donald trump is at the top of

the ticket. most of the senate republicans running for reelection have embraced him as the nominee, even though grassley has not been with him very closely, but they realize that they need the trunk voters to came out in big numbers for donald trump and various primaries through the year. they need them to come out in big numbers for them to support in their own reelection races. however, they also realized that many of the comments that he made, they cannot embrace them to close the, which is why you saw senator mark kirk, the most honorable republican this year -- vulnerable republican this you, granted a blue state, but after saying for a while that i would support the nominee and donald trump is the nominee, he disavowed his endorsement about one month or so ago. thatlso see others saying some are saying that he has not earned their endorsement and you have other saying that they will support him but not endorse and, so you see kind of a difficult

place where these candidates are trying to balance. they're all great candidates, the national republican senatorial committee votes on how congress the senators are, but the fact of the matter is is that there are republicans running in purple states in the presidential year. host: marco rubio is running for reelection. what does it mean for sender sanders now, now that he is back in the senate and involved in the campaign? guest: it is difficult because he has all that secret service from day to day. host: [laughter] is still exists? guest: yes, until he formally ends his campaign, he still has secret service around to when comes to capitol hill. he will meet with the democratic caucus on wednesday to discuss his vision. he amount as you will not be the nominee, however, he is fighting for all the leverage that he can to craft a democratic platform in philadelphia later this

month, so primarily what he is fighting for right now, his discussion back in the senate, he has a lot of friends in the senate carried only one endorsement, but they are glad to see him back and they like and -- senate. the only had one endorsement, but they're glad to see him back and they like him. they are still friends in the keep that going. [laughter] guest: senator rubio, i was just say that he is definitely enjoyed talking to reporters again. [laughter] u.s. out on the campaign trail, he was not as present in the senate, as well as bernie sanders, so now rubio is back in the thick of things and he is leading essentially the republicans when it came to the puerto rico legislation that just passed terry d has been very vocal on that and zika. just passed. he has been very vocal on that and seek a. bernie sanders, i

would just say that something we saw before the july 4 holiday, the democrats released their draft platform and you did see a lot of his influence in that. they definitely did not side with hillary clinton became to the death penalty and say that they were against it, so you can see sanders working his way. host: let's hear from bob in indiana, independent line. caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call. i win it to ask the ladies in regards to the gun control issue , over the last two years, more and more federal agencies have been issued small arms. the perception appears to be that when semiautomatic weapons are held by private citizens that the appearance seems to be that they cold and offensive weapon, but when they are held and government employees' hands, they are classified as defensive weapons or for personal protection.

i would like to know why that is. thank you. i think that is an issue that has come up before. we saw that even how weapons in the hands of federal agencies can go awry. we saw the gun walking scandal, i believe it was four years ago, where thick and the major congressional issue, so i think that is something that federal agencies are paying attention to. ken in new jersey, republican line. caller: good morning. the gunt ironic that holders to commit the felony are subject to deportation but not eligible for citizenship, but we goes with the same thing work with various advocacy groups, so i do not know why they are not embracing this injustice. thank you. think, and again, not

that specific issue, but the broader issue of treating immigrants who are here legally or who came to this so -- or who came the so-called right rate versus immigrants who came here illegally, and a variety of issues, that has been a major tension point for some time and you see elements of that argument coming up and immigration reform debates over and over again. i assume he is talking about the shooter [indiscernible] and this is a guy who really fall through the cracks and should have been deported, perhaps the first time, with his first felony conviction, but congress has not been able to pass legislation targeting this issue because the republicans and democrats have not been able to agree. what is interesting is that part of the executive action that the president announced 1.5 ishiguro that does not really get talked about our kind of these new enforcement programs.

the forced cooperation of local officials and federal government in a broader program called secure communities was criticized and jeh johnson has kind of tried to go back to those cities that said we cannot work with federal enforcement officials anymore and has tried to find ways that homeland security can cooperate with these local cities and counties who are very reticent about this cooperation. theave an update during senate judiciary committee last chicken, which he testified about general homeland security matters, and he said of the 25 biggest cities, i want to say 16 are open to working with the federal government again because -- and he considered that a major victory, so you are seen efforts that do not get as much coverage, but you are seeing efforts by the federal government to try and work with these cities more to make sure that something like kate steinle's death will not happen again. host: from texas, independent

line, jim. caller: good morning. i want to correct something that "politico" and "huffington" post would say, there is never been an ak-47 gun the gun store. another thing is, a lot of people would support more restrictive gun regulations, whatever. are committed by rifles, and almost none are committed by legal gun owners. been illegal.ways we have more heroine on the street now the number. simply making laws does not work. 67% of homicides are committed by handguns. 50% of homicides are committed

by african americans. it would be very unfair to take guns away from the hands of african-americans, but if you want something that would be effective in reducing homicide rate, i would support it, but if that is all you are looking for, a policy, consider that. guest: speaking to the hair when issue, that is something that -- speaking to the hera when, that is something, select to get done before the long summer recess, before the november election. really the efforts that they are trying to push through, especially on the senate side, would be a lot more focused on recovery, not as much on law enforcement. that is the biggest difference that we have seen in the shift in the so-called war on drugs, and that is something that states like new hampshire are definitely desperate for. more funding to try to open treatment centers to try to figure out which medication would be best to help heroine or

opioid. makes we now for the drug. opioidvered addicts -- addicts. he is correct that heroin overdoses have skyrocketed, especially in areas that were unseen previously, new hampshire, some 400 people overdosed in 2015, in ohio, some 200 people overdosed in 2015, so it is a big issue out there for the country right now. host: last call from virginia, republican line. caller: thank you particular i call. i have two comments to make. first one is about isis. they are not muslims because islam does not allow anyone to be killed, and they have been killing more muslims than ---muslims, especially in you just how many people they killed in iraq, so they are just against humanity.

period. nothing to do with religion. secondly about gun control, if someone pulls on the guns and they see 100 guns pointing at him, he would not commit any crimes, he will not kill anyone, but he does not realize that in countries like pakistan, iraq and syria, where everyone carries a gun, the terrorist never pulls out a gun because he knows that once you pull out a gun, there will be 100 ak-47s pointed at him. what he does is he comes out in a broad area and you give guns to everyone in america, believe me, the terrorist will change their tactics because they will know that they cannot kill anyone with guns anymore and they will start exploding themselves in public areas. then we have a bigger problem on our hands. thank you. host: caller, i will ask you to stay with us for our next segment because we talk about

that, but what is left work wise for bills and what faces later down the road so to speak after the election and after the break? the fact that they do only have nine days left before july 15 and then they are gone for over one month, there is a possibility that they do not get the opioid legislation done and that they do not get zika funding done. if that happens, that is something they will have to finish before they leave for the end of the year, as well as appropriations bills. if they stumble on appropriations bills, which is a possibility because they have done that for the past few years, then and omnibus may be in order. guest: i think the spending fight will be the biggest thing that you see november before they leave to go campaign for the november elections, and it is critical because we have kind of chugged away at some appropriation bills but they

were not able to finish also by september, so it is a matter of do you try to assemble an omnibus in september, which seems unlikely, or do a quick resolution and try to kick the can down the road until the lame-duck session? in the lame-duck session, we will have to do with major spending bills, the transpacific partnership, the trade deal that has become controversial on the campaign trail, and other year and activities, so it should be a busy time. that our guests covering activity. min kim covers the senate from "politico." and laura barron lopez covers it in "huffington post." thank you. talk aboutwe will isis and activity over the weekend. our guest of the former white house senior middle east adviser dennis ross. we will talk to him about not only what is happening overseas, but what faces the u.s. "washington journal" continues. ♪

[applause] hard-fought 2016 primary season is over, with historic conventions to follow this summer. >> colorado, florida, texas, ohio. >> watch c-span as delegates considered the nomination of the first woman ever as the head of a major political party and the first non-politician in several decades. watch live on c-span. listen on the c-span radio app or get 51 demand at www.c-span.org. you have a front row seat to every minute of both conventions on c-span, beginning monday, july 18. ♪ investe are going to

additional $100 million into higher education in the commonwealth, you got to change the way that we deliver education and we also have to expect more for the dollars that we are getting. and a,"y night on "q gerard robinson talks about the state of education in the u.s. >> there is a body of literature that is clear that there are certain courses to take, math, science and english that should be in place if you expect to be successful in college. to simply accept students are not filled that regular obligation and to let them into a school, i think is doing a great disservice to them and it is selling the efforts of affirmative-action. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern. "washington journal" continues. host: joining us now is former white house senior middle east from 2009nnis ross 2011. good morning.

the eventsabout concerning isis over the past weekend. what did they say about -- first, what did they say about the condition of what is going on in the middle east concerning isis? guest: i think what they say more than anything else is while isis is being sent back on the ground, which is clear, within iraq, they have probably lost nearly half the territory that they had seized, about 20% in syria, to being squeezed financially, but that becomes the precise moment at which they want to show that they are not being defeated. tested.aid he will be the test of our cape israel will suffer adversity, so they are trying to explain that they will suffer setbacks, but one way to prove that they have this mandate is that they're not being defeated, and one way to demonstrate their not being defeated is to be able to inspire or orchestrated attacks of the sort that we have seen,

and you have seen it during ramadan. they're trying to create the message that this is the moment which you should be carrying out these "noble deeds," and this is a manifestation that they are there. it is not just josh john brennan -- john brennan shows they can show the agenda but it is their way of showing they are not defeated and they can lash out anywhere. host: so the frequency of what we saw the last couple of days, not surprising? guest: i think it is not. it is disturbing, but not surprising. it does not mean it is necessarily the wave of the future because the more they can losent that, the more they the symbols of their success. the real symbols of their rocco, are mosul and which are the manifestation of their having the state. when they lose the symbols of their success, it is pretty hard to continue to maintain the arguments that they have a divine mandate, so the capacity to inspire and recruit is going

to be effective the more that they can be set back in terms of the key symbols of their success . as they go through this process of being sent back, we will see them have more of the stake in trying to carry out these attacks. host: what do to beat the losing -- what do you attribute the losing of ground by isis? guest: they have never been that large, number one. number two, they do not have a great conventional military facingy, and they are what we have done a lot of training and we are hitting them i think with a lot of airstrikes , combination of being hit on the ground in iraq. they have now lost ramadi in pollution. and the kurds that we are backing in syria have sent them back as well, so they are facing forces who are backed also by we in a sense are

inflicting and have more capability than they do. host: the current approach that the administration is taking is the right approach or should be changed? guest: i think it certainly has an effect. the question is, could you do more and succeed more quickly? there is a question of what replaces them? theou defeat them but vacuum is created in the aftermath, you get the son of isis, so one of the things we need someone of the things i have argued for is we clearly need more sunni involvement on the ground. they claim to be the protectors of the faith. they claim to be the protector of the sunnis. part of our problem is that these sunni tribes, these sunni leaders and governments have more of preoccupation with the iranians when it comes to most of the region and in syria you have a lot of sunni opposition that is more concerned about [indiscernible] then there concerned about isis

or at least equally concerned, and that priority has been isis ssad,ot iran, not asa and their reasons for that. as long as we do not show the doe priority as the sunnis throughout the region, we are not going to get them involved the way we need them to be involved. we need them to be involved, not only ultimately for the foot butiers on the ground, only they can discredit isis. no non-muslim will be able to discredit isis and the shiites cannot discredit isis because isis looks at the shiites as being rejectors. the fact that you need the sunnis to discredit them, though it a look at the shiites, discredit what they represent, and you look at isis, they kill many more muslim, sunni and shiite, that anyone else. if anyone is a threat to the muslims, it is isis. host: if you want to ask questions to dennis ross about isis and what it means to u.s. policy, (202)-748-8000 for

democrats. (202)-748-8001 for republicans. for independents, (202)-748-8002 . sender tom-tom was on the press on "meet senator was the press" and they talked about activities we should have taken overseas. you can take a listen -- you can hear what he had to say. [video clip] we cannot continue within a small part of syria. they will continue to launch terror attacks around the world, not just turkey and then lead us, but western europe and the united states as well. or they will inspire those attacks. if the islamic state is losing and their defeated in iraq, syria or libya, which is may be their most dangerous and will develop cell today, they will not nearly inspire some in the attacks. we are not responsible for the domestic security of everyone of our allies, but ultimately the way to stop attacks around the world is to deny terrorists the safe even they need and a limit

their leadership from a battle, just like we did with al qaeda in much of the last decade. guest: look, i think what he is saying is in line with what i am saying and it is in line with what the administration is saying. spacey had an operational on which to plan and recruit, if they have the symbols of success competitor with al qaeda. they are fighting each other, claiming the same truth, competitors from that standpoint. the differences al qaeda did not think it was the right moment to .ave an islamic state obviously, isis did and has used that, the image of an islamic state as the manifestation that they represent something we have not seen before, muslims have not seen before, and what they are trying to say is, look, we embody the perfected form of islam. join us.

they need to carry the fight to us because part of the claim -- they claim, a, to have divine management and they claim that all those who join them are divine messengers. from their standpoint, they need to take the fight to us because that is, again, part of the definition of who they are. yes, we need to deny them their operational space and we are clearly doing that. we are shaken the territory in which they are operating. we are obviously squeezing them in terms of their finances carried signs that they are not charging attacks for anyone who will leave, and before, they did not allow anyone to leave, is indication that they are feeling the squeeze financially. simply setting them back is not enough. they have to lose the main symbols of their success. they have to lose the islamic state itself. this becomes a part of their appeal, part of their source of inspiration and they clearly are trying to inspire others.

you have been calling those who carry out attacks in their homes, and that is what we see right now. they have a following. it is indisputable. they have a following. we had to do as much as we can to set them back in a way of blunting their appeal to many of the sunnis to join us in a way that they are more active on the ground but also in a way that effort toheir discredit them. i have made suggestions on ways on how to blend their appeals because they are losing on the ground. for the first time, more of their fighters are actually surrendering. more of the people they are drawing them within the islamic state are less recruits and more those who are in the territories and they offer financial incentive. as they get squeezed and their are less financial resources to be available to provide as incentives, there are more people surrendering. we need to have pictures of them surrendering with their hands up

. we need to put that on social media. they use social media very effectively. we're not going to compete with them in terms of messages or they can reach out to those who feel alienated or looking for a purpose in the lives, but the image of people supposedly reading divine messengers and surrendering is contradiction there. being divine messengers and surrendering is a contradiction there. let them say what is going on in the islamic state, brutality, lack of justice, arbitrary, the way they treat women, all of these things are ways to undercut them and it needs to be part of a broad strategy. you do not just at the them militarily, you have to have a broad strategy, but then they have to be replaced. al qaeda in iraq was the predecessor. ifwill get their successor we do not have something that replaces them when they are defeated on the ground.

host: this is dennis ross joining us this morning. the first call is from richard in massachusetts, independent line. go ahead. you want to clear up the middle east, you have got to get us out of there. we went over there in 1991 and we screwed up the time. we have an embassy over here that is the command center because we want to take over the middle east, and when we take over the middle east, [indiscernible] this guy sitting next to you, he don't know what ideas talking about. just a propaganda is what the government. we are the terrorists, we are. well, we are not the terrorists and we are trying to take over the middle east. the fact is we are not the ones you are responsible for isis. the reality is we are seeing in the middle east great struggle, and the struggle is within islam itself, it is of her and who is

going to define identity and control it? that defines much of what is going on there, and ultimately, the truth is, yes, we are not the ones who have to be responsible for the fight, but if we think we can withdraw from the middle east and not be there at all and they were not come after us, that is an illusion. the fact of the matter is, if you think about it, what i was saying about isis, isis also has a cataclysmic apocalyptic ideology. they have an ideology that basically says, the only way that the real purity of islam can be achieved is when all of , arenemies are defeated mere existence is a threat to them, so one of those who was interrogated by the french, who back,en to syria and came was describing that what existed before we were doing bombing was

a terrorist factory. they were basically factory producing terrorists with outside, so they will bring the fight to us, whether we are there or not. but it to do everything we can with others there to the feed them because if we do not, as i said, it will visit us. i have often said when it comes to the middle east, a lot of the rules to not apply there. what takes face there does not stay there. host: virginia, ronald, democrat line. hello. caller: thank you for taking the call. i have been listening to this gentleman. i do not understand why he keeps saying, they will come to us. listen, those people do not have a canoe or a rowboat or a balloon to get over here. why does he have to keep saying they are going to come over here? come over here and what? was five years old, my grandfather was walking down the street down south. a siren came on and there was a

war, fighting, fighting and fighting. always in your fighting. when is the damn 5 -- the damn fighting going to stop? because republicans went over stirring up all of this nonsense. now we have isis. it was tojo. when is this nonsense going to stop. proceededl, nine/11 -- 9/11 proceeded are going into iraq. at the time it was the intellectual godfather of what we all describe as the radical islamist. he spent his time over here. he was hung in 1966 in egypt. he actually spent time in the united states right after work to. he wrote about what he saw as our way of life, which he saw as

corrupting and a threat to islam. the idea that they won't come over here? 9/11 they did come over here. we are seeing attacks inspired from the outside. homegrown. we've had orlando, san bernardino. -- we don'tving face the same threats that we see in europe, that we are seeing what is being done in europe. the notion that if we can -- if we just stay away from their, they will stay away from us is being belied by the reality. there more concerned that that could be radicalized within the united states or that they could come in by any means, to the borders or what have you? guest: it's a combination. the real issue is if they have a space from which they can operate, train and recruit and have safe havens, you don't want to see it breakdown of the state system in the middle east. then you have no authority there that is able to prevent them from emerging.

then you have these areas basically that are lawless and they can do it they want. failing states or failed states are basically incubators for these kinds of groups. if they can plan, they can organize and you know, basically have the luxury of not having to worry about their own securities , so they can plan attacks against us and others. that's hope we are going to see, what we are going to face. host: this is grant, independent line. washington, d.c. caller: i want to know why there is such strict enforcement of the jerusalem embassy act. presidents have to sign a waiver not to use -- not to move the u.s. embassy to jerusalem. there's no enforcement of the signings to the glen amendments of 1961.

foreign nuclear weapons states like israel. is it because there are so many people who are essentially israel lobbyists, like yourself, government? i think that, ultimately, different presidents have made the decision that when there are certain kinds of act that they think will affect us from a security stamp went, they choose it there is a national security waiver, not to act on it. congress has passed laws and resolutions in jerusalem. every president has decided at this point to exercise that waiver. not to move the embassy. host: minnesota, republican line. mike, go ahead. caller: i just want you to know that i'm always looking for solutions rather than, you know.

if you look at a company like chipotle and what they do, how it is more natural and healthier , how they bring it in? when you talk about getting back seeds?ting for the on a national level for security for us, maybe savings for the welfare system, if you have the welfare system growing in its and then dispersing that food to the people on welfare and have the systems to purchase that stuff from there, maybe sell the small businesses at a discount. a benefit for them as well. host: how does this apply to our discussion of isis and the u.s. uh?e? caller: h apply to does this combating terrorism? lady inaccording to the

the republican party of iowa speaking about isis in the 50 states, if that's true don't we need to start looking at measures to protect us here as well, is that situation should happen to unfold and reducing the cost of welfare? it appears to be broke. host: gotcha. guest: not quite sure i saw the relationship. host: james, michigan. democrats line. hi. two-part question. what is the current obama administration doing right to mitigate the issue? secondly, the believe that a right -- resolution might have an effect on the larger isis issue in afghanistan? guest: the administration has put together a coalition and are clearly succeeding in setting back isis in iraq in syria.

the fact that they have lost about 47% of the territory that they controlled in iraq, they probably lost 27% syria. those are manifestations that the administration is proceeding in rolling isis back. it's no question as well that we see signs that the administration has been targeting the sources of their financial capabilities as well. there are signs of economic distress. those are signs that what the administration is doing is succeeding. i would say that in syria is hard to be completely successful if you are not also dealing with what is the main source of sunni concern, assad. it's a difficult problem for sure. the options are not great at this point. the point i was making earlier is not that the administration isn't having successes. i was trying to suggest that if

you want to have greater success notnst isis ultimately, just degrade, which we are doing, but ultimately destroy, we can't destroy them if they can't be discredited. it takes sunni muslims to be the ones to discredit them. so long as they view iran is a greater priority, one of the things we need to do is more to be able to convince them that we understand their priority the same way that we do. that we are focusing and prepared to work with them, i think, more on how we can counter and contain any threats in the region. i have a book out called due to succeed. i go for every administration from truman to obama. one of the things that show is that frequently we got wrong what the priorities were of the arab leaders. in a sense we are still not getting right what the priority of the arab leaders were today.

that priority is a random. if we can show them that in fact we take the nature of that threat seriously, that we understand it, we are preparing to work with them to counter what the arabians are doing in the region. then we might well be in a position to bring greater leverage into the struggle with isis and ultimately only they can provide the people on the ground to provide the governance and replace isis. also they are the only one second ultimately discredit them. clearly part of what were doing right now is successful and i'm trying to suggest an added dimension in which we are likely to succeed over time in terms of meeting the real objective, which is ultimately to destroy isis. our guest was a special advisor to hillary rodham clinton, also worked for the it reagan administration -- for the reagan administration. dennis ross. charlie, hello. caller: hello.

i have a political idea about president lincoln. he had an emancipation proclamation. i think it's a great idea for all muslims to liberate all the women. they can get a divorce. give them all drivers licenses. all the lesbians, homosexuals, liberated. everyone of them. shiites, all the muslim countries. it's a political idea that i think trump would implement. he is brave enough and it would show the hypocrisy on the democratic, how they are in the pockets of all the oil money in qatar and kuwait, saudi arabia. who they are really backing. i think it's a great little idea. and it would be a wonderful thing for the muslims, if they actually care about the people. many reformist muslims

are looking at ways to confront what they see as a threat to their faith. many of them are emphasizing and liberalizing ideas. i think that the more that we see this kind of struggle for ideas being played out within islamic communities, that's a favorable thing. host: who are our partners in the middle east? who are our closest heart right now? guest: it's an excellent -- closest partners right now? guest: it's an excellent question. many of these states are our partners right now. they are just not committing the kinds of orson on the ground that i would like to the. if you look at -- if you ask me who is probably playing the biggest role, i would say is probably the jordanians playing the biggest role. obviously within a racket self they are facing a struggle. if you look at the horrific inonds that just took place

baghdad, carried out by isis, you have a real strip -- a real problem on the ground. there's the role of militias. frequently we saw in the aftermath that a lot of those sunni men disappeared. talk offalluja we hear the younger males not reappearing yet. we hear talk of the torture. i think that the iraqi government, they are doing a less of a at playing role, still playing a role. not all of the militias, but some of them are. some of the ones most affected by the arabians. they provide the arms, the money , and a lot of the training. here again you have a struggle being played out and it raises questions on the sunni side. this is a complicated struggle. it's not ample. but if we have a strategy that is designed to focus on what it

only set isis back and blunt its appeal, but also discredit it. there has to be a role for the sunnis. they are playing a role but not as much of one as they might. new jersey, jack is on the independent line for dennis ross. caller: good morning. i appreciate you taking the phone call. there has been discussion over the last 15 years about avoiding the crash of civilizations. i contend that there has been a clash of civilizations with the muslim world going back to the eighth century. when the followers of mohammed erected out of saudi arabia. conquering north africa and other parts of the middle east. they will not stop until they are at the gates of paris and vienna. to this day, many countries that have a majority of muslims, the

government and the muslim faith are one and the same. we even see this in turkey, which is backsliding from the reforms of ataturk. a politicallyof muslim country. arecrusades, which denigrated, are actually response to these invasions by muslims. ,n our own country's history there are a first overseas military engagement was in north africa against the barbary pirates, followers of the muslim faith who believed in rape, rampage, and slavery. comments? look, i would say that there isn't a clash of civilization. would say that within muslim majority countries, there is a struggle going on right now.

i've been calling it robert set love, wrote a very good piece describing islamist and islamism . islamism is an ideology, like communism was an ideology. they have a representative spectrum but they are let -- acting on that ideology. there is a struggle within muslim majority countries. , we need muslims as our partner in the struggle. as i said before, isis has killed many more muslims than anyone else. muslims, but sunni muslims. because this fight is not limited there. because the fight is being brought around the world and we have seen unfortunately over the last several days a multiplicity of attacks, all outrageous, all killing innocents, we can't

escape that struggle. if we are going to be on the winning side of it, we need to join with the muslims themselves andare on the front lines paying the price for it. sunni muslims are the human once you can replace them, but they are the only ones who discredit them. the last thing we need to do is create alienation of muslims who are our natural partners in this. "doomed touest book, you spoke of this that we need to start taking to avoid a vacuum. what are some of those steps? what are some of the others? one of the key things will be governance. you had a government in iraq that was exclusionary and in a

sense denying sunnis any rights and creating the impression that there would never be any inclusion. there needs to be governance. in a place like iraq there needs to be a kind of expansion. there needs to be a kind of participation. it certainly has been the policy of the obama administration to encourage that. it's been difficult to produce it. ultimately within a rack, let's we see that kind of inclusiveness where the sunnis have the rights respected and there is a kind of federal arrangement in iraq, my own senses that's was going to emerge there. without a political solution to what's happening in syria, even if you defeat isis, even if you stop them, it's not clear what

replaces that. without a political solution in syria, which is ultimately going to have to have a federal flavor to it, whether is a kind of recognition of local rights -- again, a lot of the opposition within syria, even though it is broadly sunni, it is highly localized. what you may end up with is a kind of federal system not exclusively guided by sectarian identity. guided very much by local rights. particularly in places like syria or iraq, where the sectarian differences are so pronounced in the trust level is so low, unless you have something like that it's hard to see how you relate the kind of governance that ensures we don't re-create this as a kind of problem. host: montana, democrat line. caller: mr. ross, i would like to su russian. when we went into iraq in 2003

to remove saddam hussein, at that time there was a 300,000 that at thatarmy point had not been paid, but they had guns. when we went into iraq, within a aek mr. wolfowitz dismissed 300,000 man standing army. they were angry. they had guns. did they play a factor in the birth of isis? terrorismexplosion of in iraq at the time? i would like to know that if you could give me an answer. guest: the bush and ministration made the decision to disband the iraqi military. it was a mistake because it helps to contribute to a vacuum.

filled.uum was there was probably always going to be the potential for insurgency in iraq after the -- after saddam hussein was removed. sunnis represent a minority within a rack. -- within your rack. iraq.hin having help our for so long, withg been removed from it no structure in place, it's not surprising there was a kind of insurgency. the short answer is that we in iraq contributed health to produce the vacuum there. one of the things we have seen in the middle east is that whenever there is a vacuum, the worst possible forces fill it. in a rack we other ones replacing the regime -- in iraq we are the ones replacing the regime. we didn't do enough to fulfill

it. the broad consensus was the mistake in retrospect to disband the iraqi military. you needed to play a role in terms of providing security and preventing a vacuum. in syria by being so hesitant to be involved, we probably contributed to the vacuum. if there is a lesson here, the lesson is that we need, working with others, to ensure a vacuum is not created in the part of the world. it's not that nature abhors a vacuum. it's that in the middle east in particular we see the worst forces fill them. texas, republican line. good morning. ask -- i was going to isis, are they mostly sunni? guest: exclusively. because of disarming the

iraqi army, the majority of the sunnis that basically were the army of iraq, it created isis to regain power, right? caller: if you look at -- you have the forerunner of isis, something called al qaeda in iraq. that really probably did grow out of the insurgency. the iraqi military under saddam hussein still have the -- the majority was probably shia. bear in mind, that was a military that fought the iranians for eight and a half years. wouldtion that all shia necessarily be supporters of the iranians, that wasn't the case in the about war. the leadership of the iraqi military was primarily sunni. , probablyificant art a majority of the soldiers were shia.

host: independent line, jonathan, hello. caller: i would like to make a statement of all the stuff on the news, more than one story a .ay with these terror attacks bangladesh, india and other countries, one after that one after that, i think america needs to wake up, in my opinion. wake up in smell the country -- smell the coffee. i think that if it gets any worse, there will be another war. we are kind of borderline going into a real war. i'm actually kind of really scared that i will be somewhere and a real terror attack will happen. there's more of a chance going on right now then maybe even 9/11.

in the city where i live, and i hate to sound selfish a little scared and i'mly hoping that people would hear this on c-span and start to talk to their neighbors and everybody who did. maybe with a secondary civilian army. we maybe need to start preparing sooner than later. i think that would be a colossal mistake. we have superb law enforcement and intelligence. many of happen to have an active terror like 9/11 -- -- when you happen to have an act of terror , when you look at san , theseino and orlando were the lone wolves inspired by isis. a lot needs to be done with, you

know, what we do domestically in terms of working with local communities. , we are a society governed by law. the last thing you want to do is about- raise questions what law enforcement has done from that standpoint. truth be told, the fact is we ,re making efforts is days getting back to what we said earlier. obviously the muslim community is here as well. no one feels more threatened, potentially, the muslims. they have been the main victims of this. the answer in this country is obviously effective intelligence. we have to do an effective job in terms of social media, watching as a media and seeing what is posted. a lot of what we see emerge, as

we have learned afterwards, posted on facebook, indicates radicalization. you have to be sensitive to that. you have to monitor that. the idea that we don't have sufficient law enforcement here -- i think that we do. host: what faces the next president, not only abroad but at home? guest: two things. january 20 the next president will have to take a look and say -- where are we in terms of it,? ultimately to destroy those were the right words according to president obama. partnerse the kind of laying the role necessary to succeed in that? there is a need for early keytegic dialogue with

sunni arab partners. here again, take stock of where we are. take stock. look at the status of the intelligence is. look at how we are doing in terms of potential homegrown threat and where they might be. one of the things the next president should do is ask for an assessment. are there communities potentially more susceptible? what more could we be doing? i think it isn't fully appreciated how much is in done, domestically and by local law oarsman and with the fbi, tracking potential domestic threat and working with local communities to identify any indicators to identify radicalization. first, take stock. make a judgment of how the current policies are working. ask questions about where we could be doing better, both on

the outside and the inside. host: republican line. dave, maryland. caller: good morning. my name is dave. what is the situation in the islamic world where we have two group of religious leaders that in some respects are thatibuting to the wars ?ere created they say that old men create wars. -- oldman create wars, young men die for them. that seems to be the case with the middle east. we aren't holding religious leaders accountable for solving this problem. they might be few, if they don't seem to be in the large majority or he would you facing the problem. guest: it's an interesting question. there are signs that more and sayingerics of their

that this is a perversion of the faith, a threat to the faith. one of the problems is that a lot of them seem to be in establishment positions. offshoot.ots of you have self-proclaimed imams, using social media and the , spreading their word. it's true that one of the things that necessary to have a kind of const stream of religious leaders in the region are discrediting this, part of it is that you have -- you had some very -- you had some cleric trying to create a distinction between what's unacceptable act of violence in what. isn't.what the cannot be one form of terror that is legitimate and another

that is. terror is illegitimate. it's wrong, it has to be discredited. that has to be the case, this kind of uniform response to this. i do think that the one thing that the caller has right, there needs to be a more consistent effort to have religious figures out there publicly proclaiming that this is wrong. there is no justification. there is no rationalization. just in the fact that you can go after some and not others and create a distinction between what's legitimate forms of terror and what is in. host: this is richard. springdale, arkansas. independent line. caller: good morning, sir. good morning, c-span. you say you want to discredit them, yet every time you open your mouth you give them credit the -- you give them credibility . they are only isis in their own mind.

from the president on down you continue to call them and islamic state. you learned people just can't seem to get it right. i don't understand. well, you know, secretary , but calls them only dash doesn't make them go away. in the middle east they will only refer to the mostly as dash. host: what's the distinction? guest: it's an arabic way of describing them and has meaning that is in a little less credit. the point is fair. but the truth is, you know, fair enough. if we all call them dash, is that going to make them disappear? i don't think so. host: jonathan, pennsylvania, go ahead. caller: i just wanted to ask

question about what the u.s. plans on doing in terms of their cooperation with the countries being affected in that area. is the u.n. going to have those countries come together? is there any plan for how the countries, including the u.s. are going to be able to cooperate to figure out what to do with isis? considering that it will affect us eventually, but immediately at just affecting that country there. when we want to cooperate with the countries in the -- wouldn't we want to cooperate with the countries in that area should mark guest: the short answer -- area? guest: the short answer is, we are doing so. there is a coalition that the obama industry has to put together. there is a broad coalition that does require cooperation across number of activities.

the military is not the only one. there's been brought cooperation in terms of cutting off all the sources of financing for them. one of the problems of the regime is that they still seem to be getting their oil from dash, referring to them as the previous caller suggested. there is that previous conversation. there are certain things that we might do that would increase they are acting but they aren't doing everything they might be doing because part they see other threats and they want to know that we see them as well. the more that we come to common understandings about how we will deal with a common set of priorities, the better ultimately we will do. dennis ross, the author of

succeed."doomed to thank you for your time. guest: my pleasure, thank you. "lines fromound -- now until 10:00. you're the numbers -- -- here are the numbers -- host: we will take those phone calls when "washington journal close of continues. -- washington journal" continues. ♪ watch coverage of the democratic and republican national convention. we will also look back at past conventions and the candidates who went on to win their party's nomination. we will focus on the incumbent reelection.an for

dwight d. eisenhower, lyndon , jimmy, richard nixon bush, billrge h.w. , and the 2004 republican convention in new york city. past republican and democratic national conventions, saturday night at 8 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> "washington journal" continues. host: once more, the number four open phones -- number for open phones --

taking a look at politics from "usa today," the headline there, the former secretary of state, clinton, susan page writing that "the former secretary of state leads donald trump by five percentage points. rounding would make the lead six points or quell -- p are quotes --." host: there is also another polling question that they made a chart out of. "what do you think about, when you think about this

presidential election? how do you feel?" again, that's "usa today." a lot of talk about vice presidential candidates. you heard guests out there talking about joni ernst and donald trump having discussions. the piece in "the wall street journal," taking a look at the strategy behind picking a vice president. "one of the key strategies is to hit a demographic

host: this is open phones. our first caller is from new jersey. john this for -- first up. go ahead, john. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. i'm calling for the resignation of the head of the fbi. first of all, they miss the boston bombers. they had information on that they missed orlando. they seem to be spending their energy of highly estimable sting operations trying to entrap people more really not a threat at all, instead of focusing on the potential real threats. they need a thorough investigation, thorough

objective outside investigation into operations. this gentleman should resign. host: this is from brad jaffe -- the fbi director is set to make a statement at 11:00. no intelligence on the content of the statement or whether it deals with what was discussed with the former secretary of state. mike, st. charles, maryland. go ahead. >> there some background that professor, ambassador ross missed. we had a gentleman who represented what they thought

was modernization efforts. we had a connection between the defense department and the next patriot from iraq who was from the shia persuasion. all of that rings the light certain other invent -- certain other events that we were involved in in the neighboring country. at the time, in the mid-70's, there was an interesting change , whoties by richard helms was working to represent president axon, and later gerald ford. -- president nixon, and later general ford. certain events were going on in iran people to the it was the most duplicitous country and culture ever to be hatched.

back and look go at some of the history of that country, when it was called read a-- you can semi-fictional history call the tosian boy, which led understanding a lot of that duplicitous activity over there. there was a whole culture of duplicitous activity. host: gotcha. john, from arizona. democrats line. hi. listened to the callers this morning. i listened to mr. ross. i think what he was trying to explain to people, about what most folks did, they believed that if we got a strong man here , we could force those people over there to accept our way of living. i heard a man say this morning that we need to have the muslims

and becomeeir women like us. but they don't want to be like us. that's the problem. when he came to america to see how we live, it became one of our greatest enemies. that this idea that we , it'slect a president going to make those people do something, they are sadly mistaken. host: luanne is next. new jersey, independent line. caller: how are you today? host: good, go ahead. caller: if the fbi director that hillary clinton will not be indicted, we the people need to stand up and demand her arrest. loretta lynch and president obama for covering up everything

. it's time to we, the people, take act america and leave politics out of criminal investigations. host: again, no indication of the content today. is set to maker a statement. when we find out more, we will let you know. tim, virginia. democratic line. you're on. thank you for c-span. crazy politics year. tohillary clinton wants settle this trust issue, she needs elizabeth warren. she has a good character. character is what you do when no one is looking. why does elizabeth warren help hillary clinton? specifically on the trust issue as you describe it? she's trusted, she has

good character, and fights for the little guy. thank you for c-span. have a good day. the caller mentioned the nature of the medical season. we are keeping track of all of that on our website, www.c-span.org. in charlotte,n north carolina 3:00 this afternoon. on c-span you can find out more information. look to the website permission on that event. that address is c-span.org. a look at the upcoming conventions today, you had also see those on c-span. taking a look at the new york -- ,t "the new york times" story president obama preventing cabinet members from seeking, saying that the directive was issued by the white house chief of staff. it was seen by a move -- as a move in the waning months of the

obama administration. "largely an effort to delineate it possible the public governing responsibilities we have at the white house that are separate from politics." that was josh ernst, talking to the publication. this is amy ziskin writing in the business section. "cleveland is anticipating 50,000 visitors, as is philadelphia."

host: larry, from indiana. hi there. caller: if air force one is going to be used to transport hillary clinton to north carolina for the joint appearance with the president, why would that be? that the american people have to pay for that transportation there? host: west virginia. thomas is a. good morning, thomas. caller: good morning. i just got a comment. resident roosevelt gave us social security. present kennedy gave us medicare and food stamps. present johnson gave us medicaid for the poor people. ms. clinton and bill gave us care for the children. barack obama give us the

affordable care act. i'm going to give the republicans three or four months to name one thing, just one thing that republicans have done for the poor people or the working-class people. queens village, new york. michael, independent line. the reason i'm calling today is in regards to the 2016 presidential election. i want to know how, in a democracy, any public, especially the american public makes a mature educated decision about the most important position in the country, if not the world, when they don't seem educated and mature opinions, if not decisions in general, from the news that they think about this issue or not even challenging the candidates about the physician or issues. whether it is donald trump or hillary clinton, whoever it is,

there are things that people think about positions that are quite frankly, crazy and ridiculous and don't make any sense. people still support a donald trump whenever they can. as a citizen, i'm not alarmed, i'm very certain. when you have so many people thatsupport candidates make such crazy, crazy, un-american, divided, divisive and insulting statements and positions and people are still some wording them, that is alarming. you don't it to be the united states of america when you are the divided states of america. royal oak, michigan. republican line. hello? caller: hi. my comment is about hillary obama for therack

presidential elections. i am all down for hillary clinton winning the presidency. i would also like to be her by's presidential candidate. lorraine, wisconsin. democratic line. hello. i have it written down so it will be fast. did you notice that when donald trump gave his little speeches, he repeats what he said in the same speech, with a couple of words changed around? i'm told that this is what happens, the first sign of someone with alzheimer's. in the first stage of alzheimer's he's repeating stuff. president would have alzheimer's before the first term is up.

donald trump, the subject of a story by trip gabriel today. finding himself playing catch-up, mr. trump reportedly skeptical of tv ads and having purchased any. host: lynchburg, virginia.

a, independent line. good morning, you are on. caller: i wonder why with these high unfavorables, more attention is being paid to some other options. wouldn't it be funny if on election day, neither of the two most spoken about in press coverage right now, neither of them got elected. host: you think libertarians have enough support to make that happen? caller: i'm at a point where i might not vote. or if hillary gets indicted, someone else gets in? something happens to trump finally that gets him illuminated? although with everything he has said, i can't imagine that that would be the case. i'm kind of with a jump ball right here. i don't know what to do. .et someone better than trump i would like to see a third choice. you know, garyet

johnson and jill stein have appeared on this program and on other platforms. information onat her website. catherine, from staten island, new york. caller: good morning. i just want people to understand , hodgkin's, they say, hillary clinton is going to be indicted. she just talks friday to the fbi. three and a half hours. and they already know that she is going to be indicted? how do they know that? they told her? they gave the word out? people are going to get suspicious. she didn't volunteer to go into the fbi. it was a subpoena. ok? the board -- to buy. host: new port richey, -- goodbye.

host: new port richey, mark. caller: how's it going? here's this guy on the other what a nerve -- hillary's better than trump. and it just blows me away. like, he to be sick in the head to vote for hillary. -- he would be sick in the head to vote for hillary. this election is too important. i'm a 100% disabled combat that. vet.ombat there is no other option other than voting for trump and throwing the comes out. you go to the arguments section of "usa today," they talk about the role that bernie sanders should play leading up to the democratic convention. this is the headline -- "sorry,

bernie, runners-up don't get to write the war rules -- write the rules." host: brooklyn, new york. hello. thank you for taking my call. i appreciate it. the previous representative this morning made a comment about vacuums in the middle east. i thought that that was an important statement. as we help countries in the intoe east become more

stable governments, it's very important that we understand cultures and their way of operation, so that we don't create vacuums. i think that that is going to help us have a more sustainable positive country in the middle east. i want tocomment, give kudos to president obama really last eight years, supporting renewable energy. i definitely think we need to move forward with renewable energy and getting away from fossil fuel. i don't think it's the best way to make electricity anymore. thank you, c-span. you have been a great platform for us expressing our comments. thank you. one more comment here on the general election -- "i feel helpless in this election, there is no candidate that has my interest in mind." bill, kentucky, republican line. caller: jobs, kennedy, obama

gave us obamacare. you are from kentucky? you are on. caller: yes, i would like to comment on the guy, three talking about what all the democrats gave us. obama giving us obamacare. obama ain't gave us nothing. all the peoples insurances went up triple under obamacare. voting for hillary clinton to keep all of this obamacare, these presidents that gave us all this stuff, they ain't gave us nothing. all the seniors health care has tripled under obamacare. all the younger people are turning 26 now. i've got a grandson turning 26. they can't even buy health care under obamacare.

if they do, they have to pay $400 per month, $500 per month, when before -- my son was just month for his son's health care before. it tripled. everybody's insurance has tripled. nobody has gotten out for free. host: bill, kentucky, got your point of us. larry, jacksonville, florida. independent line. flex the republicans need to change their -- caller: republicans need to change from gop to nra, the nra owns them. host: on "the washington post," there is an article concerning whether or not they get to roll up their sleeves. a memo from james condo, the army deputy chief of staff says that soldiers may be authorized

to roll up their sleeves and when doing so, the camouflage will remain exposed, something known as camo out. an ongoing debate. adding that the chief of staff said that there was a pilot program at ft. hood and they were open to making the change. the battle dress uniform was phased out in 2005. there are numerous photographs that showed soldiers with sleeves rolled. atlanta, georgia. james, democratic line? go ahead. caller: thank you for accepting my call. two quick points. hillary clinton will not be indicted. if she is, they will have to go back and indict condoleezza rice and donald rumsfeld.

fluke.trump, it's a he doesn't have money to run his campaign because he didn't think he was going to make it this far. host: even with the support that he got, you think he was a fluke candidate? caller: if they were supporting him, he would have money. we can talk all day long, but the support comes in the coffers of the money that you raise, aght? you can't run as candidate without money. so, if you love me, pay me, right? host: thomas, democratic line. a democrat. i have supported hillary clinton in the past. i even made donations to her against when she ran obama. but she has gone so far to the left. she met with the black lives matter people. she also met with al sharpton.

a white person who would vote for hillary after she has met with those two black racist groups is a fool. thank you. host: one more call, ellen, you are the last call this morning. have a comment for the person who said that democrats have given everything and republicans have given nothing. there is old saying. socialism works great until you run out of other people's money. it's popular, but we are in so much debt and so many other things are wrong. wall builder will tell you what has been done. wall builder is an organization that you can google. topic, again, a joint event with hillary clinton, 3:00 this afternoon, watch it on c-span2, also listen for it on c-span radio.

concerningformation the statement expected by the fbi director at 11:00 today, you can go to our website for the latest information on those fronts. that is it for our program, and programition of our comes in tomorrow morning at 7:00. ♪ >> the u.s. house is back from the july 4 break with a busy agenda, including gun legislation. we will have more on that in just a moment.