from the washington times join us to discuss political news of the day. that is followed by former u.n. ambassador zalmay khalilzad discussing north korea and iran. host: april 1999, columbine shooting, more than 315,000 u.s. students have experienced gun violence according to washington post data. this morning in the first hour of "washington journal" we are going to ask you about that and the reasons why. we will frame it as a question. the media and violent culture, are they to blame for the mass shootings? do you agree with that statement? if you do, the number to call is (202) 748-8000. if you disagree that the media

and violent culture are to blame for mass shootings, we welcome that, the number to call (202) 748-8001. we also welcome your comments on facebook. send us a tweet. we will try to get to those as well. the latest school shooting happening friday in indiana at a middle school, and an update on a teacher that was involved in stopping the shooter at that incident. this was the associated press from the miami herald, teacher out of the hospital after stopping school shooting. he was released one day after being shot while tackling an armed student inside his classroom. police confirmed that jason seaman was discharged from methodist hospital in indianapolis. republican lawmaker susan brooks had posted a video on foot or saying she had met him around

midday saturday. one of those two students still in critical but stable condition. at the top of the hour, our media and violent culture to blame for school shootings? this is available at washington post, where they are tracking school shootings since columbine. more than 215,000 students have experienced gun violence at school since columbine. shootingssually at since 1999, washington post has spent the past year determining how many children have been exposed to the violence during school hours since 1999. beyond the dead and wounded, children that cower behind locked doors, it can be probably traumatizing. the federal government does not track school shootings. they piece together the data

with each round of reporting from 135,000 students in primary and s.condary school the data from the washington post reporting over the last year. the data on violent culture came up after the santa fe school shooting in texas. the headline from the hill reporting on nra tv, mass shooting is so-called progressive culture and media. we want to assure you that video as a starting point for our conversation on gun violence this morning. [video clip] >> when are we going to acknowledge that the awkward,

bullied suicidal shooters in the room for what they are, or are we going to keep acting like we don't know what is going on in the name of not confronting the miserable reality that they are the christian of our so-called progressive culture and media? every time the same type of person commits the same type of furniture are media swan dives into a promiscuous exploration of who these killers are wanting to know why they did it. we know who these kids are. the kids from columbine left an entire manifesto. our media will post every picture they can find of the shooter and repeat their name habitually, turning them into a rock star, and they will keep asking why the shootings happened, in a country obsessed with celebrity culture raising a generation of kids unable to deal with anything. it is not guns.

with that guns in this country since its inception. a years ago, i could order gun out of a magazine, and they would send it to my house no questions asked. these school shootings did not happen in the day. nothing has changed except for our culture and the way media handles these events when they happen. we are creating every subsequent school shooter with every mention of their name. nearly every single school shooter suffered from the same type of social ostracism and social neglect, and yet we are somehow dumbfounded as to have a kid that no one paid attention to the sides to go out in a blaze of lori after spending weeks of turning that kid into an infamous demigod. we are even more surprised when another kid with the same issues tries to do the same thing but even worse. we cannot be this stupid. instead of teaching our kids how to deal with the harsh realities of life and we shield them in

safe spaces and tell our young boys masculinity is toxic and young women to act like a man. further confusing kids that are going to struggle with their identity as is. nra after the the santa fe shooting. we use that as a starting point for a discussion on the causes of gun violence. with 748-8000 if you agree that statement. (202) 748-8001 if you disagree. oregon,n portland, agrees. good morning. caller: good morning. first-time color. -- caller. i don't know what their problem is with having sensible gun laws. we have just got to do something about this gun issue.

you would think that the newtown, connecticut, thing would start doing something about it. guns are apparently more important than kids. that is really a shame. that is a shame. we just need to do something else about this gun issue. we have really got to get our hands on this issue because we are just going to have more people killed. i'm not a person who wants to right to ownner's a gun away from them, but i am a person that wants sensible gun laws that will stop the beotings, and kids can not scared to go to school anymore. i never worried about this when i was going to school.

i am 70 years old now. i will be 70 next month. i went to school back in the 60's and 50's. host: this morning we are focusing on the issue of whether the media and violent culture are to blame for mass shootings. do you agree with that? (202) 748-8000. disagree, (202) 748-8001. martin disagrees with that statement. caller: thank you for bringing me onto the program. i am a highschooler. i registered to vote just two months ago. i turned 18 recently. i wanted to make a comment on this issue. honestly, looking at the issue of gun violence, especially mass shootings, i don't think there is just one concrete issue we can stick with. a bit of moderation when

it comes to the nra. i don't think it is necessarily the gun culture you find in mississippi that is leading to these mass shootings, but i also don't think that media is really to blame either. i have to disagree with the nra on the idea that it has to be violent rap music or first-person shooter video games. in reality, this is an individual issue when it comes to mass shootings. we cannot have one thing that we need to focus on for this issue. we have to look at it on the individual level. if we look at shootings like andine, parkland, houston, the one recently in indiana, all of these shootings have had a certain social standing. they have had their own specific experiences. necessarily look at these kinds of shootings as

something that has to be linked to culture or one root cause. i think we need to look at this from a psychological perspective, but we need to look you said you host: are a highschooler. one year? caller: i am graduating this year. i am going to american university in d.c. host: congratulations. have you seen your school prepare for these kinds of things? caller: yes. we have drills. in case we have amassed shooter -- a mass shooter that comes into the school. we will duck behind the door, shut off the lights. we have a whole system for lock down. we have also considered educating parents on safety and also trying to reach out to kids

who are alone by trying to create zero-tolerance policies to make sure everybody is safe within our school and comfortable. host: thank you for calling the program this morning. congratulations. good luck at au. thatu agree or disagree media and violent culture are to blame for mass shootings? lots of reaction on twitter. his one from richard, what made any rational american think america did not have a gun violence problem 60 years ago? been a mainstay of movies and cartoons for 75 years with you again soon to follow. obtaining military

style vents is the reason for mass shootings, not tv shows or video games. mark disagrees with that statement. go ahead. caller: good morning. i am 65 now. 1960'sup in the and 1970's. we do not have this problem back then. if we have a problem summary, we it out. get out -- duke we don't have this problem in other countries. personally, i don't see why we need all these guns. , and i it is ridiculous just think we are killing our youth by doing this. it is so sad. we need to have some sensible gun laws. things likeuns and that back in the 1960's and 1970's, but we did not have all these darn guns.

it is just time to get rid of them. host: let's hear from another viewer who agrees with that statement that the media and violent culture are to blame. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i agree that media and violent culture has a lot to do with it. i think it is important to have gun laws. i think we have some good ones on the books. moreover, i think it has to do with the family and the upbringing of the children at an early age. you cannot fix that after it is too late. i think the reestablishment or rejuvenation of the family unit and teaching of christian principles is the basis of the problem or the lack of those teachings. i think that would carry a lot of weight if we would return to that. host: thank you for that. take a look at the latest

polling on the issues. support -- gunun control support fades after three months. 17 people killed health a national movement by some student survivors. u.s. public support for more gun-control measures has grown slowly but steadily over the years, it typically spikes immediately after the mass shootings that have become part of the u.s. landscape. the impact falls back to three levels afterevent a few months. the new poll numbers are virtually unchanged from pre-parkland levels. asking you this morning about

the media and violent culture. are they to blame or part of the blame for gun violence? if you agree, (202) 748-8000. if you disagree, (202) 748-8001. the white house was busy last night with the president late yesterday evening welcoming home a prisoner who had been held in venezuela. after twoelcomed home months in a venezuelan jail. the president hosted the american in the oval office just hours after the 26-year-old man was freed from a venezuela prison where he was held for two years without trial. he traveled to venezuela to marry a woman he met online. the president welcomed him home from what he called a tough situation. here is part of the welcome home last evening.

[video clip] >> just want to welcome you to the overall this, -- over office, welcome you to the u.s. you have gone through a lot. i want to thank your parents for being such loving parents. you are really special. you are fighting all the way. there was not an hour for a minute that you are not thinking about this man and calling everybody and letting us know. we are happy. that arrival's or money is available on our website. ceremony is available on our website. good morning, john. tucson, arizona, john, go ahead. john.: it is not it's juan. host: ok. go ahead.

caller: it is the media to blame by putting these names up there and other people wanting to copy it. it's has been going on since the 1970's. that is all i have to say that. guns don't kill people. people kill people. int: we go to eric next illinois. hi. caller: this is a complicated issue. the media is a contributing factor. is it to blame? no. you have got to remember, you have got lots of moving parts. you cannot just blame it on the media. you have got to look at the situation and find out why it is going on. host: what do you think about the increase in shootings over

the years? is it more the availability of guns? is it the fact that culture has become more immune to these sorts of things and to see them in everyday life in terms of movies and video games and culture? caller: the availability of guns has been below constant in the u.s. you can't really blame it on that. japanese generals says -- the availability of guns has not really changed. having -- se people we are looking -- when you look doing are these people what would normally be a horrendous act?

is it the media? we have had violence in a lot of our media for the longest time. when you look back at fairytales and other things, violence is there. something is pushing people to go the extra step beyond. factor? --tervening contributing factor? yes. unfortunately, we are getting more data points as we get more shootings. host: thank you for that. next,hear from dorothy who agrees that media and violent culture are part of the problem. caller: yes. am i on? host: you are. has so i think the media much to answer for. school violence, i

think the media has a big part to be responsible for all the violence in this country. we talk about things that are perverting democracy. they are the ones who keep airing that over and over again. they know what it is doing. next in shreveport, louisiana. caller: good morning. the biggest problem is greed. everybody wants to make money. that is where the biggest problem is. i say gred. -- greed. i have some kind of gun when i was in first grade. byad a bb gun and a 410 time i was 9.

you could float around the school campus. truckn in the bed of the by the time i was in high school. you could see it across campus. we don't need all the rapidfire. i should have had that when i was in vietnam. it just does not make sense. i go back to greed. thank you. host: thank you. from the usa today, new nra president oliver north decries ultraviolence but worked on call of duty. grabbed national attention for his take on the root causes of america's mass shooting problem. the retired marine lieutenant colonel blamed a culture of

violence for the recent school shootings and described the prevalence of prescriptions such as ritalin could be a contributing factor. 2012, he worked as a promoter, script consultant, and voice actor for the popular first-person shooter game call of duty black ops 2. that is the starting point of our conversation today. are the media and violent culture to blame for mass shootings? if you agree, call (202) 748-8000. if you disagree, call (202) 748-8001. you can send us a tweet @c spanwj. it is a culture of fear, not violence. inhael moore found this

bowling for columbine. there can be many reasons all over the world. to media is hooked hype. revenues are up, and they want to keep them that way. let's hear from herby who agrees. go ahead. caller: good morning. it is fear. it is more a weekend. all of those dead soldiers out there. the media and our president always talking about war. they are always ready to go and kill someone. becausee man has fear after all the things he has done here in the world to his female, black people, other countries, he has got to promote fear. nobody is after us. you don't have to worry about north korea.

we did not have to worry about iraq. these are things that were perpetrated. where are the weapons of mass destruction? guns are weapons of mass destruction. i think we need to deal with this race problem because the police are even killing little black kids because they have fear. white men fear everything. nobody is coming to get nobody. we need to deal with this thing just like god had it. black people did it the right way, nonviolence. if you deal with it in a nonviolent way, that is how you get good results. host: in his comments, her be mentioned memorial day weekend. the headline from the washington times, rolling thunder is still mia andfor mi w --

p.o.w. after 31 years. reports suggest americans are still being held as prisoners of war. they agree it is time to draw attention to the issue and never forget pows. men write, we were ordinary who understood they had the right to have their voices heard, which led to the creation of rolling thunder, named for the fears bombing campaigns over north vietnam. let's hear from florida, sean. hi there. caller: it is not going to be all the blame, but i have children 20 years and older. instill. games seem to

you have just got to stop and look and think. lot to personally has a do with it. rep for aed by an nra donation. i have been a supporter since i was 16 years old. yesterday, i told them absolutely not. i have not heard the nra once safes.cate for gun comes --onsibility with power comes responsibility. i'm not giving you money. why this nobody ever mention s afes? a person has kids in the house. the parents should be held responsible. you own that weapon. you take responsibility.

it is like one dollar a pound for a safe. host: thank you. disagreement that statement, bob in jacksonville, florida. go ahead. caller: thank you. is it dave? host: it is bill. caller: i'm sorry. it is not jacksonville, florida. it is jacksonville, texas. host: i apologize. go ahead. caller: i'm not sure how i want to make this statement or ask this question. i own guns. to these people that think we don't have to have gun laws, should not have gun-control laws , let me ask one question. let's do away with all of the gun laws, repeal all of them, let you buy anything you want to come and you see what happens then.

thank you. host: shelley, alabama. good morning. caller: good morning. hello? host: you are on the air. caller: hello. what i want to remember is the people that live in this country before the europeans came. the state i live in, alabama, there are no more indians by the name because this country is violent. the media is not the reason for that violence. historically, this country has been violent, the way they treat people who are different. is example the immigrants the culture of this country and the way we treat each other and disrespect each other and our children that are watching.

problemwhy there is a in our schools, the way we treat each other every day. host: thank you. the question this morning is are the media violent culture to blame for mass shootings? caller: hi. how are you doing? host: fine, thank you. caller: no, i don't think they are. if people would read the bible, it says i create darkness. i make peace, and i create evil. the lord, i do all these things. there you go. host: thank you. the washington post looking at the issue of arming teachers. the post writes that kansas has a problem. it has a law allowing teachers to carry guns in the classrooms,

but almost no schools are using it because insurance companies refuse to provide coverage if they do. nsurer in the state of kansas has included that concealed handguns on campuses poses a heightened liability risk. then came the parkland school leading frustrated toublican legislators propose a bill that bans unfair discriminatory rates. i don't think insurance companies are notorious anti-gun liberals said the associate executive director for kansas school boards, so we think they have good reasons for not doing it. that is from the washington post . asking you about the issue of media and gun violence.

they met last week on capitol hill, heard from a number of florida students and others can putting charlie murphy, who was asked what would make him feel safe? here is his response. [video clip] >> what would make me feel safe is it tragedies like this would happen and something would actually happen here. still, nothing has happened on the national scale. in the past 24 years, it has only gotten worse. even now, it has been a while, and nothing has happened. they have talked about things happening, and it just is not. there has been legislation passed locally. nothing on the national scale. i have been all around d.c. talking to people, and it seems it is just leadership here. that seems to be the issue. there are people right now saying no to us. there are people that are

refusing to help us. if they wanted it to happen come it would have already happened. priorities, and clearly it is not being prioritized. well, universal background checks would make all of us feel safer if we knew that everyone who had a gun had to go through a background check. i don't see what the difference gun. where you buy a i think no matter where you buy a gun, you should go through the same processes. i don't see that it should be easier to buy a gun and get a get as license -- than drivers license. that makes sense to me. there are policies that would not only make us feel safer but

would make us safer. question for you this morning, partly based off the nra tv host: more -- noor, mass shootings are a creation of our so-called progressive culture and media, comments about the deadly shooting at a texas school said last sunday that mass shooters were a creation of our so-called progressive culture and media. "we have known why these kids shoot up schools since columbine." when are we going to be completely honest and acknowledged the awkward bullied sexually frustrated mass shooters in the room for what they are? ignore the fact

that they are a creation of our so-called progressive culture and media. good morning. caller: good morning. ok. i say this is partially due to media, violence in video games, movies, absent fathers. boys spend a lot of time playing violent video games. girls do not. host: do you think that has just gone worse in the last two years? caller: it definitely has. don't you think it has? host: thank you for staying up with us in honolulu. let's hear from linda in pennsylvania. she disagrees with that statement. caller: hi there. my children both grew up around guns. you need to teach them to have responsibility for their

actions. i think a lot of the problem today is the breakdown of the family and respect for one another. host: i will ask you the same question, has background in the last few years? caller: having respect for each other? host: disrespect, yes. caller: definitely. i think a lot of that is the breakdown of the family. parents need to see what their children are doing, and it is also the parents need to put down their phones and pay more attention to their children and get involved with them. host: this is the politics and nation section of the washington post, after school shooting, staff tries to pray is pain away.

communal displays of faith have the defined this disturbs response -- district's response to the shooting. other schools have responded with politics, santa fe has been less concerned about guns than god. why is it different in santa fe? because the leaders of our city, school district, state, they know where to look, and that is to the lord jesus christ. the poster is that the fabric of religion and spirituality is fabric of the everyday life in santa fe. residents say what they need most is thoughts and prayers. good morning. john. caller: good morning.

i have two solutions. should offert money for anyone who turns in their guns and promise not to purchase anymore. and a warning before the video games come on if you watch this video it could lead to violence. that is about it. host: vivian. you think the media and violent culture are to blame. caller: hi do. i also believe -- i do. i also believe it is more than one thing. man has always corrected one wrong with another wrong, and this culture we have today does not help our young men. men need their fathers. girls are no little

doing this. boys who don't have fathers, don't have a home life. that is the beginning. we want the government to correct every ill today. that is not right. that you have to raise your children properly. that is the beginning of the culture. the television set, it is just all caps on television. awfulmultiple -- just what is on television. these multiple things are to blame. host: we will hear from dennis, calling us from florida. what do you think is the root

cause? caller: anything to do with more violence and school mass shootings, i don't think the media has to do with it. we have to get to the fact that when you get a car, you have to have liability insurance. this is the best answer i have heard. if you buy a gun, what is wrong ?ith having liability insurance all these kids that have died in school, they have not gotten a dime from anybody. they just died. republicans love insurance companies. we learned about that during the health care debate. this will help insurance companies. mandatory liability you buy a gun. that is it. host: this leads us back to the story earlier from the washington post, ensuring

schools in kansas, it is difficult to insure schools because of the law allowing teachers to be at armed. -- be armed. the insurance industry faces huge potential liabilities from these tragedies. the 2017 las vegas shooting where a gunman fatally shot 50 people could cost insurers more than $1 billion, including potential lawsuits and lost business income from the incident and its fallout. turn to insurers for liability protection to cover them if there is an accident or negligence. insurers are looking for ways to minimize risk, which is why is that cover schools send out notices about small dangers such as extension cords causing tripping.

having trained police officers to schools is generally treated favorably, but giving guns to janitors or teachers raises concerns. putting in more resource ,fficers, additional security we feel that makes it safer. it's different when you start pushing it to arming teachers, volunteers, and voluntary security. read more at "washington journal." washingtonpost.com. good morning. caller: good morning. plays athat the media part. that gives these people 15 minutes of fame. with also in conjunction what the nra article said. drugs.ropic

you just prove that culture by having that high school kid speaking. these kids are speaking. if that kid commits a crime, he gets put in a juvenile system because his brain, according to the progressives and whatnot, is not fully formed, and he is easily influenced, so he should not be held accountable. there is your progressiveness right there. thank the comments of the african-american gentleman saying about the african-americans don't have a problem with gun violence. they don't do mass shootings, but on a daily basis, they are killing each other one at a time. i thought that was kind of a racist thing and ignorant thing that gentleman said. baton rouge, louisiana, renee disagrees with the

statement. hello there. caller: hi there. there is insurance. the gentleman talked about purchasing liability insurance. there is insurance. host: yeah. violentmass shootings, disasters, are not entertainment. i'm 55. i went to work in morgan city at the age of 15. there was a serial killer. a famous one. your right to life matters. everyone has a right to life no matter your age, race, gender. you have a right to life. toore you decide whether marry and have children, you need to learn to protect your right to life because i also worked in law enforcement, and law enforcement cannot get there

in time every time. it is impossible. host: thank you. from thet this tweet new york times that says an ever growing body of research consistently reaches the same conclusion, the only variable that can explain the high rate of mass shootings in america is its astronomical number of guns. i will see we can bring up the story itself. what explains u.s. mass shootings? international comparisons suggest an answer. this is part of the data gathered by the new york times looking at the numbers of guns in the u.s. and mass shootings. mass shootings here, philippines, russia, china, india. has fewer than 46 million guns or 18 mashers. has 270 million guns.

is the media and violent culture to blame for mass shootings? (202) 748-8000 if you agree with that. (202) 748-8001 if you disagree. clarita,in santa california, disagreeing. caller: yes. host: go ahead. caller: about 25 years ago, i was with a group of guys trying to get our kids involved with cars, taking care of your cars, raising your cars correctly. we were talking about the future of what our kids had to deal with. one of the guys in the club said he had his seven-year-old kid with some friends over, and they

were in the bedroom, and he heard a bunch of cheering. he walked in on them. they were watching and playing a videogame were the people would actually either shoot a criminal or especially they would shoot a cop. when they shot and killed a cop or criminal, there was not just a body falling down, there was a .uge screen full of blood over the years, over the decades, they have become accustomed to this. it is no big deal to see all the blood and gore and everything else. hasink the video culture for sure. there were a few others in that sons have,aid, our and they can no longer have the

again scored do this or do that. one of them was a police officer. he was incensed. the thing on assault weapons. i am sick and tired of hearing people say we are going to ban assault weapons. they have been banned since the act went through. host: are you still there? go ahead. we lost a little bit. finish up what you are saying. caller: the thing about assault weapons. 1935, yet wened in still have people calling them assault weapons on tv, even including fox news. we have a senator in california who is running to ban assault weapons. they have been banned. just because they look like, they are not an assault weapon.

they are just a regular single pull gun. some people modify them. that is their business. just because it looks like a thing is wrong. violent culture is a normal thing now in america. momentou describe that when you first walked in. the first time you ever saw anything like that in a game that your kids have that level of violence, the blood in the gore? >> that was the first time i had seen it. it was absolutely horrible. everybody was kicked out. those kids never came to the house. the games were broken up and fried. i never know whether they snuck

out and did anything on their own at some else's house, but not in my house. host: thank you for calling. if you agree that media and violent culture are to blame for mass shootings. disagree, (202) 748-8001. naomi in south carolina disagrees. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you? host: fine. thank you. caller: i disagree because i know many young black men and women that play call of duty. they don't go out and decide this is something that random to go and kill a bunch of kids at school. we do have black on black crime. most of it takes place at the club. somebody gets upset or angry. ight breaks out, and the

gun is the first thing they go to. when they go to our schools, and they start to get these teachers guns, and you must around, and you have a teacher with a bad day. a kid comes in their very disrespectful, who is to stop the teacher now from using that done on that student? those are the things i am concerned about. i don't know what is going on with the young people. on occasion, young people go out schoolsde to go to the and kill these kids. of black people that are playing these games, and they are not doing this. maybe we need to find out what is going on. most of these black kids don't have a problem in the home. they were raised strictly by their mother. said several colors have

the absence of the father in the home, whether white or black they did not say, leads to the issue more gun violence. do you agree with that? caller: i do not because i am a single mother. i raised three children. host: thank you. send us a tweet. , shooting is our preferred method of conflict resolution. some people are just evil. slamdunkss makes it a to acquire guns for people who have a grudge. the more coverage media gives to these people, the more killings will take place. good morning. is ontothat last caller something. i think it is white males that are doing these mass shootings.

what is affecting their mental health? theink it is contact with right wing political philosophy, which is antidemocratic and antisocial. immigrants, black people, women. it is deeply antisocial. it is definitely affecting the mental health of many people, mostly white males. it is white males that are committing these mass shootings. if you look at the history of these white males, they are always right wingers. they always have some contact with the republican party. this latest shooter in texas, his father was a supporter of the head of the nra, dana loesch. when you read articles about these mass shooters, these facts will be buried in the article. we have to knowledge this. i know it is not a very popular

thing to say, but it is the right wing political philosophy that is causing these mass shootings. host: are you saying that it is right wing, that they are affiliated with republicans were far right wing views, fascist views and things like that? caller: it is all connected. is gaining numbers. it is the fascists come near not seized. neo-nazis., the republican party is the blame, and the democratic party is also to blame. host: how so? caller: they are not resisting it. they are not standing up. they are not speaking out. there are some of us on the left that are speaking out. the media is not promoting solidarity across racial lines, across gender lines, ethnic

lines. they are fanning the flames of this. it is true that the media is probably to blame, but it is not in the interest of the oligarchy to promote solidarity across differences, ethnic, national, gender lines. they want a divided working-class so they can continue to rob us all. front page of the new york times this morning, reporting on the irish vote on friday on abortion, in a landslide irish end in abortion ban, one of the world's most restrictive abortion ban, a series of stinging rebukes to the roman catholic church. the results announced on saturday cemented the nation's liberal shift at a time when right-wing populism is on the rise in europe, and the company

administration is imposing restrictions on abortion in america. ireland has voted on another referendum to allow same-sex marriage. this was a particularly wrench ing issue for irish voters, and it was not clear until the end that the momentum for socially liberal policies would be ingrained enough to wait opposition to abortion. sandra disagreeing with that statement. tell us why. caller: the last caller, i almost wish i could have a conversation with him over coffee. he is so on point. i love the way he continued to reiterate that it is not popular to say the things he said, but it is so true.

more people are starting to unify and stand up with that same thought process. said, i stand in lockstep with him. uploadmes, i will the c-span segment on to my facebook page, which i'm going to do with this one, and i'm looking forward to the conversation that will start. i started listening to c-span about a year ago, and i feel like racism is so strong. it has gotten so strong in this country that even a few callers man said a black caller earlier implied that black people don't kill people. he was wrong. people that talk in extremes are the problem.

people who misinterpret what somebody else said are the problem. they want to go on and have talking points. it is a problem. the media has something to do with it, the way they present these killers. i think the violent culture is a symptom and result of the culmination of deeply rooted problems. i think there is a lot that goes to why things are the way they are. it comes from racism and slavery. if i had more time, i could make more solid points. host: let me ask you about what you said. you said you have been watching c-span for the last year or so. your interpretation that your hearing racism is on the rise. we have been asking about media and violent culture. do think discussions like this, people's opinions them is beneficial for everybody

concerned matter where they stand on the issues? is it good to have the conversation? caller: i think the conversations are going to heal us no matter how extreme one side or the other. the conversations have to happen. silence is the problem. i love c-span. it is ok to hear the racism because it is there. it needs to come out. it needs to be addressed. when i hear what i think was a before, iwho was just applaud black people that stand up against racism against black people, and i know racism happens to other people, but i am black, and that is what i'm focused on now. i care about all people, even when people and everybody. host: glad to have you as part of the conversation. in the to get one more conversation. let's go to louise in the nation's capital.

hello. caller: i think the fact that nra refuses to allow congress to appropriate money for a scientific study of gun violence and the causes of gun violence is a very important factor. what is the nra afraid they will find out? thatnk it is just horrible a study conducted by people whose job it is to study this sort of thing might really help. i think your conversation that you had even with people i think are horrible, i think that is a very good thing to have available to us for education. thank you for your program. host: thank you, louise. glad you are part of it. coming up next on "washington journal," we will hear from the daily beast's eleanor clift and

columnist cheryl chumley from the washington times. khalilzad, theke ambassador -- formerkhalilzad, the heat he is questioned about the florida senate race in what it will take for democrats to win the senate in 2018. one of the most expensive senate races ever. are you prepared to put up the money necessary to keep bill nelson in the senate, and how much money are we talking about? most expensive because governor scott will be writing a lot of checks.

expect the race to be competitive and i expect we will win there. and his service in the senate for florida makes him the favorite to start the race. it will probably take money to topple him in this environment. host: he has overspent early on. spendingnotorious for that money. we know what we are up against financially. but for the voters in this environment, it is about more than money. we will have the resources we need to communicate and get the sen.'s message across. what cycles do democrats need

to break to be successful? all the resources were behind communicating digitally where the republicans are here in this cycle we have forwardand put our foot in terms of showing a real estate thatabama, is not normally a democratic stronghold we had a chance to be a part of that and we knocked on doors and went to 1600 african-american is this is. having a kind of effort and in red states is important. on newsmakers, coming up today. joining us here on "washington journal this morning cheryl is the opinion editor cheryl

cheryl chumley and also the daily beast's eleanor clift . where do think things stand for republican members of the house and senate as they go back? there has been talk that democrats are hoping to win back at least the house in 2018. where do you think things stand? a few months ago, if you would ask that, you would say democrats. in the last few weeks, there are been interesting polls that could show otherwise. there has been the pole about the generic findings if you are to vote for a house member today would it be a republican or a democrat?

and for the first time, democrats have fallen behind on that. republicans have taken the lead. significanten a drop-off for democratic support since november. . there been other findings. polls showed that democrats were losing with women which is a big deal because that is the go to segment for the democratic party. that is not to say these women are supportive of trump or trump policies, but they are moving independent, and that opens a window for republicans to step in. there is interesting movement. eleanor clift, as they get closer, where do you think the things stand for democrats?

not a: -- guest: i am correspondent for the daily news period have been a lot of things, but i am not that. either winning or they are over performing in the seats. they are doing a whole lot better. i think the democrats have a decent chance of taking back the house. i think the senate is a huge reach. it looks as though the midterms are shaping up on the referendum of president trump and the performance of the republican congress. a lot can happen between now and then. think president trump is an asset or a liability on the campaign trail or speaking in videos and tweets for republican members? guest: normally a president at

40% would be a liability. the balance point is usually 50% popularity. i covered the clinton white house. bill clinton wanted to go out and campaign during the midterms and he was told, no, you will make it worse. barack obama, a large number of lost.were for typically lose seats the occupying party. how big will it be and will it tip the house? host: cheryl, asset or liability? asset.i think he is an there are regions that don't like donald trump and will vote for the candidate that least reflects trump like policies and rhetoric. by and large, if you look at the

economy, which is a key think voters look at going to the ballot boxes, the economy is great. i think trump can take a lot of claim for that. 748-8000 is the number two reach us. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8002 for others. eleanor, do you think the economy is a strong point for which democrats can use to run against republicans? guest: the economy is going gangbusters, but not performing well for particular people who voted for president trump. the focus groups and polling shows people are worried about rising health care premiums, and they blame the republican party for the health care protection they had from new health care

protection. the tax cut bill that the president signed an republican congress passed is not seen as a winner. people look at it and are not feeling it in the caucus. they see big corporations buying back stock's. -- stocks. it has not performed as republicans hoped it would in the cycle. the: democrats turn that to focus on health care in their speeches on the floor and in news conferences. there was music yesterday that there may be another effort in the senate to once and for all repeal the affordable care act. on that issue, what are the response and what have they been saying in being unable to overturn the health care law? guest: there is frustration the

republican camp, particularly the tea party. they are upset that obamacare was not repealed across the board as promised. with health care costs right now and the concern of american voters. it is a winner for an issue for republicans to come forward with some sort of talk and means of repealing obamacare, not just piecemealing.-- isterms of tax cuts, it early to see how it will affect individual pocketbooks paired with companies and corporations, you cannot dismiss the fact that companies are handing out bonuses, salaries are going up. the unemployment level is at 3.9% i believe was the most recent take care you cannot dismiss the economy. guest: i am not dismissing it,

the racesooking at where he didn't work, like in the pennsylvania race. harley davidson -- you have harley davidson and they are getting profits for tax cuts and laying off workers. i do not think people see the tax cut as direct the helping them -- directly helping them. the evidence we have seen so far that it is not the big launchpad that republicans used for victory. you think ther of announcement about pulling out of the north korea summit with kim jong-un has any downstream effect on local races or congressional senate races? pulling out now does

not have a direct effect. the president believes that as long as the has a strong command of calling the shot that it helps them and maybe it does, the nobelot think peace prize is within reach. i am not even sure that would matter. bread and butter issues are much more important in the midterms. guest: i slightly disagree. i think the fact that donald trump is sending a strong message on overseas and foreign policy does resonate down to the individual level area and i think americans a by and large love this president for taking a strong message with foreign affairs. there are naysayers who do not like his rhetoric and think he could be more diplomatic, but you cannot discount the fact that north korea just released three americans. hadzuela just yesterday we

the white house their money eight released an american prisoner. now we are looking to turkey to a christianeleased pastor held hostage there. it is things that americans love like that. guest: i don't know how you define real american spirit but north korea always has a stable of hostages that a release and every president has brought back prisoners. they are important and i'm not discounting them. but i think the unsettled nature of our allies and back and forth with russia and ongoing conflict in syria where the president's policies are unclear. .hat will distract taking strong stands to hostages and whether not just whether or not he is going to have a summit i don't think translates into a cohesive foreign policy that is a winner. host: we have budget of calls

waiting for cheryl chumley and eleanor clift. would like to hear from you. let's hear from harold on our democrats line. caller: i would like to ask the guests if you think that the lying factor and fake news factor will make any difference in this upcoming election. you can keepid your doctor, they made a big deal out of it and the guy stood up and said that he was a liar inside the senate and everybody took offense to appear now we have a guy that lies to us -- i saw a poll yesterday that started off the first year was like almost five times and now it is nine times a day. this is not a republican or democrat issue -- if your spouse

or your child or your doctor or your lawyer lied to you nine times a day every day, would you believe anything they said? would you follow them? and for the evangelicals out there, if christ was on earth today and he was going out giving a sermon and he decided he was going to say he could grab women by their private parts, would you follow him? if he lied to nine times a day would you follow him? host: let's start with you, cheryl. not sure he's talking about donald trump or andrew mccabe or james clapper. there is a lot of lying owing on right here. right now, the big issue is looking at the intel agencies and law enforcement agencies and determining who lied during what occasion. onhave a huge issue brewing

capitol hill that has been targeting president trump for over a year now called russia obstruction of justice investigation. so far, we have had little come from that except for indictments handed down from robert mueller and his team against trump campaign officials for lying. some have admitted and some are fighting in court. the fact is, there is lying on both sides and i don't think can point to donald trump as being the liar in politics. for that, the rest of the public and party will suffer during election time. think the caller made excellent points. we have never had a chief executive that routinely lies. put american credibility online in terms of making future deals in the relationships with allies and whether he can go with the deal with north koreans and if anyone will leave it. he has not been faced with a

serious crisis since he has been in office. if that were to happen, will the american people believe what he says when he changes his mind 24 hours later? i think the notion that everyone lies and the president is no different as completely salacious host:. host:linda is in ohio. welcome. caller: thank you for taking my call. shented to ask owner what thinks the democrats will do. this is not the democratic party i grew up with. they need to get new leadership. i don't know why they don't try to do more with changing the party. i love the democrats, but now i am so upset with them. they are so far left and they keep talking about trump. they all lie. i was so disappointed. i wanted you to tell me what the democrats are going to be able

to do for this country. thank you very much for taking my call. host: are the democrats in an evolutionary phase? dislike of trump and resistance of trump is strong from democrats and it overwhelms any other message. they arerats are aware going to see they need a compelling economic message. it is not enough to say they don't like trump. i think it is evolving. the candidates that the democrats have put forward in many races across the country are quality candidates, many former military people and newcomers. they have not come up to the political system. you are going to see a transform that democratic party in congress, assuming the democrats do well and take at the house. there will be a lot of women elected. the victory of stacy abrams in the democratic primary in

georgia is kind of an example of democrats believing there is a new coalition out there, and if to pull them something for, they will turn out and vote it as we all know, turnout in the midterm elections is usually low. we talked about this a little. i want to show you a statement from npr. lewandowski in an interview said this "it is a very simple question -- are you and your family better off today than you were two years ago? " the midterm elections are about the country and if so, trump wins. what do you think? guest: i agree with the statement. not just the economy. if you look at what the white house has put forward, the naysayers can't say america

first and that it is trite, but it is not. it goes to the essence of what americans under eight years of obama were sick and tired of. apologywas tired of the ours.r be here comes a president who brings a solid economic package pushing america's economy forward, but also coming forward with strong rhetoric that our country is first and foremost when it comes to the global arena. host: he is talking about the direction of the country. he talks about the economy. guest: the numbers are still negative in terms of direction of the country. i agree the overall economy is going well. it is not going well for individual people. if you look at the state of

ohio, the number of jobs have the last -- really since 2000, and the new kinds of jobs that come and do not replenish the pocketbook the way that they should. you have the opioid crisis, which the white house has claimed they will do something about, but nothing much has happened. you have a sense of anxiety about people sending their children to school and being afraid because of the guns. the president and congress still have not banned the so-called bump stocks. this and saying this present is victorious when he is actively working to undermine a justice department investigation, many people think we are headed for a constitutional crisis or maybe in the midst of one. this is a very unusual time in our politics and the most controversial president i have

experienced in my lifetime. host: let's hear from kelly on our independent line in west virginia. caller: good morning. i think the republican party, if they were smart, they would go back to the state of the union where the democrats sat like children and it show the clips. the democrats will rue the day when they acted like that. thank you. i am not sure exactly what particular moment he is speaking of. i agree with eleanor a little bit that the democrats need to fine-tune the message. and sell to go forward on a something that is more than we are not trump or vote for us, we are not donald trump. the democratic party is in trouble and they have to offer a message of true platforms and

the something inspirational and motivational that will draw people to vote for them. right now, the republicans have the upper hand. guest: when you talk about the party in trouble, the republicans control both house and senate and the white house and the supreme court you could say. they don't agree on anything. you have a speaker of the house walking away from the job because they can't do it. he does not want to be in the minority. you have two parties searching to define their message. the democrats have an aspirational message -- and that is medicare for all, free college tuition, a higher minimum wage. those policies have to be fine-tuned to the point where they are realistic and what you can accomplish. the democrats have an economic

frame out there. they have to get through to a public now that is looking at everything in washington and considering that everybody is corrupt. draining the swamp never happened, or if it happened it is full of new creatures. host: you put it on speaker ryan leaving. numberne of a record retiring. guest: not many democrats. issues ofe were sexual harassment. do you think congress is part of the conversation -- not conversation but part of the reason we may see real change in the polls in the election results in the fall? guest: congress always polls low. politicians are never top in the american people's hearts. american voters always look at not just congress but the white courtsnd the cabinet and

as being activists and anti-constitutional and so forth. go tok people constantly the ballot boxes looking for change. some of which can come from decent votes. a lot of it is just the system and the deep state we have been talking about since donald trump has come into office. some of that has been uprooted and taken care of as we speak. guest: what do you mean about the deep state that has come into being? guest: if you look at law and force agencies. some of the key players that have been outed as lying and deceiving have been outed as having real political biases as they go about and investigate donald trump. it seems to the average american that these are real conflicts of interest. guest: no, this is the republican mind. guest: andrew mccabe.

guest: he was appointed by president trump. the officials the president refers to as democrats are registered republicans. guest: he has come on said he is not a republican. guest: this is not a democratic deep state. that is a phrase that has been the trump convince base that whatever he can't do it is because all of these forces are maligned. guest: that is not true. it is not a made-up phrase. like when you say hillary clinton is the right wing. guest: i didn't say that. guest: that is my point. you may not like the phrase. but when we look at james clapper and john brennan, just

look at his twitter feed. here is a guy who was supposed to have been an honest cia official with nonpartisan and nonbiased integrity, and look at his twitter feed. it is all anti-trump and hate trump. he is no longer with the cia, but he had these views while he was part of it. holding himre liable for views you think he held at the cia. host: let me jump in quickly here. let's get a few more calls. let's go to daniel in virginia beach on the republican line. go ahead. caller: it is a bit of a memory lane here for me. i remember watching elenor clift on the mclaughlin group in the early 1990's. it makes me feel old. guest: it should make you feel seasoned. host: there you go. caller: the affordable care act had people like my sister and

one of my childhood friends whose earnings were just on the wrong side. they got hurt. my friend had to drop it. his health care went from $4000 to $10,000. the affordable care act wasn't so affordable for a lot of people. on the democrat party, i was a democrat and -- if i was a democrat, i would look at the two debbie's from michigan. debbie stabenow and debbie dingell. those two latest watch their state being taken apart by globalization, and they survived it. a friend of working people, they are. find out what they did. that is all i want to say. i agree on debbie dingell and debbie stevan they are fighting, and they -- stabbed stabenow, they are

fighting. they needed to look at the trade partnership as well. she did at the end of the campaign. you had president obama campaigning to get that treaty ratified. the democrat message there certainly helped in the loss of michigan. in terms of memory lane, the mclachlan group is back on in the washington area. we are on sundays on wj elliott at noon, except that this new -- la at noon, except this coming sunday. we were preempted. host: is that really focused on the certain particular races? best: i don't think it will

a huge issue foremost voters when it comes time to go to the polls in november. people are watching it, but there are concerns they have on their mind, namely immigration. i think that is huge. and again, the economy. and i think the trade. trump is doing a fine job when he puts out the message that he would like america to have the upper hand when it comes to trade deals. as that trickles down across the nation come in most laypersons mines, that makes sense and that s, that makesind sense. host: what do think about that? guest: i think that we are worried about shipping. that is why they backed off on the initial declarations the president made. the white house is divided. you have free traders and the secretary of treasury and larry kudlow inside the white house

basically warring with the anti-free traders. policy has not taken shape, but it has created fear in the midwest among certain aspects. i am sure the two michigan members of congress that the caller referred to are right there on that issue. has met with various groups and has heard it first hand. he has made exceptions here and there, but his view of trade deals is so incredibly simplistic. he thinks if we sell less to you than we buy from you, then somehow we are losing. global fluid thing you cannot adjust every country to make it come out so that the u.s. is a winner. chinawould you say in their pledge to buy more from the u.s. in some ways could be marked up as a victory for the administration? guest: let's see what they actually do.

talk is cheap. the president says he will an act tariffs on european cars. that has our allies in the european union very upset. he also does all of this without consulting anybody very he does not tell members of congress who states are involved. he does not consult with allies before he does it. iss go it alone attitude what he has and it creates a lot more problems for himself and he needs to. issue, cheryl chumley, the unpredictability of what the president decides or where he may go, is that -- that -- is that an asset for him? guest: i think it is unfair to say he does not consult with people. he needs to -- he consults with the people he needs to. he relies on internal factions to help him shape policies domestically going forward. on foreign affairs, the more unpredictable our resident

seems, the safer it seems for america. the reason why is that you don't know where this president stands on foreign affairs issues. kim jong-un does not know what president trump will do in terms of taking a military stand or in terms of fixing tighter sanctions. .e just does not know it is the unpredictability that gives america a real strength to bargain from. host: is that unpredictability good with our allies in terms of nato and asian allies? guest: i think the unpredictability is good in terms of we give our allies what we think they need in terms of staying on our side. in israel, it has more information that it let on in the media about what president trump will go forward with in terms of foreign affairs. as far as other allies, i do not think for every foreign policy we should take polls and surveys

affiliatesyou and want us to do or european comrades want us to do. i do not wish to run our country. let's hear from our next color. -- next caller. caller: this is chris. mi on there? host: you are not -- am i on the air? host: you are. go ahead. about: what she said andrew mccabe and comparing him lying the wayrump he lies nine times a day and the deep state. this "deepnny how always in the f the

eye guys that were kicked out -- fbi guys that were kicked out and they were potential in the guys that were potential witnesses against , the crimes committed. host: we will get a response. thank you for calling. guest: i am not sure what crimes donald trump has committed because he is not been charged with any crimes. my reference to andrew mccabe was factual because he was fired being proven that he lied. we have other so-called federal

officials and we have some text that show deep-seated anti-trumpism on people who are tied to the robert mueller investigation of trump for collusion and obstruction of justice. we have a lot of players out there that are being less than honest with the american people. the democrats want to point to donald trump as being dishonest" this nine times a day lie. there must've been a poll taken because i don't know where that comes from. i would say, let's look what james comey and john brennan and james clapper have done over the last few months and over the last couple of years. there are a lot more deceptions there than on donald trump's front. host: let's get back to 2018 politics. take a look at a few ads. you see a flavor of how they are looking. i wanted to play the ads from the montana senate race with the

democrat and from the challenger . first and and from jon tester and issues he is focusing on paired let's take a listen. we'll come back and talk. [video clip] washington is a mess. one, reduce government waste fraud and abuse. to, reduce. three cut red tape at the eighth five, did right by our cops, firefighters. six: support for caregivers. eight, i am out of fingers. i am jon tester, and i approve this message. ad and froms his rickepublican challenger, rosen dale, challenging the senator appeared here it is. [video clip] >> nancy pelosi call it crumbs. >> they really stepped in. >> trumps tax-cut, you can't say

that on tv. >> i met rosen dale, and i am running for senate. montana needs a conservative who is willing to bet the trump the gender and not kowtow to nancy pelosi. the trump tax-cut mean business. the focus on that race is on the tax cut that senator tester and many of the things he accomplished in his term. eleanor. inst: he was holding his own a state with a democratic governor. i think people are listening to what is being done for me. i think the tester ad does cite specific pieces of legislation that affect people's everyday lives. an challenger is saying "i'm trump." i like to we will double down. host: he is saying he supports the antenna candidate to support

the trump agenda. guest: the reference to nancy pelosi goes right to the poll that was taken at the beginning of the segment where i mentioned where he found that women were turned off by the negativity going on in politics right now and also a lot of independent voters dislike nancy pelosi. was a very clever way that he brought in nancy pelosi. he is not a nancy pelosi follower. host: huffington post said that the house minority leader from san francisco has consistently been one of the gop's targets and featured in roughly one third of television ads. , if theyt only that

say she gets elected they will support her. that is fine. do what they have to do to elect their new leader. if they don't regain house, nancy pelosi will step down. if they do regain control by whatever margin it is, conceivably she made see that as time to take her victory lap or she could fight on in serve another term. i think it's all depends on the numbers and what kind of victory, if there is a victory that the democrats get. -- host: among those ads is rick scott running against bill nelson. here is one of his ads. >> i do not think he is a role independent voice. >> that is what is wrong with

our broken congress. .verybody is a partyline voter bill nelson is one of those. >> he no longer thinks and acts independently. bill nelsonor before. i totally think it is time for somebody new. >> i believe illness is way too partisan. 2018 we are talking politics and more with eleanor clift and cheryl chumley. we welcome your calls. we go to build in marietta, georgia on our democrat line. chumley, good morning. i like what you mean about real americans. explain that term to me, please. thank you guest: -- thank you. tost: real americans means me that they are the heart and soul of this country and the hard workers in the midwest and the farmers and homemakers and

teachers and police. the average american who does not live, breathe, and died by the next political, hysterical crisis in lusty -- in washington, d.c. the people who are trying to make ends meet and send their to college here that is what i mean by real americans. host: are you still there, bill? do you have a follow-up to that? caller: that doesn't cover everyone in the united states. guest: it would be a long list. caller: let's go for it. if you call us all americans. let's call us all americans instead of real americans. host: thank you for the call. guest: i think you are on the shaky ground when you are defining real americans. it sends a message that some people are not included. you said that people who are obsessed with the latest crisis

in washington somehow don't fit into this group. i think people obsessed about withay the crisis came up people trying to put food on the table and send their kids to college. this is a time for political engagement and more engagement since the vietnam era. i think that is positive. is messy -- democracy and we should argue it out and everybody gets in the arena and make a case. guest: maybe i can better defined by saying what is not a real american to me. not a real american of those americans who want to fundamentally change the shape of our nation and degrade and demise the constitution and make .t to something it is not not real americans are those who don't recognize that our country was founded on judeo-christian principles with a limited government aspect. not real americans are ones who want to bring a more socialist

type of leadership and a socialist type government to our political system. that would be a better definition of what i mean by real americans bite to finding those i don't think -- by defining those i don't think a real americans. worse i think that is a definition. another call.t to dorothy on the republican line. welcome. caller: good morning, ladies. i start out by telling the screener i had a question for each. i would like to ask what eleanor about thehing that --ing of a law and and is that allowing the media to propagate?

-- actually it is the reverse. i want to know if eleanor could see any lies that he has said and compare obama to then godsey, keep your insurance, keep your health care -- two benghazi, keep your insurance, keep your health care -- all the things that obama got away with that the media didn't bring up. media does ising lie. that is why the majority of people voted for trump. i think the democrats are going to get wiped out in the midterms. i hope you have those questions worked out. host: there were several issues. guest: the majority of the american people did not hope for trump. he lost the popular vote. so-called lies she attempted to president obama said the mainstream media did not cover them.

how else did she know about them? they were covered quite pursue closely.- the fact that we have a free media in this country is part of democracy. i think the mainstream media in touchays has lost test -- with some aspects and they are working to rebuild the trust. they have a president who assails the media whenever he does not like the story is undermining our democracy and it is very concerning and calling the media the enemy of the people is directly fascist. you hearryl, what did from the caller? thet: i'm not sure about

question. but to go on about the problem with the mainstream media, i believe there is a problem with the mainstream media being biased and targeting donald trump. i believe the media does on occasion outright lie. i believe more frequently the ,ainstream media does omissions they change context to present a certain agenda that meets their views, and i say this because i have been a part of the media for 15 to 20 years, and i am seeing it happen myself. the media has a decided left a slant which is backed by polls that show how most of the journalists vote. i think they bring their views on to the job and when they cover politics and when they cover particularly republican politicians, they have a lot more watchdog approach them when they cover democrats. host: both of you work for organizations and you have used media paidinstream

your for the washington times, and you with the daily news. how do you define mainstream media and do you think you are part of it? guest: i think the mainstream media is a big him rolla, but it also has partisan elements. you have an activist, right-wing media, fox news would be one and the washington times would be another, there are very much in the president's camp and echoing what he says and amplifies it. at the mclaughlin group, i spar with pat buchanan and we talk about the fact that if the right-wing media that exist today existed when richard nixon was resident, that he might have survived watergate. -- washt-wing media president, that he might have survived watergate. the right wing media is to president trump's liking. it is part of the mainstream media, but they are also

partisan elements. when i think of left-wing media, on par find anything with fox. host: both of you are opinion people. do you think another organization and in those opinions do they leak into the editorial coverage and hearted -- hard news coverage? nbct: when you look at which is considered mainstream, but is really when you look at the new york times and washington post is considered mainstream. cnn, cbs, all mainstream. i think it has leftist leaning bias, which if you look at some of the watchdog groups, they track these things. the washington times is definitely conservative. from my point of view, it is not as conservative as i am.

guest: i am agreeing with that listening to you. guest: the problem with the media is when they don't admit it. i do not have a problem with the daily beast being as far left as it wants to go, as long as it admits it. guest: we have a range of opinions. guest: nbc likes to present themselves as if they are mainstream, down the middle of the road and totally unbiased. host: do think msnbc is? guest: they are way out in left field and fox is centrist. the reason i say this is because you can point to certain shows on fox, sean hannity, laura ingraham, and say they have conservative viewpoints. yet their opinion shows. if you look at shepard smith, he, in my opinion, is left. brett there is down the middle. have the same

argument on msnbc. you are calling fox centrist. guest: i am. guest: all right, i think that answers the question. let's get views from mary on the independent-minded you are on the air. caller: i would like the guests to know that 22 out of 34 women in the women's republican club in ohio have left the club soon after the tax cut wered, these women lifelong families who voted republican and have switched because they called donald trump a con man and pundits come. -- pond scum. that iflike to say

there was nothing in robert miller's investigation, how come there have been so many indictments? in order to switch attention away from him, trump will try to cause confusion and discourse by saying that he was spied upon. this is not the first time. leslie stahl, of 60 minutes, strump'd recently that strategy is to attack the media so that people disbelieve. anyone who just listens to fox news is doing harm to themselves and to this country. there is nothing wrong with ms nbc, cnn, and other channels that you call independent media. host: a couple of points. viewpoint.ley on her

does that cause you concern? guest: no, it doesn't. if you look at the indictments handed down, there were 17 or 19 so far, 13 are for russian nationals who say that worship nationals were trying to meddle with the election. it is hardly stop the press news. we already know that for nations try to meddle with american elections. that is not news. another three were for companies. then you have paul manafort who was slapped with about every imaginable charge you can find, and has pleaded not guilty to all of them. he is due to go to court in july for one hearing and september for another. whoyou have richard gates was an associate of paul manafort who was slapped with two dozen charges but then robert mueller reduced to just aligning and throughout the other 22 counts. guest: that's because they weren't cooperating. mueller,y won't robert

who has three people who have admitted lying to feds, michael papadopoulos, and richard gates -- he won't before with sentencing. he wants to pressure them to give out up more and more information for his own russia collusion investigation, which after year has brought forth nothing. this kind of for investigation is a short amount of time. guest: and no collusion. guest: that is not the key point. there is collusion and obstruction of justice that are still going forward. doesn't it bother you that we have a president that has fired so many officials. guest: they were indicted for lying. is there any white house spin you do not buy? guest: that is not a spin.

how high up could he be with russian intel officials to orchestrate this whole behind the scenes? guest: let's let robert mueller complete his investigation. host: i agree -- guest: i agree. sandy, is comes from asked what happened to pelosi and schumer's better deals. have they abandoned that message? guest: the better deal message is out there, but a lot of democrats don't think it has enough to it. i think it is still out there. host: what is the crux of that message? what is the message? guest: it is an economy that works for the middle class, reinforcing health care and fixing the affordable care act gettingrepealing it,

immigration reform, protecting dreamers, getting common sense done loans asked -- common sense gun laws passed. it is the concern about people not being able to afford college and get one or two years of community college paid for to get people more interested. host: a question on twitter. , 25 million campaign contributions and got $607,000 tax cut on it organization and profits and subsequently gave the gop is $30 million contribution. i wonder if cheryl has an opinion on that guest:. . guest: i don't because i would have to investigate that. host: dan in georgetown, massachusetts be go ahead. caller: thank you for having me

on this morning. one thing i realized at a young age with politics in this you cannotthat really listen to what people say . there is a lot of nonsense. you have to look at actions. what actually happens? put their personal just focusednd and on what happens, we would be a lot better off. i feel there is a lot of personal hatred to trump, which, to me, falls in the category of hatred. you have to look at what has happened, but do a little comparison of our last two presidents and how they started off. out of the atmosphere

as far as how well he is doing compared to the last two presidents if you look at things side-by-side. that is one point. a previous caller mentioned something very important that you brushed over, and that is something that was slipped into and that was the rescinding of the smith act. this has opened the floodgates for the media to basically lie if it is in the best interest of the government. what we are witnessing is the deep state aligned with media and they have a free pass. there were a lot of questionable things happening in this country. we have mass shootings. i am sorry to say, these things are questionable. under this law, the rescinding of the smith on that -- smith mundt act.

they could work with the media to deceive us and it is legal. talk about the rescinding of the smith mundt act. host: dan, we'll let you go. any thoughts? i think that sounds like a conspiracy theory that is alive and well. with: i am not familiar that particular act, but i will say back in the 1950's there was an investigation was never confirmed and that was where cia operatives worked with u.s. media to shape the messages that came out of the media, and it was purportedly supposed to have andhundreds of journalists reporters. that is something that has been reported and used in different terms. guest: what was the message they were trying to get across? on forit very and went

years. wasn't just a message but to slant and shape how government officials worked with foreign officials as well. that transmitted american policies abroad. it was time mass shootings with the government to deceive the american people. conspiracy theories are ridiculous, but there are some things our government has been involved in, including the deep state government officials recorded in history and proven. host: let's get to another caller. -- eddie massachusetts

in massachusetts. when you said the farm belt, the chinese have threatened to put heavy tariffs terrorists.andthey threaten saved trump is trying to us. they go through the basins and the gray market and go through them dumping aluminum and steel on us. we have lost so much already pay we have to try to save it. we lost all three beer companies -- budweiser, mears -- budweiser, miller, coors. they are going to mexico, canada, china. make america great again. host: eleanor? isst: my comment on that

even the building of autos is very complex. china does not assemble parts. they come from other countries. these are not simplistic deals as the president thinks he can make. i disrupt the american people don't get hurt. host: cheryl chumley? guest: i don't think he is trying to make the deals himself simplistic. i think donald trump's strength lies with sending a simple message to the american people, something that the average --rican can grab a hold on grab a hold of. host: we have to let you go. eleanor clift and cheryl chumley. we thank you both for being here this morning. guest: have a good memorial day. host: thank you for being here. coming up on washington journal,

we well talk with former u.s. ambassador to the united nations and other postings, zalmay khalilzad the talk about the tensions with north korea and iran over their nuclear programs. and then more of your calls and comments as "washington journal" continues. ♪ [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2017] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] skill as aks a great grand strategist. once he knew the advantages of shock, this is how the unified germany in 1860's. with denmark,wars austria, hungary, and eventually france. that and having done having achieved his objective, which was a unification of germany, he stopped and became a consolidator rather than an instigator. power asxt 20 years in

german chancellor were devoted to trying to build reassuring alliances and a web of alliances with all of germany's neighbors so they would get used to the idea of a unified germany. that distinction between shock stopwe and knowing when to and do something else was reassurance. >> a young university professor and his book on grand strategy and strategic thinking and leadership for contemporary global challenges. tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span's q&a. >> join us live next sunday, june 3, for ours year-long special. featuring best-selling fiction writers, contemporary novelists will be our guests. >> if we are talking about creativity, many writers and so

on, the people who have a lot to say our completely -- are completely undaunted. that there is a storytelling, that you must learn to do this if you want to be a fiction writer, is necessary, but not sufficient. it will not make you a great writer. and you gou sit down actually, they could all do it, you know? there is nothing about learning to do those things that intensifies creativity. >> her book includes who is irish? sunday,e special series june 3 live from noon to 3:00 p.m. eastern on book tv on c-span2. washington journal continues.

host: joining us this morning is cellmate khalilzad, former ambassador -- zalmay khalilzad, u.n.r ambassador to the nations. thank you for being with us this morning. guest: good morning and great to be with you. host: we meet this morning as whether the issue of the president and kim jong-un will meet in the summit in singapore on june 12. the headline in the washington times, the washington post rather reports on the leaders of south korea and north korea meeting yesterday over the weekend. they met in an effort to salvage the summit. when president trump announced he was resending and withdrawing from the summit, do you think that was the right decision? guest: it looks like the summit is back on track now, and the president's withdrawal from the

summit did not have a negative impact. if anything, it may have incentivized the north koreans, who were interested that -- who were interested as it appears. and confirming their desire for denuclearization and to strongly meet with the president, so we will have to see if that happens, but it looks very likely based on the report this morning. host: what is your take having worked in a number of diplomatic postings and ambassadorships? what is your take on why the communication seemed to be so different between that the north korean leader has said and what the president said? and then at times, they seemed so similar. guest: for one thing, north korean leader is a prickly leader. and i think we also had some problems in terms of message

discipline on our side. ended badly for qaddafi. that had a negative effect on the north koreans because what is the priority of the north korean regime based on what we know? and i have to say that it is a country we don't know a great deal about. they would like to get economic assistance. the commitment to declan arise -- the commitment to denuclearization. we have had agreements and they have not been implemented, but i think he wants to get economic assistance in exchange for an agreement perhaps that ultimately leads to decriminalization. host: what you think china's

role is now, and can be in getting the north koreans to that summit? guest: the chinese are always very important as is the rolling of south korea and japan because it puts maximum pressure on north korea. their cooperation is very important because of the chinese in terms of sanctions. chinese's rolehe has been important and will remain important going forward. regardless of what kind of an agreement we get in order to keep the pressure on north korea, we need to keep these countries on board. host: you mentioned libya a moment ago, and the comments that have happened from the last two weeks from the national security advisor john bolton and from the vice president, talking about the libyan model, which was a spark that alerted kim jong-un to withdraw or make

harsh demands on the united states. you were an ambassador during that time period. what does it mean, the libyan model? ofst: there are two sort models in regard to libya. we is, in exchange for what did or in the aftermath of what , the regime was overthrown, that has an effect on qaddafi, who was building his own weapons of mass destruction, who came clean, fearing the same thing that might happen to him. then there were additional dimensions to the libyan model, which led to the ultimate demise. i think the north korean leadership might have taken umbrage with regard to an and inte giving up,

exchange for which they want guarantees in terms of security of their regime. to thewith reference libyan model, the second expectation in exchange for giving up nuclear weapons, there will be support for the survival of the regime for its economic development. it is an overthrow of the regime and the leadership was killed not something he would have liked to hear. host: and the president's north korean decision happened a week or so after his decision to withdraw from the iran nuclear deal. what was your take when you heard that? that the u.s. would pull out of the deal? that: i was not surprised the president pulled out of that agreement.

spoke verynt forcefully throughout the campaign, and since he has become president, he was not happy with that agreement. but we will have to wait and see. it seems the withdraw from the nuclear agreement is part of a broader strategy towards iran to put maximum pressure on them. we don't have a broad coalition supporting it. iranrms of the sanctions, is in a very difficult situation economically, whether unilateral sanctions by us would be sufficient to get to an agreement that addresses some of that theesses agreement had been entered had. host: do you think those additional sanctions will have

real economic impact in iran? guest: no doubt it will have an impact in iran. some of the people who have investment in iran are rightly to abandon those investments. host: some of those are american companies, correct? who wasike boeing planning to sell aircraft, also european countries and others. willll have an impact, but it be sufficient to get iran to agree? we will have to wait and see. the outline for iran is extremely ambitious. consistent with those goals? they will have to be very robust. we will have to see if such a strategy will be implemented. host: our guest is zalmay khalilzad. we welcome your comments. we are focusing on iran and north korea nuclear issues.

202-748-8000 for democrats. 202-748-8001 four republicans. and for independents, that number is 202-748-8002. issue,t mentioned the the strategy could form essentially with that plan. what is your view of president trump's approach? he has beennk unconventional in some ways and conventional and others. he has -- his tactics and his approach is different at times from those that have been used in the past. he has disrupted sometimes the normal ways that things are koreanut if the north nuclear situation is handled and if it is an agreement

that genuinely leads to denuclearization and put substantial limits on its missile programs, and other programs, that will be a success for the president. is the president significantly different from previous presidents. host: as i understand, we don't have a current permanent ambassador to south korea on station, correct? does that help or hurt us? guest: it does not help not to have someone on a day-to-day allies, such as, in this case, we need people in south korea that can interact with south koreans, and their role is very important. are moving rapidly to fill

the post. host: the headline this morning and the wall street journal this decriminalization push looks for to a trump meeting and according to moon jae-in, the two met yesterday in the demilitarized sound. president trump welcoming home the man who had been held prisoner in venezuela and was asked about where things stood on north korea. here are his quick comments. pres. trump: we are doing well in terms of the summit with north korea. alonglike it is going very well. there are meetings going on as we speak in a certain location that i will not name. it is not so far away from here. and i think there is a lot of goodwill. know ifpeople want to we can get something done and if we can be successful in the deacon relation -- in the

denuclearization of the korean peninsula. it would be a great thing for north and south korea, great for japan, and great for the world and pray for the united states, great for china. a lot of people are working on it. it is -- it is moving along very nicely. we are looking at june 12 in singapore. that hasn't changed. and it is moving along pretty well. so we will see what happens. optimisticing very and sounds like june 12 may still be on. guest: looks like it. there are a few weeks left between now and then, so i hope it happens. but i have to caution that we changes with regard to meetings before, and also in the past, we have had agreements with north korea,

most during the clinton administration and the bush administration. on the issue of denuclearization were north korea is committed to denuclearize, and the agreements were not implemented, we had issues. and are part of the bargain in the past -- and our part of the bargain in the past. learning lessons from it, we have to approach it obviously with a great deal of caution. but i give the president credit for bringing things along as far as hes had good -- as far has had. host: zalmay khalilzad is our guest. on our public in line. caller: i want to give credit to the ambassador for finally coming around and giving credit to president trump to get the

north koreans to the table. the employment of all of these ambassadors in the department is being held up by the senate, who is still walking back all the nominations that the president put forward so far. i think there is a dichotomy here when you say that the positions are empty. they are empty because the senate is not confirming the nominations that have been put forth by the president. but i do want to keep you credit for coming around and giving the president credit for bringing north korea to the table which both president does did not do. thank you for that, sir. host: thank you. you are right that the senate process can cause huge delays. the processes have become very protracted. there have also been delays in terms of nominations. there was someone under

consideration to be the ambassador to south korea. but then the nomination was withdrawn. pao -- i believe mike pompeo is focused on getting the job done, but the point about the senate is exactly right. from virginia,r john on a democrat's line. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. ambassador, thank you for taking my call also. i want to say north korea' w bush unpredictable leaders that they changed their minds. this meaning you are talking about my not happen. it is a matter of time you make a great with donald trump and he may change his mind. and that is not how diplomacy works. we signed aestion, deal in iran. as the u.s., they signed a deal

that works in all international communities to accept the deal, and now we are telling european countries, if the -- if you don't follow us, we will punish you. ambassador, you know that there are so many things connected as a diplomat. doesn't means word nothing because when you are a leader, your word means something. when you are sending diplomatic people on the board and they say something, and on the way back the president says something, you cannot run a country that way and you know better than that. i am glad that you mentioned afghanistan and iraq, you know that things are getting worse. i want to to tell us how we can do better for those countries to see if we can change their policies, or if we can have some

involvement? host: all right, john, thank you. go ahead. guest: thank you, john pray with regard to agreements that have been signing getting out of agreements, it has happened in the past and happens really, but it does happen. of one under president bush. but it is a rare thing. the countries have the right -- but countries have the right to get out of agreements. remember, this was an executive agreement, not a treaty. we have even gotten out of treaties at times in the past, and other countries have too. with regard to iraq and afghanistan in recent times, there have been positive movement. isis has been largely defeated their. they have had an election that

is taken place. they are in the process of forming a government. be in airaq would difficult situation because of increased hostility to between us -- of increase hostility between us and iran. and being a neighboring country of iran, the iranians have had a lot of influence there. in the past when governments have been formed, the u.s. and iran have had agreements. i think that may be more difficult. we will see what the impact will be. in may -- president'sanian that was carried on radio, i want to read comments. he said the world today has not accepted the united states decides for the world country and has been independence. who are you to decide for around in the world -- who are you to decide for iran and of the world?

well, we have heard the statements from iran before. of course, the united states is also a sovereign country and an important coverage -- and an important country and can decide for itself. we decided to get out of the agreement and seek a better agreement. objective, ithat has outlined a set of concerns with regard to iran. those objectives, as i said before, are extremely ambitious. and i hope we will have a strategy that can achieve those objectives because if there is a gap between the objectives and the strategy, it can become problematic. we will have to wait and see. i think the u.s. has the right, like other countries, to change its mind about an agreement could host: a story this morning

and the washington post about syria and their headline -- syria's army is on the path to progress, ousted rebels from damascus, but what comes next won't be easy. what should the u.s. strategy towards syria be in light of the iranian pulling out of the agreement and other issues? what do you think? purpose andof the the goal the u.s. has outlined with regards to iran is to -- to is to incentivize coerce and incentivize. they brought malicious from as far away as afghanistan and the u.s. and pakistan element to fight on their behalf in syria. assess theo

implications of what the administration has said with regard to iran, it would seem syria'ster reviewing policy, rather than getting out, do we want to stay, or do we want to send these forces there to put forces on a rainy and forces and place cost on what a rainy and is doing -- and put call someone iran is doing? cost on what iran is doing? it will become harder if we are remaining true to the objective we have outlined with regard to iran. host: let's hear from leo next from the blocks -- from the bronx on our democrat's line. caller: ambassador, thank you for being here this morning on c-span.

my question is, last week, there was a whole issue, donald trump and the cte, or the bte was supportively being banned from selling equipment. then donald trump changed his position and says, he is concerned about a loss of jobs. and there was a report about china lending one of donald trump's corporation $500 million in indonesia. to be a little facetious, if iran offered funding the donald trump to build a hotel and tell tehran?ld -- in host: the headline the wall street journal, the opinion china gains dominance over digital technology, it would be dangerous for freedom worldwide. , caller, foryou your question.

toelieve china is seeking become the preeminent world power in terms of digital technology, artificial intelligence, data analytics. and they set a timetable by 2025, they will achieve that goal. at the same time, china is using -- it'srols over control over data that is generated by the various systems that they have either through , ort ventures with the u.s. through cyber theft and other theft. platformsbuild huge -- they have built huge platforms that the population is

using, and applying artificial intelligence with data from the population, and creating a great deal of control over the people social scores to people based on their performance. so there is monitoring and data collection on their citizens. and what you have is the emergence of a surveillance state in china. i am also concerned that they are seeking to export that model to other countries. , that would leaders be very appealing to them. in terms of interest and values -- in terms of interests and values, we need to monitor this development, and oppose it, but particular to vte in telecommunication technologies, generally, i believe that

training is important. are they being fair or violating u.s. laws? that -- but we need to think about the national security implications in the groin competition between us and china that includes the issues of surveillance. host: the president -- did the president make the right decision on this? is he not taking into consideration the national security and data protection issues that you bring up in this piece in the wall street journal? host: i hope that the president -- guest: i hope that the president would reconsider, not only the trade and economic issues that are important, but the national security issues. if we do focus on the national security and the surveillance state components of it, we would not want to have companies in china that produces equipment

assist use here, or to them with their companies in these -- in achieving their objectives in dominance with regards to digital and ai and data analytics. host: our guest is former ambassador zalmay khalilzad, former ambassador to the united nations for iran and iraq. we welcome your calls. 202-748-8000 for democrats. 202-748-8001 for republicans. for all others, 202-748-8002. we have a caller from brooklyn. caller: good morning, sir, and good morning to your guest. i just want to say thanks to the veterans, the deceased them and those serving today. now, mr. ambassador, as a

seasoned diplomat, i am really ashamed that the subject is negotiation nuclear , that you are saying, in essence, mr. trump, the unconventional handling things the conventional way period there are certain diplomatic protocols that have to be adhered to, which this man is not following. the people that he puts in places in these -- and his cabinet are not qualified for these positions. i do not care about unconventional protocols -- he is not following these protocols. one day he says something in the next thing -- one day he says something and the next he takes it back. we need someone to stand up and say to this man, this is not the way to do things. there are ways to do it. you are not doing the right

thing. you are getting as into serious danger. it will take generations to get these things back in place. please, sir, please be truthful to the world and the american people and say the right thing. host: thank you. guest: thank you for that. in regard to north korea, the givenent has been relatively good marks for his performance. still, the jury is out with regard to the ultimate outcome, whether he would get as an agreement, whether that agreement would be implemented. but you have to give him high marks. i refer to the message of discipline from the administration with regard to libya. if you remember, it was the what some ofrected his subordinates had said, that the libyan analogy might not have been appropriate.

he expects in the post agreement that the current government would be in place and that we would provide, assuming an agreement, and that is one of the objections. for the north koreans to receive assistance to do better on their economy. the current leader of north admittedairman kim has , told his people that he will focus on improving the economic lives. i think the president has been more on message been some of the others in his administration with regard to the north korean issue. host: next up is built and sebastian, florida, independent line. caller: yes, good morning. i would like to know the former ambassador's the stance on the crisis in syria with the white hats, the white helmets, as well

as the right-hand man in afghanistan. i believe his name was abdullah? and also, the aggressive behavior with the israelis and the palestinians. syria andouched on afghanistan, if you will. guest: i do not know what the question was from the caller with regard to abdullah. he is the chief executive of afghanistan. there was an election a couple of years ago. it was a disputed election, and there was an agreement the former secretary of state, john they, negotiated between now president of afghanistan and abdullah, to share power. and that government is in place, led by both of them, and they're

getting ready for a parliament early election this year and a presidential election next year. but the situation in afghanistan remains difficult. host: let me ask you more about the special inspector general for afghanistan, rebuilding afghanistan, came out with their latest report that said the u.s. efforts to stabilize that country over the past 17 years have largely been a failure. you were the ambassador there for 2-3 years? guest: two years. host: looking back 17 years, what is your view? guest: we inherited a very difficult situation in afghanistan. remember, when we were planning to go there, there was no plan on the shelves to rebuild afghanistan. qaeda was, because al in afghanistan and the taliban regime refused to turn over al qaeda, we went in and the overthrew the taliban regime.

challenges given the conditions in afghanistan, which are worried food difficult. and -- which are very difficult. strategy,the current the trump administration has been focused sharply on the problem of pakistan putting more pressure on it. so far, there has been a fundamental change in pakistan policy. we will have to see. i think the administration has done the right thing to remove some of the conditions that president obama put on the timetable for withdrawal. , in my judgment, a positive change, but the situation in afghanistan remains difficult. institutions,g such as the army, the police, intelligence agencies -- have been a challenge because as i

said, the country has been at work for 40 years with very little infrastructure, and little social development, and human capacity has been very limited, but there has been significant progress. i think the inspector general has observations that we have not made as much progress as we would have liked, is on target. host: let's hear from new york, john, republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call. my question is, how do we let the situation with china deteriorate to the point where it seems like we are always playing defense? for example, they have stolen our proprietary rights in many cases. they devalued the -- -- they devalued thewan. .- they devalued the wan

i think i read an article considering the number of chinese students in our country doing research. it just seems like we are always playing defense. you know, china is not just an emerging power, it is a preeminent power. and it is really challenging our status in the world today. i think it destabilizes a lot of things in every region of the world. so, my question is, how did we let it get this far? and really, what are we doing about it now? i will take your answer off-line. thank you. guest: thank you very much for that very smart question. during the cold war, we moved closer to china because there was the need to balance and contain and put pressure on russia on the soviet union. in the aftermath of the end of the cold were, we did not adjust the policy with china in the way that we should have. now, we have a situation in

which we have continued to help build china, economic power, and economic power is being translated into a military power as well. ad we are heading towards rivalry likely between us and china. and therefore, we need to look fromr relations with china the perspective that we are going to be rivals of each other. china would like to replace us as the world's preeminent power. and a decision with iran's economic issues, national issues need to be informed by that. i have come up with a word that i like in terms of our strategy towards china. engagement, which is a combination of containing china, pushing back against its negative behaviors, but not closing the door to engagement

with them because there may be issues such as north korea and some other issues on which we could cooperate perhaps. and the balance doesn't have to be 50-50 between containment and engagement. if we can vary it depending on the chinese revolution and development policies. engagementreful that could become a real washington term before too long. china, and regard to a number of countries like we have some positive relations. but we have negative that we have a constant -- we need a concept that could capture that. we think someone is our friend or adversary, but there are a group of states that are adversarial or collaborators or partners, or potential partners we need to capture in a more complex way then friend or foe.

host: former ambassador khalilzad with us. taking your calls and comments. 202-748-8000 for democrats. 202-748-8001 for republicans. and in all others on 202-748-8002. largely focusing on iraq and iran, and also issues as well. but back to iran for a moment. we announced that we are withdrawing from the nuclear deal. the secretary of state mike pompeo shortly thereafter earlier this week came to the heritage foundation in washington and laid out some of the principles or stands of the trump administration on iran carried out want to play that and get your reaction on mike pompeo caret [video clip] >> now is the time for the regime to summon the courage to do something beneficial for its own people. for this engine and proud nation.

our eyes are clear as to the nature of this regime. let our ears be open to what is possible. unlike the previous administration, we are looking for outcomes that benefit the uranium people, not just the regime. if anyone, especially the leaders are in doubt of letident's trump vision, them look at their diplomacy with north korea. the willingness to meet with kim jong-un underscores administration to help solve the greatest challenge. even with our staunchest adversaries. but that willingness is going to come by painful pressure to resolve this challenge forever. understand your current activities will be met with result. -- result. olve.

my final message is to the iranian people. i want to repeat president trump's words -- he said we stand in total solitary with the victims, their own people. the citizens of iran have paid a heavy price with violence. want toing people long reclaim their broad history, culture, civilization and cooperation with its neighbors. ours america's hope that labor of peace will bear fruit for the long-suffering people of iran. host: what is your reaction? and thisterestingly part, although he outlined a long list of very demanding wishes from the arabians that we seek -- from the ukrainians that irananiansfrom the

,hat we see, there was a signal almost inviting iranians for direct engagement. to the my message leaders and the president of iran is look at north korea that we are willing to engage to solve the most difficult issues. the message to the iranian people was not welcomed by the regime, but the message about .ngagement was interesting was administration saying, why don't we deal directly with each other? and rating the possibility of diplomatic relations with iran? it is a bit of engagement, if i

may use that term again. on one hand it was an indication of a desire to put a lot of pressure to change a rainy and behavior -- iranian behavior, we will have to see what effect it will have. but if sufficient pressure is put leading to political have, if thatans increases engagement and a desire to work with the u.s., that it would be prepared to engage with iran directly. let's get back to a caller from arlington, texas. caller: good morning, gentlemen. my question to the ambassador is about be -- about what has happened to her three days ago in the pakistan parliament, where they approved an amendment

that the proper area would be the province,e one of the provinces. is the ambassador cost take on that, and what would be the reaction from afghanistan on that? thank you. guest: thank you for that question. that what you described did happen. government, they said they would have liked to have been consulted on that decision because, as you know, afghanistan has never accepted that line as an international border. that the people -- across therd border who they have an interest in, in terms of half of the

pushn population, are also through as so. this is an issue likely to continue -- this is an issue likely to affect relations between afghanistan and pakistan. pakistana movement in putting pressure on the government to account for all of the people that are missing, the young people that have disappeared, and they are looking for improved human rights, political rights for the people of that part of the country. -- there is a lot going on that affects our policies in afghanistan and affects counterterrorism. and i think we need to be more attentive what is going on inside pakistan. host: you have contacts in that

part of the world and in the middle east. how do you stay in touch, what do you reta trust to find out what is going on politically, militarily, diplomatically in that region? guest: i read a lot of local media. int is particularly useful local languages even. host: how many languages do you speak? guest: i speak four period four, i try to follow -- i speak four. i try to follow that part of the world. i find internal commentary day-to-day, especially following the developments very interesting by paying attention to the local media. i even watched -- i even watch some of the evening news that is available online in the current age of globalization. that is one of the great positives -- positive

achievements we have. host: let's hear from matthew from alabama on the independent line. matthew, good morning. caller: hello, thank you for taking my call, c-span. i have two points to say. number one, you talked about getting out of the deals. you pointed to some of the rare incidents we left agreements. if so, if you are saying this is normal, well then, sir, i think the u.s. will not be seen as a nation who signed treaties mean nothing from one administration to the next. we will the scene as a nation that runs from deals. n as a nation see that runs from deal. i find that unacceptable.

numbered 2 -- number two, you talk about iraq, and ran, -- iran and afghanistan and the region. anyuestion is, do you have new of this about what is going on? c-span seems completely unwilling or ignoring coverage, or maybe they are not allowed to cover the ongoing conflict. have any -- do you have any new updates? host: matthew, you are talking about yemen to your second point? caller: yes. conflict conflict -- with our saudi allies are desperate to win. it is very important for people to know. we pay saudi arabia millions of

dollars in the are killing innocent people and are not technology anything -- and are not acknowledging anything. host: let's hear from zalmay khalilzad. guest: thank you for that. on your first point, i said this is a redevelopment getting out of the agreement -- i said this is a rare development getting out of the agreement. agreementn executive by the obama administration, but nevertheless, it was an agreement. seek an agreement with the europeans to be able to stay within the agreement. host: the trump administration? guest: the trump administration, yeah. but although we came close, we could not close the gap that existed which the administration was insisting there be a commitment by allies that they will keep iran indefinitely

forever, a year away from acquiring the ability to produce nuclear weapons. and to put that in an agreement that that would be a commitment, dealing the issue of missiles, which we probably reached an agreement in terms for my understanding original policies. the agreement did have some flaws. and the time limit was very short for some of the elements of the agreement that the obama decision was hoping that iran would be a changed place. but several years have passed and iran hasn't changed. and there was regard to inspection any day, any time. on yemen, you raise a good question. i think it has become a proxy war unfortunately for the

yemenian people. they want to put pressure on saudi arabia. the saudi are supporting the ,overnment that was overthrown which the world regards as a legitimate government. as a result of this rivalry between saudi arabia and iran, the people of yemen are suffering a great deal. there has been a lot of humanitarian problems that this war has caused. host: is there any u.s. involvement with either supply materials and intelligence to saudi arabia? isst: this administration closer to saudi arabia. the yemen administration tried to follow a policy between saudi arabia and iran want to cultivate relations.

the saudi who were unhappy with that stand. but this administration has embraced a closer relation with israel and saudi arabia, and much tougher policies that we have discussed with regard to iran, so the u.s. is helping with saudi arabia and iran. and: the president obama secretary of state clinton break a deal with libya by the invasion leading to his death after he gave up his nuclear weapons program? guest: there was no explicit agreement, but i suspect, qaddafi's expectations and political agreement may have been in exchange for giving up wmd, that we would be supportive of libya and of his government. but also we have to point out, the situation unraveled in libya , and some of the tactics in terms of letting the city of benghazi, which was a big

population center, change the equation with regard to international response, particularly by the europeans. the decision from leading from behind came from european allies. host: let's get a few more calls. this is cincinnati, ohio. john honor democrats' line. -- john on our democrats' line. caller: i want to ask the ambassador of what we signed up , i amria, iraq, and iran sorry for iraq against the iran had saddamow much hussein not been taken out of power, would be fined or cities -- would be fined ourselves in the same position? i will take my answer off-line.

that theu remember assumption at the time of the discussion about who invaded , saddam hussein's alleges possession of mass --pons, which he had agreed part of the war in kuwait to give up. thehe aftermath of 9/11, united states, britain, and others came to view by ignoring problems, such as in iraq as we have ignored problems with al qaeda in afghanistan, could become a much bigger problem if you do not attend to it in time. in my judgment, iraq would not have happened if 9/11 had not happened. there was no direct link in the sense of saddam sending people

here to blow up the twin towers or the pentagon, but nevertheless, intellectually, there was a decision made that this situation in iraq was problematic and needed to be addressed. so, in retrospect, of course, a lot of people have said, if we knew what we now know that he did not in fact have those weapons, but he was seeking to indicate as if he did in order attacking,an from and was keeping the ambiguity, which was a terrible miscalculation on his part, we would not have done what we did in terms of invading them. host: let's see if we can get one more call. caller: hi, thank you for taking my call. host: you bet. caller: i have a question. towards the end of 2017,

and the u.s.mp seen some places in the iran agreement. 2017, to the end of benjamin netanyahu of israel made a statement and a declaration that the united states should drop out of the iran treaty altogether because buildould big -- would bigger and better missiles, and i think iran had threatened israel itself at one time. my question would be, do you think israel had a role in -- with trump in 2018 was finally dropping out of the iran agreement? guest: thank you for that. i want to make do we do points. one, israel has been opposed to the nuclear agreement. prime minister benjamin netanyahu, as you remember, chagrind -- must to the

of the obama administration -- much to the chagrin of the obama administration, so there is no secret that benjamin netanyahu was opposed to the agreement on one of the u.s. to get out. it, or had some slogan. with regard to the trump administration, by disagree respectfully -- i disagree respectfully. there was an effort in 2017 and continued into 2018 to see if it could be fixed in terms of some of the issues between us and the europeans. as i mentioned before, some progress was made, but we did not come to closure with our that is allies, and when the president decided to get out.

zalmayormer ambassador khalilzad, thank you for joining us on "washington journal." that will do it for this morning cost program. we are back tomorrow :00 -- we are back tomorrow morning at 7:00. we will have a guest talking about the rise of gas prices. lengel, a look back at the centennial anniversary of u.s. involvement in world war i. that tomorrow morning at 9:00. all of it getting underway at 7:00 p.m. eastern on "washington journal." we will see you back here tomorrow morning. ♪