high school in coverage of the mueller investigation. and you will take your calls and you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. "washington journal" is next. >> i am very proud to announce today that we have reached a deal to end the shutdown and reopen the federal government. ♪ good morning and welcome to "washington journal." the longest government shutdown in american history has come to an end, but a second could be looming only weeks in the future, as politicians continue to clash over the idea of a border wall. the house, the senate, and president donald trump agreed to fully reopen the federal government on friday, as we begin three weeks of negotiations over trumps demand for a border wall. well they negotiate, federal employees who missed two paychecks will head back to work next week. what do you think about the federal deal that opens up the

government for three weeks? we want to hear from you. democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. and if you are a federal employee, we have a special line for you today. we want you to call (202) 748-8003. keep in mind, you can always reach us on social media and on twitter, as well as facebook. the deal and reopened the federal government moved quickly yesterday, but now washington is wondering what happens next. we have on the phone with us jordan kearny, a senate reporter for "the hill," to explain to us what happened and what will happen next. jordan, good morning. caller: thanks for having me on. host: first of all, what is the deal of that the house, the senate, and president trump agreed to yesterday that reopens the government?

pass a they agreed to three-week continuing resolution that will reopen the government that is closed through february 15 in exchange for that, congress went to conference between the house and senate to try to get it deal on the department of homeland security appropriations bill. host: so is this deal any different on the one that president trump did not agree to three weeks ago? is there any difference between these pieces of legislation? caller: as everyone might remember, the senate passed a continuing resolution back in december, before the shutdown started, that would have funded the government through february 8. avoided the shutdown to begin with. host: so what happens now? what's the process that we will see between the white house and

congress to try to get these negotiations moving forward? went toso they conference yesterday, that formerly kicks off the process. typically conference committees are pretty behind closed doors things. we will have to wait and see if that remains the case over the next three weeks, just because the border will fight has been such a public back and forth between democrats and the president. obviously the main sticking isnts in this debate president trump has been saying i want $5 billion for the wall, democrats will not give him oft, and can this group largely appropriations members that will be on the conference committee, can they find a way to make a deal, in an otherwise challenging political environment? host: we have been hearing a little talk for the last three

weeks, it seems like all of a sudden on friday the deal just burst through. what caused the change on friday that made this deal happen? a convergence of things. group of bipartisan senators, including lindsey discussing this general framework for a while, doing a three-week cr in exchange for promising to take form,der requests in some but at the same time, you've also have some frustrations building on capitol hill this week. you had vice president pence come up to a lunch that was pretty confrontational, with republicans letting it be known they felt like they were losing the shutdown fight, that they were getting a lot of pressure to reopen the government, that they wanted this to end quickly,

and you had on the senate floor that got a lot of attention of back and forth between michael bennet, who's usually pretty mild-mannered, and ted cruz over the shutdown. you had headlines yesterday about major airport delays. just a lot of frustration this week in this deal. let that dissipate for now. host: is there anything that's going to change in the next three weeks? do democrats -- they have been adamant about their desire not to give a single penny for a border will between the u.s. and mexico, is there anything that's going to change about that in the next three weeks that you see coming? senators andeard house members being optimistic, hoping that they can reopen the government and maybe that would give them breathing room to come up with some sort of deal where everyone could be happy with fencing instead of the wall.

obviously getting that sort of agreement is a lot easier said than done. you have the white house saying we will get the wall, while president saying trump is moving forward with building a wall but without democrats. maybe not the note you want to start off negotiations on. host: right. that we getly is it another government shutdown in three weeks? or do we think that this is the end of this particular tactic? caller: the president did sort of layout an alternative to shutting down the government in three weeks. yesterday, he played the national emergency card again. you also have a desire among lawmakers to not go through this again in three weeks. again, saying that is a lot easier than preventing another

shutdown, but there's a general desire among both sides to not do this again. it has massiveg, impacts across the country that we have seen play out. at least in this moment i think people want to avoid another shutdown. host: is there anything in particular you are going to key in on as these negotiations go forward? what should we be looking for? caller: i think the question you just asked, which is how do people actually use the art avoiding another shutdown, will be something to watch. a few goodeen moments on capitol hill for doing some sort of rule or piece of legislation that will prevent future government shutdowns. how much momentum that idea actually has, especially in this three-week space. host: would like to thank jordain kearny for being with us. thank you so much for being with us.

caller: thanks for having me on. host: let's go to our phone lines. let's talk to joe, calling from florida on the democratic line. joe, good morning. caller: yes, good morning. i just want to say that they should never shut down the -- whyent again, because not get the money from there? if you shut down the government if he is going to run in 2020. the numbers are going to go lower/ we all saw what happened in the midterms/ many senators lost their seats, and democrats took over the house. if they want to listen it's up to them, but the numbers --

host: let's go to james, calling from stafford, virginia. he's a federal worker. james, good morning. caller: good morning. i actually contract with the federal government, and we are shut down as well. thankfully, we will get paid after this. i think theyis should come up with some kind of legislation that says you can't use the federal government or any american citizen or entity as a on to advance your -- as a pawn to advance your possession. i think it's crazy that that could go on. and i'm a talking about president trump, i'm talking about any of our political situation, whether it's democrats, republicans, it doesn't matter. you should not be able to use the federal government or any american citizen as a pawn to further the position. host: now james, i know some

federal workers -- if you work for the government, you will get the back pay. you say you are a contractor. will you be getting back pay, or will you just be getting checks from this point forward? caller: no, i will be getting back pay. we were essentially needed, and tothey came up with the team allow us to get paid. host: as a contractor in someone who is directly affected by the shutdown, who do you blame for what's going on right now? caller: i blame the person who blamed himself, president trump. he said it out loud. me if i "this is on don't get what i want, i'm going to shutdown the government." now, if the democrats had said it, i would have no problem blaming them, but they said let's negotiate, let's not involve the federal government. president trump said, no, if i don't get my will, we are going

to shut down the government, and i will take the blame. he said he would. i don't understand why anyone would decide if the democrats' fault. if you say you're going to take the blame, take the blame. when obama shut down the government, president trump -- trump, whopresident was not present in at the time, said it was a weak position to shut down the government, and that a real leader would be able to advance the position without that. and then the very thing he used his what -- is the federal government to advance his position. so i am not a trump hader, not in the least. i agree with several of his policies. however, using american citizens as hostages, using them as pawns to advance your position, no, i don't agree with that. host: let's go to marry,: from

detroit -- let's go to alan, from scottsdale, arizona. good morning. caller: good morning. thanks for c-span. just a real quick note to james. it takes two to tango. even though president trump said the words i own it, this is the thing that's interesting, nancy pelosi in her press conference yesterday said haven't i been clear about the border? haven't i been clear? i'm not going to give a dollar for the border. but then she goes on and says, it's all about our values, our values and unity. our values is the constitution of the united states, and for some reason the democrats never want to talk about the constitution about having a balanced budget and not overspending and putting us into

$22 trillion worth of debt. our she goes on and says diversity is our strength. fine, but it takes two to tango, correct, then she goes on and says, our unity is our power. i don't know that means, what do you think that means? our unity is our power? andunity is the democrats, that's all they talk about is the power. nowre at a point right three weeks from now, i hope that we sit down and put together a plan and everyone can agree on it. the things one of that president trump has floated is declaring a national emergency and possibly using military money to build the border wall. would you agree with that tactic? caller: and i understand that.

the thing i look at, which is so governments around the world sending drugs and especially the fentanyl coming from china, wouldn't you agree? we are being drugged to death. that's the sad part. american people need to wake up, that we are being drugged to death and it's coming across the border and they just got recently tons of cocaine that they confiscated. i have loved this country, and i would do anything to save this country from where it's going. but the values of the democratic party, for some reason, they don't want to protect the citizens of the united states, they would rather protect the illegal aliens that are coming in, and that's the sad part. from let's go to mary

detroit, michigan. good morning. caller: good morning. my comment is that i think it is inhumane for president trump to put workers, american workers, at risk with no sympathy for the republicans use all their powers to their --en they don't about judges and every ring, and i don't know what this is talking about, the republicans use their power all the time. host: let's go to bella, calling from new britain, connecticut on the independent line. bella, good morning.

caller: hello, good morning, and thank you for this opportunity. first and most importantly, two things. and i u.s. citizen consider myself an independent. having said that, i voted for trump less time it obama before so i am open-minded. my first vote was for ross perot. most importantly i have worked all around the world and since we are the only country where our leaders, using their own people and employees and or slaveas hostage labor, to sort out their differences. the leaders need to get together, and do not come out until you come to an agreement, and if you cannot, mr. trump

will pay for it -- that's beside the point. do not hold our own employees. somehow, please, we need to change the laws so they can never do this again and then have the budget passed for one year. done, buthat can be as much as i love this country and would do anything for it, we cannot have open borders. nowhere in the world is there such a thing. that one day we will have a normal government and god bless us. the: were you affected rectal he by the federal government shutdown? i know some people word directly affected -- did you see any effect on the government shutdown? colorcode yes because i own a private business and because of that we had some difficulties,

but right now that's beside the point, i was having 10% of my income affected. i'm looking at the whole picture and the whole picture is that we cannot have governmental employees, citizens, businesses held hostage for this kind of bargaining chip. we are not a bargaining chip. host: this the reason i was asking. there's possibly going to be another shutdown three weeks, if no agreement is come to. are you doing any kind of preparation for positively facing another government shutdown in three weeks? caller: what i'm doing is i am anding most of my senators we have all the leaders -- it won't make a difference because most of these guys are not present so they can go without a couple paychecks. -- theyou do really

will make a deal, and then if they cannot hold an independent to hold people hostage, it would -- i'm sorry to say,, what would we do if teacher held kids in the classroom until their salaries are not agree to? we would: the swat team. the same thing is happening here. they need to be arrested in yes, he shut down the government. the euro and words. but let's be realistic and factual, that's all we ask. host: here's a little bit of

what president trump said he expects republicans and democrats to do in the upcoming weeks during this three-week negotiation. >> after 36 days of spirited debate and dialogue, i have seen and heard from enough democrats that they ares willing to put partisanship put the think, and security of the american people first. i do believe they are going to do that. they have said they are for complete border security, and they have fully acknowledged that having barriers, fences, or walls or whatever you want to call it, will be an important part of the solution. a bipartisan conference committee of house and senate lawmakers and leaders will

immediately begin reviewing the request's of our homeland security experts, and experts they are, and also law enforcement professionals who have worked with us so closely, we want to thank border patrol, ice, and all law enforcement. host: let's go to a couple tweets from viewers. says, 45e that shouldn't have listened to culture in limbo. he got the same deal from 2018. if thisne from 1969 -- is a sign he realizes the president he is no longer a dictatorship, it's a good thing. "democrats politicize everything and everything. it's not about the wall, it's about defeating trump. politics over country always." let's talk to mark, calling from kingston, rhode island. good morning. caller: yeah, good morning. , one thing i haven't

heard talked about it all is the amount of man-hours that we are employees, the getting paid for their time they haven't been able to work, but the country has lost all that productivity that these people would have performed over that time, and i think maybe the senators and congressmen going into the committee should perhaps make a vow that he will resign if they can't settle, so they actually have skin in the game. that's my comments, thank you. host: let's go to fran, calling from toledo, ohio on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. gentleman who called said democrats don't want to talk about the constitution, i want to talk about it. the constitution means whatever the supreme court's visit.

we had a separate but equal decision, the supreme court ordered capital punishment and brought it back. the supreme court gave a same-sex marriage and laws against that of me. -- against sodomy. exceptn't mean anything what the supreme court says it means. it doesn't guarantee anything except the stupidity of anyone who thinks it guarantees anything. what do youend, think democrats should do over the next three weeks, and should they go ahead and come up with their position to shut down the government in three weeks? colorcode i don't think government should be shut down in three weeks, and i doubt the republicans would risk it again, though they may. to me, the border wall is as long as i agree, it is to their advantage people will keep coming and will stop

coming when it is no longer to their vintage. i would agree there needs to be some screaming, you don't want that people, but i don't think most of the people are coming here to harm anyone stop i think the whole thing is ridiculous in the wall wouldn't do any good. it might cause actual harm. host: let's go to michael, calling from stanford, connecticut on the independent line. michael, good morning. caller: good morning, how are you today? this whole wall that trump wants to build, he wants to keep people out of this country that don't speak english. they don't understand english because he said mexico would pay for the wall. i just spoke english and they don't understand it. this has been going on, people have been crossing the border for thousands and thousands of years, and now all of a sudden it's the biggest problem in the world, and this is all he can do, after giving the biggest tax cut to anybody?

the government shutdown had to be the longest, the biggest, longest shut down the river was, we have to getw, rid of this guy for two more years. let him go, you will dig his own whole, put them on trial and in jail. every single building in the country, say goodbye. host: no michael, what do you think about the possibility of president trump declaring a national emergency and using military money to build the border wall? caller: really, a national emergency? i think space aliens attacking would be a national the, but what's going on here? what national emergency? national emergency was no one working on the east coast. manyany weapons, how

terrorists were coming in on the east coast while the coast guard was shut down and not getting paid? really, this is your guy? really? the house armed services committee chairman adam smith will be our guest on newsmakers this week. here's what he had to say about the president possibly declaring a national emergency to build his border wall. >> i think this is based on the 1976 wall, empowering the president to declare a state of emergency, giving him various options to take money from different pots. world, if the military construction budget he could tap for this purpose and i don't think there is an emergence the, even under the 1976 laws, that would immediately be a lawsuit, taking aliens of dollars out of the minute on -- the pentagon

construction budget would be a big problem. the other pot of money he is looking at, where there's enough money for what he's talking about, is in the army corps of engineers. that is not dod money. i forget where it is exactly in the government. it is money primarily for flood control projects, and taking billions of dollars away from that would be very problematic. i think there is going to be a bipartisan effort to take a look at that 1976 wall, and see if it grants the executive to much power. host: let's talk to becky calling from covington, west virginia on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. i'm sorry that they had to go through this, but i also think it needed to be done because it woke up americans with what's going on in our country, i think we should thank our president for what he's done and what he

is doing. him, and i think it's time that we as americans pay more attention to what's really happening, and let's make america great again. god bless america. host: let's go to scott, calling from new york on the independent line. scott, good morning. caller: good morning. ago i saw the problem with the wall but nobody wants to hear it. -- for five years i worked and we stayed small and learned and studied the funny thing is, we got people capable of dropping bombs on america -- 57 years old and i've never heard of this --

russia's are flying nuclear jets over america and we don't care. when mr. obama was the president, for years i heard how ms. are obama was going to declare that state of emergency so that they wouldn't have the that he was afraid president obama would do it. -- i haveent today never heard of a president in my 57 years in america sits there and threaten the american people with the state of the so they can get they want. we are in the end times, you christians out there who you want the end to come, when christ comes back, he strikes down all all of the bad allies.

our morals are shot when we have a president who says the people will be grabbed by the crotch -- this is a fact. host: let's go to herbert from georgia on the democratic line, good morning. caller: good morning. it shouldn't have been shut down he took theinning, blame and that he would take it will stop we can't give him a pass on that. he said mexico would pay for the wall. you have to remember, when the president becomes a president, he becomes the president of all people, and the people who voted for him and did not vote they didn't support trump, so that doesn't make me support trump.

the republican party obstructed eight years when obama was there. mitch mcconnell, he wanted to make him a one term president. and the scripture of the bible says god does not mock, you will reap what you sow. i don't think they understand that. when the republicans do it to the democrats, when obama was in office, you come back in the democrats do the same thing, in america didn't vote for trump. they didn't support when he was doing and they don't support him today. you can't be the president -- if you are a leader, if you want to become first, you have to be a servant to all. i understand you have to be a servant to all people who don't like you, who didn't vote for you -- the: herbert, do you think democrats have any responsibility in this shutdown, or do you blame it all on president trump? caller: i plan on trump week as

the democrats didn't vote for trump. who is going to pay for the wall? mexico. they didn't do it. his supporters, he promised his supporters, he said mexico was going to pay for the wall. he said he blamed himself for the shutdown. he is the one trying to hurt citizens and keep illegal people from becoming citizens does that make sense? does that make sense at all? you are going to hurt some citizens, and i will let you know to statistics -- we had some pain will from mexico but did you look at who has been doing all the killing in las vegas and everything else? people boy killed five

in a bank, that's what's going on. the problem is if you wanted to racists,with all these stop these guns and ammunition's from coming into their hands. a little bit of what house speaker nancy pelosi had to say about the shutdown after president trump announced that it would be ending. differences in policy should never be a reason to shut down government, especially for a period of time that has an impact on the paycheck. i'm said it has taken this long, i'm glad we've come to the conclusion as to how we will go forward in the next three weeks. i salute the democratic leader in the senate for what he did, 10 timesn the house --

he brought bills to the floor, to open up government. to open up government. the most recent one present in the senate of war was so simple. billion for disaster assistance and opening up government for two weeks. republicans said no, i think the and i quotet in link in all the time -- public sentiment is everything with what you can accomplish. i think the public for waiting in and paying attention and i think that will be the success of this conference. the conference, the public awareness has so increased, and the public interest is so sharpened that they will see what the decisions are that we have to make. host: let's go read some more if

you were tweets. this one comes from mark stone, who says, "pelosi and schumer said they would negotiate on the government shutdown once it is over. now that is over we will see." let's go to bob. his tweet says, "he had mercy on those with hardships and no pay because democrats failed to protect the border with a secure wall where it is needed. , who saysrom mickey the president asked for a while money and got nothing. he asked for the state of the union and got nothing. he trenton to declare national of emergency and backed out, he caved to the democrats. why was the government shut for 35 days? and now we go back to your calls. john is calling from berwick, pennsylvania on their public in line. john, good morning. caller: good morning.

deficit for this and that1 trillion, does not include the money that is borrowed from social security that people are paying in. shutdown, when obama was in beck was down there protesting because obama was spending money. this shutdown was about spending more money, they wanted to spend more money. so i have a suggestion for president trump, if he wants to build the wall and not spend more money, he said yesterday that the wall is a wonderful wall and it is working wonderfully. --n why is the united states why do we borrow money that our children have to pay back for all that the next 100 years in

these trillions of dollars to provide defense for israel? than $5.8 billion in foreign aid to foreign governments, and most of it goes to israel, and when i turn on c-span and i watch it a lot, you will find that israel provides much better social benefits to its citizens, and it can win the united states is paying for the defense of israel. you think it would be a good idea for the president to use military money to declare a national emergency with money that has already been appropriated to build the wall? caller co no, i don't want him to use money for the defense of the united states, i want him to ,se money to defend israel israel can take care of its. let their citizens pay for their defense, and thank you very much

for taking my call and everyone you have a wonderful day. host: let's go to connie from highland, california on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. glad -- it is frustrating that losey and all of them are so against trump, he just won't change anything, how about trump to pelosi, sheey didn't donate a dime to anything, she was still getting her paycheck, while all the federal workers were without work -- why doesn't she donate some of her paycheck? i understand some lawmakers were donating part of their paycheck during the shutdown, but who do you blame for the three-week shutdown? president trump, congressional democrats tumble or congressional republicans?

caller: i mostly blame the democrats, they don't want anything, they offered them daca and they didn't do anything. host: what do you think should happen over the next three weeks to give the government from shutting down again? do you think democrats should give in? flips you think should happen. they should come to the table and talk it out, that's the american way. host: let's go to alfred from tampa, florida, good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. thet of all, i think three-week shutdown is a ploy, because once you stop them from doing the same thing, holding hee policy hostage, i think

was correct when he said donald trump tied the whole country and said mexico would pay for it. now we are seeing that the effect will be the american and someone said a few weeks ago it will be our children -- i'm 65 and i'm on social security stop i am disabled. the last thing i want is for donald trump to create some sort of ponzi scheme and take money whether it's from the military or for social security. he needs to govern. he needs to understand what it is to be a leader. this is not the soviet union, his powers are not those of president clinton. host: do you think democrats have any share of the blame for the three-week shutdown? caller: no. host: do you think democrats --

what kind of compromise do you think democrats should give to make sure that the -- the government stays open? thatr: no compromise involves the american taxpayers paying for the wall in the same initial presidency period when donald trump saw the biggest tax cut given to the most wealthy americans. those two are very inconsistent. mitch mcconnell, the senate majority leader, came out to talk about what was going to happen from this point forward. here's what senator mcconnell had to say. caller: i know the pain of this episode has caused to many kentuckians and people over the country. they deserve this resolution. i hope ourrward, democratic friends will stager to the commitment they have stated constantly over the past

week, that once the government was reopened, they would be perfectly willing to negotiate in good faith on a full year of government funding that would include a significant investment in urgently needed border security measures, including physical barriers. after all, the only way the federal workers are going to have stability uncertainty beyond the next three weeks, the only way our border will have real security, as if democrats will stop playing partisan games and get serious about negotiating with the president on a long-term compromise. the days ahead will tell us whether our democratic colleagues ice serious about securing the nation, whether they mean what they say. the president has called on the senate to act on these proposals, and now that there's an agreement between the democrats and the white house, we can make that happen.

let's talk to jacqueline from philadelphia on their public in line. jacqueline, good morning. caller: good morning. i'm a kindergarten teacher and it's almost like i'm in kindergarten. cohortslosi and all her are so jealous that donald trump theme president and so now ball is in the court of nancy pelosi and chuck schumer. , donaldants the wall leads to let go of the wall. let what happened happened. then the gall's and nancy is court, she is so smug. -- the ball is in their court, so donald, i hope you are listening and just say and focus on other

things. nancy pelosi and chuck schumer wouldn't know what to do and how to handle situations like this. you cannot both have the ball, but they are very jealous of donald trump because he's not a politician. host: now jacqueline, some democrats are arguing that republicans control the entire government -- the house, the senate, and the presidency for the first two years of the term and didn't pass legislation. now that it is a divided government it would be harder. why do you think they didn't move on this earlier? caller: i still say it's the same thing. i'm a republican and i can't tell people i'm for donald trump , someone would look at my tv but still, terrible that donald

trump has to agree. they are just jealous that this man, who is not a politician, they are so shocked and they don't know what to do. trump, finds fromer way to protect us mexico, let it go, because they are not going to give in, you can say it -- they are not going to give in, it is human nature. it,.e not going to give host: so you think president trump should let go of his idea for a border wall and move on to other legislation? caller: i do, and i think they will come up with something else , maybe a little bit more, not shoot people, and then nancy theyi and chuck schumer -- have nothing to fight about,

nothing to fight about. host: let's go to brownsville, texas on the independent line. pronounce your first name for me so i get it right. caller: guillermo. i live down at the border, the very tip of the border, one mile away from the river where people come through. it doesn't work because people come in, border patrol catches over, andturned them then we have to wait for them to get sent back in meanwhile they are paying. mr. trump is going on the wrong way about it, and i would like to say that it would be a waste of money. we do not negotiate with

terrorists, and mr. trump was holding the government hostage. he is putting people in jeopardy. all those people taking flights, that's wrong. terrorism, what he's trying to fight, it's in the internet. want to stereotype mr. trump has no idea what he's talking about. andame down for 30 minutes he's an expert on border security. i is a living at the border all my life, and everybody here, we have been dealing with this wall isy so building a not going to stop them. unless you put one mile of our

lines, you are not going to stop them. you can'tolicy, vouch. you can't say if you don't give me this, i'm going to shut the government down. that's wrong. to pay you not going people for going to work? that's just plain wrong. host: let's go to susan,: from high ridge, new jersey on the democratic rhine. good morning. caller: good morning. subject that ie want to bring up. people talk about the hundred thousand workers in my heart goes out to them because of course i live paycheck to paycheck, but i just got my housing choice voucher, which is hard. it's in the same category, and

if you look on it now, it is closed. i have no information on what's going to happen going forward, is my landlord going to be paid. can you throw me out. into the system, you have no idea how hard it is, can the one person you have to is your landlord of the woman who takes care of the paperwork. you also have a time limit of three months. hcv, say someone has the but they are being thrown out on the first. where do they go? on the this is mentioned shows and i'm not clear why. another thing, i just really want to talk about something no

one else talks about, the reinsurers down in this section. more nutske to hear ,nd bolts like the surveyors what is really going to happen. those ranchers have been working down there together with mexico for decades, and they think they are just going to roll over to the property, and they're not. worrisome, that my hcv is very worried, and i found a great place, i'm very happy here, i'd do pay my and i feelthe rent, sorry for people who were just on the cusp of getting it done,

and there is no inspector to come and look at the apartment. to include the participants. winky. host: let's go to brenda, calling from south carolina on the republican line. brenda, good morning. caller: good morning. i just want to say that i am so tired of hearing people blame donald trump for the government shutdown. nancy pelosi from day one, it is her fault. she offered the president of dollar -- can she not be impeached? it's all her fault. we have a great president, he has a great mind and he is trying to do what we voted him into do, he is trying his best to do everything that we wanted him to do. we didn't vote nancy pelosi to be the president, she will even

let him have his speech in the white house. what's he going to do, go in the bathroom to have his speech? host: what do you think should be done that will prevent this problem? as of right now, i'm guarantee she's trying to do something to stop him from closing the government back down. she's not going to offer him anything except maybe a little bit of money for the ports of entry. that's all she's going to do, she is not going to give him $5.7 billion. and look at the money we sent to other countries, look at what we are paying for medical, feeding those people at the border, that could be building a wall. i don't want to hear president trump blame nothing, he is trying to do what we voted him into do. host: what would you say to the

people who say he is going to take risk on stability for shutting down the government? in,er: when he first got they kept trying to get people going to other countries and they made sure they kept the busy. then they are saying, why didn't you do that first thing? he couldn't, they kept doing petty stuff. she is so jealous of him, they don't want him to be president, that's it in a nutshell. laura, callingto from clarksburg, maryland. laura is a federal worker. laura, good morning. caller: good morning, how are you? host: just fine. were you for loud, or did you have to keep working? caller: i was furloughed. what a lot of people are unaware of us, probably because of all the fake news, is that federal

employees on the day we were furloughed were able to apply for unemployment compensation. this hyperbole of people not being able to pay their bills, it is nonsense, but banks have reached out to people that were furloughed, giving low loans to get you over the hump, and you don't want the unemployment conversation. it's just a bunch of hyperbole, it's fake news, and i am in the government and i want to tell you something, the reason people are seeing a lot of difference with the government being furloughed, it's because you could get rid of 75% of the federal employees and wouldn't see any difference if you cap the 25% that works. it is sad how much of our taxpayer dollars are being wasted. government is overbloated, overinflated, it is eating up tax dollars and the return on investment is very little. i

really appreciate what president trump is doing with getting rid of the regulation with bureaucracy and the red tape, it is just nonsense. they come up with is laws that are so idiotic, i was a democrat for 28 years, i want the democratic people -- nancy is dumber than a bag of hammers. everything that comes out of that woman's mouth is nonsensical. , i am was aictim , i wasof violent crime assaulted by an illegal alien. president trump is doing the right thing. agency go is your back to work? have you been told when you get to go back? is it monday, later on in the week. caller: not yet but i presume it's monday. have you been given any information on when you're back

pay will be coming or will you just have to wait on that? caller: we have no information but i'm not worried about it. i'm not worried about the back pay. paid, irather not get would rather donate the money to the wall because i ask every manycan citizen -- how american lives are we willing to sacrifice at the hands of these people that are raping and robbing and murdering us? one is too many for me. build the wall, secure the country, that's what the federal government is mandated to do in the constitution. at the lack of understanding of our constitution, that people calling in have. host: let's go to ray, calling from illinois on the independent line. good morning. so bear with me -- ok.

good morning. i'm a little nervous so bear with me. caller: go ahead. caller: ok. thank you. we are missing the point here. if it wasn't completed, we have a shutdown. the problem is the budget not being completed. that if congress that they their job lose their perks index tenses until the budget is passed. incentive to do their job, so they need a penalty. so when nancy pelosi says how do we go forward, i say craft

legislation that puts penalties on congress for not doing their job on time, and we won't be kicking this can down the road anymore. host: let's go to will, from ohio on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning, sir. we have a two-party system and one party thinks it's in charge all the time. it's amazing. i've listened to some of these republicans on the phone, and it's like they are not on the same planet i'm on. i watched obama -- he was president, and they wouldn't even give him a supreme court pick. they wouldn't even talk to him. not one republican would even go to the white house to negotiate with him. and you guys are sitting around talking about mr. trump is being disrespected.

thatnk republicans think if they don't get their way, they will shut the government anybody, mynot pay way or the highway. i don't think it works like that. and just lost an election, they are still running around saying give me a wall. they had to years, two years, republicans had the congress and the presidency, and they didn't mention the wall. control of oneet portion of the government, i need a wall or i will shut the government down. and negotiate with me or i will shut government down. what kind of negotiation is that? host: let's go to bobby, calling from woodstock, virginia on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning.

i think republicans and democrats, they are going to stay at each other's throats, wall, they willa dig underneath the law. if you build a metal wall, they will cut through it. talked to different people. they are good people. they are just scared. they will come over here any means they can. what is the problem? he said the drug cartels will kill you. they kill your family and everything. the only way to straighten this out is to send our military over there and bust the cartel stuff up. i wonder sometimes why the republicans and democrats don't do that because i wonder sometimes if the drugs and everything goes high up in the politicians. host: coming up, cliff young

will join us for a look at how public opinion played a role in the temporary end of the government shutdown. and jim long will join us about recreational marijuana laws. first, a portion of bill cassidy's speech yesterday highlighting issues weighing heavily on his constituents, especially in new orleans. [video] >> i hope it does not seem out of place with the shutdown, but folks back home, it is something that continues to disturb them. mr. president, i would like to bring up the nfc championship game. the state of louisiana is outraged because of what happened in the superdome last sunday. televisions were broken, super

, billboards put up in atlanta, and lawsuits. my colleagues in the house of representatives is calling for the nfl commissioner to come testify in front of congress on the travesty that occurred five days ago. what happened, in my belief in the belief of many, was the most blatant and consequential blown call in nfl history. for those who missed it, on sunday night during the championship game, the score was tied with less than two minutes to go. it is third and long and the saints are in position to score. drew breeze throws a pass. there is the receiver and there is a defender. for those not familiar with football, and i know the presiding officer play at the university of arkansas, not a

bad school even though it is not in louisiana. the defender is looking back at the quarterback. he is not looking to intercept. he is only looking to plow through the receiver. every drunk sitting on a stool in every bar throughout the nation looked up at that tv and said, there is interference. one thing you don't see from this picture is there his helmet to helmet contact, which is also a penalty. it was a twofer. on one play the los angeles rams defender committed two egregious penalties. and everybody in the superdome and everybody watching knew it happened except for him. >> washington journal continues. host: we're back with u.s. public affairs president clifford young. thank you for being with us today. guest: it is great to be back.

host: how are you funded? guest: we are in international market research and polling firm. we have offices in 90 countries. we cover 130. we work with a host of different clients. the government, private sector, ngo's and transnationals as well. host: you did a recent tracking poll on the shutdown. what were you looking for and what state city deal with? guest: we have been tracking the shutdown since the beginning. we have a number of partners. we were doing it for them. we wanted to know what public opinion was standing on the issue. it was quite clear over the course of the shutdown where they stood. basically there was little support overall. we will dive down into the numbers and talk about what actually happened specifically. host: how many people did you and in but with -- poll

what was the political affiliations? guest: we are in the field every day. we do about 1000 interviews per day every day. we are capturing the pulse of america. what we want to do normally is get a feel for the population in general that is represented. peopleo, what did the tell you about using the shutdown to gain funding for the wall? guest: there was very little support. only 27% of americans were in favor of using -- using the shutdown to get the wall. only 39% were in favor of actually the wall itself specifically. those numbers do not change at all. those were basically flat lined throughout the entire shutdown. there was basically little support among americans in general. when you peel away the onion a bit and look at partisan affiliation, many more republicans were in favor of

both the shutdown for the wall in the wall itself. 54% of republicans were in favor of using the wall, using the shutdown to get the wall. favor republicans were in of the wall itself. host: where do democrats stand? guest: much lower levels. only 6% of democrats for in favor of using the shutdown to get the wall and 13% were in favor of the wall itself. a huge partisan divide. independents or more like democrats. it was very much a partisan issue. if you look at the population in general, there was only a weak plurality support. host: do we know what the reaction was for congressional solutions to building the wall? do you have any numbers that say -- that talk about what happened yesterday? guest: we don't know. but what we do

know is if you look at the blame game, who is responsible, on average about 50% of the population said trump was. only 35% said democrats. another 6% said republicans. 56% of the population was saying was basically trump and/or the republicans. that is a big chunk of change. they were losing the blame game. both trump and republicans in general were losing ground. their numbers were weakening over the course of the last month. host: you're saying those disapproval numbers increase for republicans during the shutdown? lower at the beginning but they went up? guest: on average, trump lost about 6% to 7% in terms of approval rating. that is significant. they were losing ground. not only did people stay firmly

against the wall in the shutdown, but the republicans and more specifically trump really were hurt. ultimately i believe the short-term deal -- they were losing numbers day to day up to yesterday. host: did democrats see the numbers go up and down? guest: on the blame game side, basically flatlined. nancy pelosi, she basically gained about eight points. she strengthened over the course of the shutdown. on the flipside, trump lost about six point. many pundits are saying trump nicolosi and lost -- met pelosi and lost. really it was public opinion that defined the outcome. there was never broad-based support for the wall or using the shutdown to get the wall. host: so, tell me what the

approval market averages and how it gets into this conversation. are thepproval ratings most important indicator for the relative health of an administration. it is a wonderful predictor of who will win on election day. what we see right now, the market average in general, trump is about 41%. his disapproval's went up to 56%. the gap between approval and disapproval went from nine to 15, whizzing about 5% or 6% in total. the most important predictor of politics are approval ratings. the administration and republicans were looking at these and saying we better do something quickly because we are doing our support generally and more specifically what our base. host: to the numbers tell us

anything about whether the republicans and democrats will get together to get a deal in the next three weeks? do these numbers tell us shutdown stonework? politically -- shutdowns don't work? politically at least? guest: we don't know exactly what the deal would be, but what we can say is there is huge partisan differences. we saw these differences of 40 to 50 points in some ways. that's what a partisanship, that polarization suggests it will be difficult to have a broad-based deal in the short-term. we will see what happens but ultimately republicans are in a bad place leading up to yesterday. host: how does the president's approval ratings stand? we talked about his base. how does his approval numbers

and among republicans? republicans? guest: he started at about 85%guest:. that is really good. in one of the strongest positions historically with his base. obama was a little lower with democrats during his first term. he's in a very good place. at 85% atypically probably will not have primary challenges. that's flipped to 79%. over a month. the overall numbers were important. i will come back and tell you why. i assume that they were specifically looking at the numbers of the base because they need those in the 80's to be competitive and push agendas through. where do you expect these numbers to go next week? is this specifically because of

the shutdown? guest: this was the shutdown. this was not the economy or other issues. if you go back to the numbers, only 27% of americans were in favor of using the shutdown to get the wall. only 54% of republicans. still a majority but not a super majority. not 85%. numbers is athe function of the wall. people were frustrated. they saw poor governance in general. i would expect these things to start taking backup. in 2017, he had a lot of issues with the running of the white house. he lost numbers with his base. overtime they ticked back up. -- over time they ticked back up. host: how is speaker pelosi standing with democrats? guest: she improved her numbers. at the beginning she was about

69% and now she is at 76%. those are good numbers for the speaker of the house. speaker of the house is much less known than a sitting president. she gained strength over the course of the month with her base while trump lost. host: i know it is way too early to talk about 2020, but what do these numbers tell us about president trump's chances in 2020 in a reelection? guest: approval ratings are so important. it is the most important predictor of elections. we have a huge database from 1000 plus elections. president at 39% has better than a 50-50 chance. below 40% you start to worry. -- 40%-401%, he has a %, he has better than a

50-50 chance. below it, they have less than 50-50 chance. he is still in a good place and he is a staunch lead. host: let our viewers jump in here. we will open the phone lines. democrats, you can call (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. keep in mind you can always reach us on social media @cspanwj and on facebook. sarah from taxes on the republican line. -- from texas on the republican line. caller: i am disappointed in the speaker of the house. nancy is acting rude and not even caring about the united states. she needs to wake up. i am from world war ii when united states of america -- we

stuck together. we pulled for the united states. we want to keep it there. president trump is trying every way he knows how. it seems like they hate him. i have never lived in a country where it seems like they are so against a president of the united states. he is our president. you don't have to like him but he deserves respect. he deserves his office. he deserves what he is trying to do. give him a chance. we deserve to be number one again. the wall needs to go up. host: do we know anything about president trump's approval rating among democrats or nancy pelosi's approval rating among republicans? is that even worth poling at this point? guest: they are very low on both sides. we are in a very different operating environment than he were 10 years ago or 20 years ago. a highly polarized environment,

very low levels of trust. this is a trend we see in all the western world, including europe and latin america. it is hard to create consensus when you don't give the benefit of the doubt to the other side. that is what we are seeing in the polling numbers and approval ratings. there are just as many people that disfavored nancy pelosi as disfavored trump. it's very difficult to create consensus. host: joseph from maine on the independent line. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i want to make a few points and get them out there and go from there. aboutu people talking everyone getting in line and have a normal go through process, his mother and father ago dida year a half

not go through process. right? you can fact check it if you want. something the president does not know anything about, facts. they don't like donald trump because he is a liar. he has lied to you as republicans, telling you that mexico is going to pay for the wall. two years ago when he got elected, the president of mexico bag him to stop saying mexico will pay for the wall. he told them they ain't. today the mexican president told him again, but he don't listen. he just keeps lying because people are gullible enough to believe him. when these people put on their fabulous,n say i'm what don't you just have to gullible across her forehead? you can save on the $20, spend it on something worthwhile. americans to see

what they were interested in. when you look at the whole spectrum of issues, what republicans most interested in? over democrats most interested in and what were independents most interested in? guest: joseph brought up some good points. here are three issues that sort of our defining our time. economy, health care, immigration. they come and go. right now it is immigration as the primary issue 18 points. -- at 18 points. republicans cited as the primary as the primaryit issue. during the shutdown it really was a shutdown about immigration, about the wall. that came into much more relief and became much more salient for people. immigration is the primary cleavage of our time.

it is what defines politics. if defines whether you are a republican or democrat. it is not just in the united states. europe is going to the same sort of change as well where immigration and anti-immigrant attitudes are defining politics. host: who is more concerned about immigration? are democrats were concerned? are republicans were concerned? do you expect those numbers to stay the same post shutdown? guest: 35% of republicans. much less so democrats. immigration is a republican issue. as i was saying, health care really is an issue that defines the parties for democrats and independents. we can understand now in part why trump took a hard line with the shutdown. solutionss demanding

with respect to immigration because that is the number one issue. host: robin from coleman, alabama on independent line. good morning. what is poling? did it coincide with a 2016 election? ,id you predict trump to win and if not, why not? i would like to know if he things about building the wall. host: he wants to know how did you do in the 2016 election and what do you think about the wall. guest: in june of 2016, i wrote an article where i gave the election basically a 50-50 odds. 53% chance for hillary, 47% for trump. i thought trump had a good chance of winning. our polling at the end was showing at the national level leaning towards hillary.

that is what the results were. very difficult election because it was on the margin and ultimately hillary won the popular vote while trump won electoral college. i am a gnostic when it comes to political views. i don't talk about my political views. i think of myself as an analyst. i tried to call the facts as they are. i will leave that out at this point. host: there is a lot of conversation in 2016 about the reliability of polls. billy we know the reality -- the reliability of polls? that ithe only caveat to would make is the polls were not so wrong. at the national level, the overall average was 3%. approximately. that was basically the popular

vote. hillary won by about 3%. where there were problems of the swing states, they were overestimated by one point or 1.5 points for hillary clinton. in my opinion it is much less about the tool and the reliability of the tool itself. it was the interpretation of the polls. they're all the narrative that she was the undisputed favorite. there was no chance of trump actually winning, and that is not true. there is always the probability of trump winning. forecasters like myself that don't just use polls, we use a host of inputs and models. it was much more of a 50/50 split than 8080-20 for hillary. -- 80-20 for hillary. host: james comer good morning. go ahead -- james, good morning.

go ahead. caller: they should be working of the bill to prevent any one man or party from shutting down the federal government. the government should never be shut down. should beo way they able to just shut the government down at their will. as far as the wall is concerned, -- thinkld be able to about all the poor people to have your right no that they did why not spend $5.7 billion 50 the money in america. he says let's make america great again. shutting down the government does not do that. host: what was the number one issue for democrats? we know it was not immigration. what were democrats worried about in your polling? guest: health care. midterms, health care. health care, health care, health care.

as i said before, jobs and economy are important as well. there are the three main issues of immigration, health care, jobs and the economy. for independents and democrats, health care still reigns supreme. i believe that the combination of immigration and health care will be the defining things in 2020. host: we know immigration was number one for republicans. what other issues were they worried about? guest: jobs and the economy. they were also worried about health care. but the ranking is different. their key concern is immigration. that is their focus. that is why trump took a hard line. why the republican political class stood behind him for so long. other issues were important. host: harold is: from canton, georgia on the independent line.

is calling from canton, georgia. caller: you mentioned tools a few mexico. i'm interested. does your polling measure the impact of the negative media on a daily basis? it does not seem to matter about any channel i turn to, there is a negative story about trump going on. just on a side note to the fellow talking about gullible, keep your plan, keep your doctor. i listen to your answer off-line. guest: that's a great question. theon't directly measure negative media. it is baked into the numbers. the negativity and positivity is going into the numbers because people are consuming that information, reflecting on what is going on, adjusting their

attitudes and their positions in respect to the trump administration. this negativity or positivity is baked into the numbers. we don't necessarily measure it separately. what we do know is depending on your partisan persuasion, you are more likely to consume certain sources of media than others. republicans are much more likely to get it from fox news for instance. democrats much more looking to get it from cnn and msnbc as examples. the channels are different. our polling specifically theures it indirectly, negativity and the positivity with the approval ratings. host: rocky, good morning. caller: good morning. about theng to talk wall that we desperately need.

that will definitely would work. it will stop all the criminals, the drugs. but if itot 100%, just stops a few people, it is worth it. $5.7 billion to build some type of wall or whatever they want to call it, that is a drop in the giving sosus th much money to other countries. they don't even really help us at all. we can't keep policing the world. we have to keep taking care of the working people. i'm in a wheelchair. i am self-employed. i never drew a check from anybody besides my i heard through my business. media, cnn, left would quit knocking trump down. they don't talk about anything but trump. they must dream about trump at night. thank you for taking my call.

i am glad to accept it my phone call. guest: to respond to rocky, thanks for the call. he is among the 73% of republicans that are in favor of the wall. only 13% of democrats are, and only 39% of the population in general. a very partisan issue. we can see from the calls. in some ways we have two americas. very different views when it comes to immigration and more specifically the wall. host: we have a question from one of our online watchers. does works to know, can public opinion affect outcomes of policies for each political party? are they looking at polls and trying to decide what to do based on polling? guest: yes. they are cookie monsters of polling. pollson-makers are using

to understand where public opinion is. politicalst part actors, economic actors, politicians, government don't do a good job of affecting the polls, but they are affected by the polls. they orient themselves with respect to what public opinion is. the shutdown is a perfect example of trump blinking against public opinion. public opinion was not in favor of the shutdown. it is only marginally in favor of the wall. he blinked. host: let's see of it can get a few more calls. linda from florida on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you? in 2016, republicans have the house and the senate and they cannot get the immigration bill done. donald trump comes in office and yes, we should respect him as

the president. but at the end of the day, 88,000 people were out of work. some of these people voted for ,000 thousand people were out of work. some of these people voted for him. nobody talks about fox, cnn, c-span. we all have the right to voice our opinions. he is the president of the united states. he should stand up and defend us. the wall will not work. wall, theey built the land they will take will be eminent domain for people that on that land. what is he going to do about that? just tell them we are taking your land. guest: thanks for the call. two points. -- one of the issues that binds us, unites us as americans is freedom of the press. americans are in favor of

freedom of the press. that is a fundamental right for americans. shutdown is a wonderful example of political actor trump is calculating, thinking he could change -- miscalculating, thinking he could change public opinion. i often tell clients should meet public opinion where it is. it is very hard to change it. was we saw from the get-go the public opinion was against the shutdown, against the wall. there needs to be some sort of compromise in the middle. the 35 days and ultimately the president blinking was an example of public opinion defining what can and cannot be done. host: hermann from south carolina on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. i have one question. did you do polling on the

democrats and republicans on what they thought about a legal immigrants -- illegal immigrants coming in? also on legal immigration? the other question i have is, is their opinion on how much -- is there opinion on how many immigrants we should let into the country? guest: herman is getting into the nuances. there are a lot of semantics around it. a majority of americans are not in favor of illegal immigration. there is a distinct between legal and illegal. a strong majority favor legal immigration. a minority favor illegal immigration. there is not much differences across partisan lines. there is a majority believe that immigration is important for

america, but ultimately this debate is a debate of new wants and where the fall. only about 20% of the population are in favor of open borders. that is a nonstarter in some ways. most americans want some sort of restrictions. the question of degree of restriction will be a function of partisan view. for the most part americans are in favor of some sort of control of who comes into the united states. host: rosa from memphis, tennessee on the republican line. caller: good morning. i think we should focus on negotiating with trump. i think ben carson as far as the housing, he needs to focus on helping the poor. money does get you where you need to be. the democrats and republicans have to show some bipartisanship in the house and work together.

my final question is why don't president trump go to israel or invite the people from israel that built their wall and see what they have to say about golden the wall -- building a wall? i am going back to the initial point i was making. we are in a highly, highly polarized tribal time. it is difficult to create consensus. we see the person in the other party as the other. we have little empathy for them. when we talk about compromise, consensusbuilding, we should start with those things we share in common. when it comes to immigration, all-americans, most americans agree there should be some sort of restriction. perhaps we can start there. if we don't start with certain issues that people share in common, it becomes very difficult to come to a

consensus. host: mary from auburn, new york on the democratic line. caller: mr. young, you are really good at numbers. i would like to quote some numbers here. what it is caustic as for illegals in our country -- costing us for illegals in our country. was $12,971,328. tos morning, it went up 18,000,000,590 million dollars billion.ference of $5 that is in seven days. over $5 billion.

my next is the praise for nancy pelosi. if you can go to her district and see the drug needles, the most all over the streets, of it is next to children's playgrounds. i will listen to your comments and thank you for listening to me. have a nice day. guest: thank you so much. let me respond generally. there is a huge continuing in terms of where people fall on um in terms ofu where people fall on this. when it comes to people that live in the united states, there are huge partisan differences. republicans -- they draw the line there and that is the conundrum. how to come to consensus on an issue that is so partisan and

dividing? i don't know what study was being cited. i'm sure others on the other side can find their numbers as undocumented -- this is a semantic, illegals versus undocumented. undocumented pretties for the economy and contribute to the economy. it is a highly partisan issue. it is hard to find partisan consensus and middle ground. it is not just america that is going through this. it is all that was some world, especially europe dealing with immigration issues. host: we would like to thank cliff young for coming here and explaining all these great polling numbers for us. guest: thank you so much. host: coming up, it will take more of your calls and talk about the deal that will reopen the government for three weeks. you will see the numbers on your screen and we will be right back. ♪

>> sunday at 7:00 p.m. eastern giving: by "just philanthropy is failing democracy and how we can do better." >> there are some studies i quote that show two things that are surprising. if you make generous assumptions, get into places financial aid purposes should be counted as an advantage. or a museum that allows the kids from in a city schools to go to the museum. if you maximize the assumptions about what percentage of giving to those places counts in the poverty relief category, at most, 30% is in that direction. >> sunday at 9:00 p.m. eastern, stephanie land discusses her path from working as a maid turning a journalism degree with

" maid: hardware, low pay and a mother's will to survive." she's interviewed by rachel schneider. >> the first thing that comes to mind is definitely be will limit. -- bewilderment. not understanding what is going on. i also felt very marooned and isolated. very alone. alone in a way that is kind of all-encompassing. i did not have anything to fall back on. through all of that process i think i learned to rely and depend on myself. empowering and strengthening but also very hard . >> watch book tv this weekend on c-span2. washington journal continues. host: we will go back to the

phones and talk about the deal that will reopen the government for three weeks as they negotiate over whether there should be a border wall. democrats, you can call (202) 748-8000. republicans, we want to hear from you at (202) 748-8001. independents, your line is (202) 748-8002. there is akers, special line for you today at (202) 748-8003. we are always available on social media, on twitter @cspanwj, and on facebook. let's go to angel from washington on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to mention the private sector workers. they are the heroes of our current situation. they have had to take part-time jobs and go to food banks on their own and take snaps, etc.

after obamacare was passed. they could not afford the health care. the impact i've had from the government shutdown has been zero. i think that is like the feeling of a lot of people. who are these government workers that are so important that we don't even have any residual effects? maybe the tsa or whatever. america is going deeper in debt. right or left, it doesn't matter because they are all becoming the pity party and americans are paying for it. we are the ultimate people paying for this incompetence. host: speaking of tsa, let's talk about the shutdown's impact on air travel with a transportation writer for the washington post. ashley, good morning. guest: good morning. how are you?

host: what happens now with the tsa and air traffic controllers? we heard of the slowdowns at laguardia. how has that affected your travel? will happen now with tsa? guest: a couple of things will happen both with tsa and the air traffic controllers. after the shutdown was ended yesterday, eleanor holmes norton tweeted, "thank you air-traffic controllers. you scared trump into opening the government." she is the congresswoman from washington, d.c. eleanor is an externally smart person and she knows it was a combination of things that caused this to happen. there will be two potential residual effects. controllersraffic are at the high end of the federal pay scale because they deal with an awful lot of tension and -- in their

day-to-day activities. landing airplanes, taking airplanes off and so forth. what happened during the 30 plus days shutdown is their training academy, the training academy and i think oklahoma city that trains air-traffic controllers was shut down. what does that mean? well, i will take you back to 1981 when ronald reagan fired all the your traffic controllers. that all the air-traffic controllers because they were on strike. the consequence of that means all of the people who came on board in the aftermath of that are now eligible for retirement. plus of them are. over the last several years any

of them have been eligible for retirement and have retired. consequently they have to deal with a lot of retirements and they don't have any replacements. paul ranalli, the head of the union, has been saying this to congress for years and saying we need to expedite getting new trainers -- new controllers trained. this'll be a real potential crisis in the future as the academy has been shut down. there have been estimates it could be several months before the academy is back and running. host: go ahead, sorry. guest: from that we go to the tsa workers. are at the low

end of the federal pay scale. they make between $150 and $200 a day. if you have issues like they do, and that is suddenly they were not able to pay the mortgage and not able to make the car payment and they were not able to pay the credit card bill, they have got to rethink, i would imagine, rethink whether or not they workingant to be tsa or -- it wouldd's or guarantee a paycheck. that is the issue there. what happens if a lot of those people quit or some of those people quit? the tsa is not about the compromise safety standards. so what that means is the lines

when you get to the airport are going to be longer and longer and longer. is that guaranteed to happen? i don't really know but i think it is a real possibility. host: what happened yesterday at the gordian? was that planned or was that something that just happened organically? guest: first of all it did not happen at the cornea. what happened was -- happened at laguardia. the center in warrenton, virginia, which controls airplanes above 33,000 feet shortstaffed because controllers did not come to work. that meant that impacted. laguardia is a notorious place for backups in the newark area since itsk area

airports are the big hubs for air travel in this country in addition to chicago and los angeles and atlanta. the consequence of that, short staffing in virginia, they had to back off the planes. what they do is they will space them out if there is an issue. --tead of an airplane being i will make this up -- a mile from another airplane, they will say it will be two miles or three miles or whatever. what they did in laguardia and they did throughout the 33,000 above 33,000 was they said, ok, we will space the planes out more just to make sure everybody stay safe. -- stays safe.

it impacted laguardia first because the cornea -- laguardia is a hot point for air travel. that is what happened. it was actually in warrenton, virginia that people did not report for work. host: last question. when will we see the airline system, the air travel system to back to normal? what you think was going to happen over the next three weeks? especially if it looks like there will be another shutdown? guest: it is a political question as to whether there will be another shutdown. if i had to guess, i would think no, but i'm a transportation writer, not a political writer. if there is another shutdown in three weeks, at least people will have been paid, both the tsa worker in the air traffic controllers before that happens so they will have some ability

to tide themselves over if there is another shutdown. i would be surprised if there is another shutdown. host: is the air travel system back to normal today or are we still seeing delays around the country? seeingi think what we're -- there are some delays but i don't think they are significant. i don't think they are real significant. system ase air travel a consequence of the tsa people in the air-traffic controllers continuing to work has survived issue,ntroversy, this this 30 plus they shut out -- daydown. -- 30-plus shutdown.

guest: thank you to ashley halsey/ . guest: you are welcome. host: ruth from south carolina on the independent line. caller: good morning, c-span. it is a blessing this whole debacle thing is over. it never had a happened with the shutdown. it affected so many people's lives, it is unbelievable. it is so unfortunate our president and his administration with all those billionaires cannot understand. they told him to go to the grocery store and maybe the grocery store can help them. being a senior, i grew up with that. going to the grocery store during the week. on the weekend when my parents got paid, we paid them back. that goes back 50 years.

you have the billionaire saying go get a loan. don't worry about it. or go on vacation. just take advantage of it. they had no clue, no understanding of what it's like to be a working person. unfortunately, sadly, the majority -- not all because you have a lot of republicans who are struggling, but they want to stay republican, which is fine. i want to stay independent. but they had no clue what it's like for the working people and what these people are going through. i can tell you -- i will say this. we in america need to be very, very careful because we might think we are sitting on the mountain now as the people in venezuela were a few years back. now look where they are at.

if we don't come together, regardless of your political affiliation, we will be the same way. we have got to stop this thinking we are so much better because i got mine, i got a car, a boat and all that. it does not matter. host: let's go to mary from arizona. she is calling on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning, and it is late have a suit. su.lake hava i have a comment on the upcoming compromise. since nancy and chuck are fighting president trump over the wall, they don't want a wall, my idea is a solar powered electric fence. that should please nancy and chuck.

thank you. mary from cambridge, massachusetts on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. i was going to say the same kind having watchtowers and to monitor devices the border. but i was also going to say, why don't we bill the people who are really responsible for the terrible chaos in mexico, central america and south america, which seems endless. it has been going on for 200 years. they have always been in chaos. probably since the spanish and the portuguese arrived. the church took hold of these their and they controlled

right to save legal abortion and birth control -- safe, legal abortion and birth control. you have a huge space with millions and millions of absolutely poverty-stricken people who are desperate. they are on the street. the really poor people outside of rio send their children in e to to beg -- in ther beg. those children are considered vermin and can be shot by the police, last i heard. they should go elsewhere for a wall or whatever we want to try to keep that chaos from coming over the border. i think i know who should get the bill for all of this, speaking of who was going to pay for the wall. that is all i have to say about this. host: tammy from new york on the

republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. people need to look to tijuana, mexico and then they will understand why we need the wall. we love the president. i hope he holds the line. thank you. host: jordan from monroe, louisiana on the independent line. . good morning. to make itanted dovetailing comparison between the awful calls in the new orleans game last week. everyone in the world saw the evil judgment that was made, yet the referees are like our ruling class managerial elite in the world. i would like the fellow you previously had on to the polling about what i think trump needs

to understand about his base. we would really be all right if coup d'etatr a soft for three to five years really had martial law and we just did away with the bread and circuses that keep us from really understanding the complexities of the social, political, economic, judicial, foreign policy emergency situation we are in. thank you very much. ohio let's go to luis from on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. i will make this as quick as possible. i don't think we should build a permanent wall between the united states and mexico. if donald trump would talk to the president of mexico, they for a wall atout

the southern border of mexico. that would keep mexico from getting all these immigrants going through and it will stop most of them from coming through to the united states. mexico thinks it has an immigration problem coming from the united states? caller: no, that they will have one if we get a wall. they will be stuck with all those people that are there. mexico does not want all of them. host: what you think the united states has to offer mexico for them to take up this problem? caller: do it 50-50 on the cost. host: ok. mike from alexandria, virginia on the independent line. good morning. caller: thank you for your time. of the u.s. being a

calls for looking at history. years of exploitation of our neighbors to the south of toources, manpower, land develop our own companies down there, we are intruding. harry are putting up walls to prevent the people who are trying to escape the deprivation caused by our expectation -- exploitation. the answer is let's make good neighbor relations. make all the americas great again. north, south and central america. host: let's go to mike once again calling from alabama on the republican line. caller: the russians are having a field day.

the kgb are having a field day with what is going on. we helped them tear down their wall in berlin, and their puppet is forcing us to build a wall on our southern border. if we keep harassing the mexicans like we are doing, don't be surprised if you see a russian armored division running doesn't work or operations on our mexican border. host: jim long joins us to talk about recreational marijuana laws in the united states. of we will take a closer look at what it means with tom jones. we will be right back. >> the legend was he was a bad kid running amok on the

waterfront of baltimore. he never lived on the waterfront. internalized that. ideank he internalized the that he must be bad it. why else would neither of his parents have wanted him? onjane levy with her book babe ruth. series, he world gets into this back and forth with the pitcher for the chicago cubs. it becomes a legend that he is standing at home plate and the cubs are yelling at him. the yankees are yelling back. one finger and then hents -- this is the myth -- points to the grandstands.

>> sunday night at 8:00 on c-span's q&a. >> live super bowl sunday at noon, sportswriter is our guest on in-depth. a people's history of sports in the united states, game over. his most recent is a book about jim brown. hired -- sports sports. we need to take them back. what we need is our history. that is our greatest ammunition. no history ofe -- the fans and sports writers who stood up to the machine. knowing this history, it allows us to see that struggle can

affect every aspect of life in this system. conversation with your calls, emails, and facebook questions live at noon eastern on c-span two. >> washington journal continues. host: we are back with our spotlight on magazine segment. we will talk with world magazine reporter jim long about his series on recreational marijuana laws in the united states and legalization. good morning. guest: good morning. host: what made you decide to look at the hot industry last year? guest: we are not afraid to get down and dirty in the street where people live. saw, it'smething we taking off from medical marijuana legalization to adult

use of marijuana. to take the pulse of the nation on this. how far we on moving toward national or federal approval of adult and recreational use of marijuana like candidate? this, it'sked at kind of a done deal. the train has left the station. we are moving very quickly toward federal approval of adult use of marijuana. that was the impetus on this series. world magazine is a christian publication. the jew look at this from a christian point of view? what was your result? that includes all of

these issues. we look at the political angles, the big business angles. we look at the social impact, the criminal justice impact. the ethical component to this. ist: recreational marijuana not legal in 10 states. -- now legal in 10 states. assume there is no pun to draw there. bonanza this cash draws for cash starved legislatures, especially with budget deficits. california, the analytics projected that by the end of tax year, the california base for marijuana businesses will be $5.1 billion. that's more than the beer tax

base. that same group critics californians will spend more ud as they will on suds. it's hard to turn down that kind of revenue. host: talk a little bit about this, where do you think federal legislation is going on recreational marijuana? there have been a bunch of bills. you see any of them being passed? any timedon't think soon. there were 40 bills passed and 2018.17 prior to that, there were 39 over 14 years. we will see that increase. you just had the farm hemp bill that allows the federal legalization of hemp farming.

you will have to have more momentum having states passed the adult use of marijuana. if you're going to prognosticate the future, you have to look at canada. marijuana use recreationally last october. that is going to be your harbinger of where we will be as a nation. host: they can join the conversation. democrats can call in at (202) 748-8000, republicans (202) independents (202) 748-8002. you can also reach us on twitter and facebook. jim, who are the biggest advocates for recreational marijuana? guest: it's interesting. i would say the biggest player would be the drug policy

alliance. that is funded by george soros, the hedge fund billionaire. they are the most influential. their primary mission is to decriminalize marijuana. it's a social activist angle. sean parker, the president of facebook, he was heavily involved in funding prop 64 in california. allen, theter progressive insurance billionaire. he was a big funder for a lot of the issues for adult use marijuana. also, people are trying to get their fingers into the pie with big business, like big alcohol. is investing heavily in

canadian operations. you've got heineken, they just bought a brewing company. they make craft beers based 411 -- 420, the time when people are supposed to light up. they are making beer that is thc inspired or has it infused in the water. you've got big tobacco, they are quietly in the background acquiring domain names that have marijuana references. you have big business positioning as well. entrepreneurs, people who are trying to invest in edible companies that a been doing so well in the dispensary businesses.

business interests, social activists, those are trying to get into the market in the cannabis space early. host: i was fascinated by the itond part of your series, was called pot in a bottle. is the alcohol industry interested? wouldn't that become petition insteadalcohol industry of a new area of growth? guest: that's a good question. early on, they looked at that as competition. they saw their sales decline. after marijuana was legalized in these states, there was an uptick in alcohol consumption. note, they tragic see an increase in double intoxication in traffic fatalities.

there was an increase in both uses of intoxicants. that should raise concerns in terms of the social costs. the momentum is not going to go away. that's why alcohol appears to be moving into the space and trying own market.eir heineken is a good example. my guess is what they are going to do is keep that market brand separate, create the thc water which they have done already. see how that doesn't market. name may roll out their own thc heineken beer.

in california, the regulations do not allow a thc infused alcoholic beverage. they will be two separate lines. have and alcohol heineken beer and a thc infused heineken beer. the market has embraced it as their friend now, a separate product line they can build on. host: let's let callers join in. virginiato john from on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to recommend to the democratic party that they take this up as a major issue and run on legalizing marijuana, which has proved to be very beneficial tax wise to the states who have done it. to stop ruining the lives of people who use it. i think that's a great

opportunity for democrats to make it legal, which it should of been a long time ago. my main disappointment with president obama is he didn't take it off schedule 1, which is stupid. host: go ahead, jim. thet: my response would be democratic party has been moving in that direction. there is some bipartisan support in that area as well. there was a cannabis caucus created in 2017 that included democrats and republicans. , a republican from colorado, he and elizabeth states' th created the act. they got approval from president trump. that is attempting to use 10th amendment rationale to defer to

the states on the issue of marijuana usage. basically, they would remove the federal prohibition against marijuana. there is strong movement, not just against the democratic party -- with the democratic party. trend is on its way. ohio on thego to republican line. how are you this morning? guest: thank you for taking the call. i would like to make an analogy of things have changed in america. past, earlywade abortions were ok. new york passed along were you can kill a child just before birth. when the gays came out of the

closet, now we have men marrying men. we can go on and on with these things that have reached a level of absurdity in where we go when things are accepted by the public. if the public is willing to accept the decadence of the democratic party, what are we to expect with what's going on in the future? abhorrentelease behavior into society, this is what we get at the end of result. we will like to commit murder of babies, that likes to marry each other, it is society that has to wake up. no matter what we try to mandate, if society will accept decadence, we will have a decadent country. i hope people wake up.

i hope my observation wakes some people up. i want to respond to that? the bible includes sober mindedness. the closest analogy we have in scripture to this topic is the issue of alcohol and drunkenness. that's where you get your strongest analogy to arguing the ethics. one huge thing that came out of this and it's the strongest afterthought i had, there is a real problem with the high levels of thc in today's marijuana. this is not your granddad's reefer. due toels of thc improved soil conditions, genetic strains of marijuana, the use of thc concentrates,

it's up to 90% in terms of the dry weight of marijuana compared in a typical joint. it's much much higher. kids are called dabbing. if it has 12 milligrams, these are up to 90. studiese few stories -- over 20 milligrams. we have no idea what this type of potency can do to the human brain. the younger brain, the more damage thc can do to that. thise kind of rushing into , allowing access to young children. animals being made in the shape of gummy bears, ollie

top's. lollipops. we need to slow down and think about the controls that need to be in place and maybe do a little more research. slow down and be very careful and look at the consequences of what we are doing. i want to read to you a little bit from your article. it has a lot of the major concerns about the marijuana laws. teenage abuses the most worrisome. into addicts.urn one study found cannabis related emergency room admissions where youth aged 13 to 21.

is that just in one state, are we seeing that in other states? guest: from my understanding, that was based on a group called smarts. they are a lobbying group. their stats were taken from the campaign that they were conducting in colorado. those stats were based in colorado. that is my understanding. host: matthew is calling from new jersey on the and dependent line. good morning. caller: good morning and thank you. i have some facts i would like to guest to address.

fact number one, in many states which have legalized recreational marijuana use like colorado, traffic accident with manye doubled more serious injuries. fact number two, drug abuse and addiction have risen. as you mentioned, children are being admitted to hospitals from thc candyh potency like gummy bears. fact number three, the tax revenues in colorado have not materialized because they've been offset by increased legal costs.

fax, gentlemen, which the mainstream media does not report. i can tell you in new jersey, the state police are against legalizing recreational for these reasons. we are not talking medicinal. for these reasons which are not publicized very often. those are very good points. that needs to be made. promises areevenue made and realized, they have to be set off for the social costs that come with this. is because ofn the high thc levels, the potent marijuana that is out there now

does rise to the level of opioids. the netherlands is considering classifying thc levels of 15% and higher in the same level as lsd and heroin. we may be creating another opiate epidemic with a new marijuana. the social costs to that will outgained the revenue the revenue -- the marijuana will create. we should count all the cost before we rush into things. thing that came to really are rushing into this.

intoxicated by the lower of all of this revenue, the tax revenue. we are not considering the social costs. wrote the last piece and use this great metaphor. and like a legal locomotive there are kids playing on the tracks. they are in danger. we really need to be more cautious in our proceedings with this. this was something i had not thought about. and what has the stereotype of the people smoking marijuana. it write in the article that ng against edibles. a can deliver the drug with potency 16 times higher than

smoking. it seems like this is going to be the future of recreational marijuana. guest: that's right. i think that's a done deal as well. said fivene last year out of six americans would choose to ingest marijuana through edibles. that includes drinkable's. way marijuana and thc consumption will be done, through edibles and most likely drinkable's. you will see it used in familiar products. coca-cola just announced in september they are going to explore a beverage. you will see it in ice-t, in smoothies, and frappuccinos, and sports drinks. there is a company creating

drops, i believe it's 15 milligrams that will get you high within five minutes and last for 90 minutes. it's being billed as the new beer. intoxication,n that with no calories and no hangover. it's a far cry. that whole social stigma is gone. it's going to be much more socially acceptable. the form in which it comes is already acceptable. let ryan from kansas joined the conversation. good morning. caller: good morning.

i wanted to make a couple points. host: can you get closer to your phone? i think we lost them. let's go to robert in indiana. good morning. caller: good morning. i said good morning. host: go ahead. caller: i am 75 years old. . have never smoked any dope i've never done drugs. i want to say that you can put a nice name on it, it is still dope. all you've got to do is add a

little liquor to it. the prior phone calls, i'm a democrat. i support the wall. let's keep going. let's go to david in michigan on the independent line. caller: good morning. we've got to go back to richard nixon when he invented the dea. no law is passed to make the dea into existence. why do we have to pass laws to make marijuana illegal? there was no law passed that

said america -- it was illegal on a federal level? it is illegal because the dea has placed it on its schedule 1 of controlled substances in the federal drug act. that means it has no medical value. when everybody has been lobbying they,nce the early are lobbying to remove it from the schedule 1 category. let's go to roger from virginia. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. in curious about the numbers

canada, how they are doing in terms of revenue and if there is a correlation between accidents, crime, what are the levels for that? guest: that was outside the scope of my article. they just passed this in october. it's going to take time to implement it. i'm not sure if canada has released any figures yet. it's a good question. host: peter is calling from michigan. good morning. i called him a few times in the past, usually as an independent and i'm a republican now. is, i'vey everyone

been smoking weed for 40 years. the weed we smoked 40 years ago was 20 times is good as you can get. host: one of you found on that issue? guest: it's something i mentioned earlier. there has been more genetic engineering. soil.is enhanced the lighting systems are improved. , they usery systems oil concentrates. they can be 80% more potent. rate, it doesn't burn off as my when it's consumed.

that last gentleman may have been talking about smoking the bud. the factors with the burn rate. there is a lot of sliding scale factors to determine how much thc gets into your system. kids are doing a thing called having. that's where it can be in the form of a wax or resin and they use a straw to ingested in vapor form. that can be up to 90%. thc. potent thanre traditional reefer of old. like to thank jim long of world magazine for his series and for being here today. read the series, go to world magazine. guest: thank you.

it's a pleasure. host: it's been a bad couple of weeks for the news media. we will look closer with tom jones. we will be right back. >> the richard dean story doesn't and there. last november, he was forced out of his office. the second time the government shutdown, he continued helping social security recipients. he was working without pay. on behalf of richard dean and his family and all of the others i challenge all of let's neverchamber, shut the federal government down. weekend, at 8:00 on history, how the

state of the union has changed since the time of george washington. he scored politically here. see the address, the lore of politics is too great for many college -- presidents. it is designed to -- for party leadership. presidents don't avoid the opportunity to use the address to try to score points. we are far away from that formal address the george washington may have given. on americanend history tv on c-span3. >> c-span, where history unfolds

daily. in 1979, c-span was created as a public service by the cable television companies. we bring you unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court, and public policy events in washington dc and around the country. we are brought to you by your cable and satellite provider. >> washington journal continues. with senior back media writer tom jones and we will discuss the media issues going on over the last couple of weeks. you have taken the news media to task for a couple of stories that have gotten a lot of coverage. the covington catholic video story and the buzz feed story.

>> let's go back to the buzz feed story, which broke what appeared to be a major story when they claimed they had information from federal hadstigators that michael: been directed by president trump the lie to congress. full disclosure, i know one of the authors in the story. we worked together at the tampa bay times. i should also say that he had a sterling reputation. he won a pulitzer prize. when we looked at the story, a couple of things were concerning. investigationer said parts of the story were inaccurate. a funnyort of statement. they didn't say what parts. everyher part of it was other news organization is working hard to confirm or deny

the story. they have been unable to do so. the reaction was one i found very interesting. everyone is trying to keep up in the new cycle. they are trying to stay on top of the story. everyone is chasing buzz feed it, they could not confirm if it was true or false. that was the first big story of the week. the other story was really complicated when it came to the covington catholic school story in regard to the standoff in washington dc. the difficult part of this was most of us saw this through a video. it was probably on twitter or facebook, somebody sent a link and we saw about 3.5 minutes of the standoff between this kid

wearing a make america great hat and a native american. we weren't sure what we were looking at. that is the problem here. we had no context. theolleague likes to say difference between accuracy and truth is context. we may be looking at something that is accurate. we all knew what we were looking at. at the same time, we had no context or what happened before the video was shot. we had no idea what happened in the moments after. who shot it? why do they put it out there? idea about the history of these two people. we are all trying to keep up. we are trying to keep up with what sapling.

because we have no context, we have no idea what we are looking at. some people think the kid was wrong, why did the elder walk away. unless you have context, you don't really know for sure. later, we ares very much divided on what we saw, even though we saw the same video. is there a rush to publish ? is that a problem in journalism? do they try to compete with social media and rush things out? absolutely. i think you make a great point. let me relate a story to. a few years ago, there was a photo of the aleppo boy. he is in the back of an

ambulance and covered in dust and rubble and blood. he had just been pulled from his home which is been destroyed great people looked at that and said look at the awful things the syrian government is doing to its people. a video came out of the same young boy. his hair clean with brushed and looking very healthy. his father gave an interview that said the international media was using that is propaganda. we had the story wrong. but then more comes out that the interview was done with a state run news organization. we wonder if the father was pressured into doing that video. we still don't know what to make of what we are seeing. that's what happened in this case. video, as the same you mentioned, there is a rush

to reaction. ways, newspapers came out every 24 hours and you had time to develop and work on a story. if you needed eight hours to put it together, you could. they don't want eight hours to put a story appeared they want a story in five minutes. there is a rush to publish and judge what we are looking at. unless you don't have the facts, it's a dangerous thing. better to be right than to be first. news organizations are trying to be first. host: this is a great theoretical conversation. what is the actual danger of putting out information from it up sodia or putting quickly we don't understand the context? guest: i think we could see it

in this case. i'm not going to sit here and make a judgment who was right or wrong in the situation. we started to find out more about the situation. the public reacts. we heard of death threats on both sides. we also heard stories about other groups that might have been involved that day. when you have this rush to publish, you are putting a information that may not be false, but it may be false. case, we think we have it right and we don't. the public reacts in such a way that the person we are writing or broadcasting about, it turns vilified for something they shouldn't be vilified for. host: let's let the viewers calling. democrats can call in at (202)

748-8000, republicans at (202) independents (202) 748-8002. we're always reading on social media and twitter. mary who iswith from pennsylvania on the and and lie. caller: thank you. that noanted to say good comes from talking to the media. people jump to a conclusion. they hear what they want to hear. it depends on the interest. stone, ilike roger don't agree with him, the way cnn arrived at his home, the media jumps on things.

i just don't understand. case, with the roger stone story, it's a breaking news story. they are doing their job. as far as the today show interview, i reached out to the today show to ask about that interview. it confused a lot of people. i agree with the collar. a lot of people go in with preconceived notions. a lot of people didn't like the kid from the start because of the hat or the video they saw. a lot of people supported his right to be there. that interview was interesting. point, iller across don't know if he did himself good or harm in that interview. lookedht it times he

coached, like a pr firm had worked with him. if it were my son, i would probably consult with media consultants to prep him. i came out of that interview and i agree, if you have a certain idea about him going in, those notions were probably confirmed by what you watched. host: let me ask you this question. is the problem the media or is it social media? there been issues with the media for hundreds of years. social media has jumped everything to a quantum level. i think the first thing is social media. it can be dangerous. this past week, a lot of the backtracking that journalists were doing. we saw the video and made a reaction to it.

everybody started walking it back a little bit. not everybody. the social media reaction fed the flames of that story. i think there is another issue at play. when you look it media today and ,"at people defined as "media you look at the new york times or the washington post, most television broadcast networks, they are journalists who go by the standards of journalism. they seek the truth without being biased. then you have this other faction out there. we all know what it is if you carlsonxnews or tougher or rachel maddow. i'm not sure i consider that journalism. they are opinion lists. .- opinionists

what i will say is they go on to give an opinion, almost like a columnist. a lot of view them as the media. that's the other part of the issue. you have people on cnn and fox news retried until the story using the journalistic standards we should all practice. there are other shows that are just about opinions. i'm not sure you can categorize them the same way you can other journalists. host: chuck is calling from oklahoma. good morning. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. caller: i just wanted to comment. washington hasn a problem with the native american gentleman, they should've had better chaperones there.

everybody has the right to protest. we can't have conflict. we have to have adults to keep it from happening. say socialed to media is shining a spotlight on things as it happens. you're going to get things wrong once in a while, everyone will get their side in their opinion. that's what america is about, debate. we go back to this story, there was so much more involved in the story than just the elder and the student. there were so many other people that were involved. another group may have been fanning the flames. through the idea of the kids were in the wrong, another group might have been in the wrong.

context, it'sthe very confusing and troubling to cover. everybody wanted to cover it because it was a story everybody was talking about. that's another thing social media does, it creates viral moments. that becomes the buzz of the country. we often don't know what we are looking at. mcconnell is mitch talking about the criticism of the viral video. these are students from his home state of the techie. fat-free rush to judgment is becoming all too often an occurrence. we can learn anything from this weekend, here's what i hope it is. when the rest for headlines

takes precedence over the facts, rights asre made and americans are putting risk. this trend is troubling when young people are involved. host: do you agree with him? guest: i agree with part of what he says. people in the media have to be aware of rushing to judgment. they have to have all the facts as much as they can before putting a story out there. the idea that this was just a kid and he should be treated differently than adults in that situation, i get that to a certain extent. he was there. he was protesting. he was wearing his hat. at that point, you are putting yourself in a situation where people are going to judge what you are doing. i think that's fair. he was there, he was old enough.

-- i't think he should be do think we should ignore the fact that that's where he was. he was wearing the hat he chose to wear. that's his right to wear it. we can't afford him the rights to do it he did and then say he didn't know what he was doing. host: president trump talk about ending the white house press briefing. he tweeted about it from his account. this is what he had to say about the idea there are fewer press conferences. the reason she did not go to the podium is because the press covers are so rudely and inaccurately. i told her not to bother. the word gets out anyway. they will never cover us fairly. what your thoughts about his tweet and are the briefings

worth it? guest: i think they're absolutely worth it for the public. i think a lot of people are jumping on it media, we are the conduit between whatever public figures there are and citizens. it doesn't matter what we're talking about. i used to work in a sports department. i had the ability to go into a locker room to really what the athletes said to the fans. this is the same thing. it's obviously much higher stakes. the president needs to be held accountable. he is a lot to get his message out there. the best way is for there to be official rest briefings. if we can't talk to the president, we can talk to someone who was there to speak er. him in an official mann

she mainly does it outside. or in the hallway. it's not what they have cut off the media totally. i think the press briefings are very important in our democracy. the president is making a mistake and he should continue to have them. we've gone since december 18 since the last time. that, it was most of november. you have is freezing out the press, it's happened so timelessly during the government shutdown. just int's go to michigan on the republican line. go ahead. i do disagree on your

statement that the young man was protesting. he had been to a protest. wearing the hat. a state of protest, we are in a sad state of affairs. guest: go ahead. the black hebrew israelites started this whole thing. i watch the longer clips. a great portion of that is by the black hebrew israelites. terribleted hurling things to these young men who were there. they were waiting for a bus to take them back to their home.

the native american group moved into the center of the crowd of young man, immediate per traded that the they surrounded the native americans and harass them. banged a drum for his face. these are 16-year-old kids. they have not lived a lifetime of experience on how to deal with these things. they were all jacked up that they were in washington d c. i feel they are getting a bad rap. to jump ons so quick anything that makes republicans look bad. they picked these kids as scapegoats. i am looking at it on my screen right now.

kids, i read in an article youth gange kind of sign thing. i'm not surprised they would pick it up. i'm not surprised they picked it up. with the culture today and all the gangs. one thing the caller said, that i will disagree with is in terms of the young man and you might have a thought on this as well, wearing the hat, he has every right to do that. but if you don't think that sends a message to the people in

that situation, you are wrong. it certainly does. other people who were there see that hat, you're going to get a reaction for that hat. i think they know that. i'm not saying you're not allowed to wear it. that is your right as an american citizen. hat, youwear that needed to know that you are going to get a reaction out of it. host: john is calling from california. good morning. caller: this is one of the main reasons why i watch you people. result from the media. the primary thing and i think is a good example is michael brown. it never happened.

investigation of the federal and state investigations and all of the eyewitnesses, it was very tedious to read through all of them. there was only 13 second situation. an individual saw him with his hands forward, which looked like they were up. came the individuals with their hands up. that is a mistake. happening withis the indian and the young a hat.man with the maggot ha theirike the women with genitalia on the top of their heads.

it's another aggravating situation. you can take it from there. you can take it from there. host: we are talking about the media today. how does the regular consumer ?ecide what is fake news how does a consumer decide where to go to get their news. guest: it's a great question. it's something all of us are struggling with. -- notably are divided in our politics, the media is part of that. there are some people out there who only want news a certain way. in anti-trump, they watch this network, if they theyroton -- pro trump,

watch that. most journalists are trying to do a good job and report the truth without bias. they are not out to get people. democracy,presenting the citizens of this country. ,ost journalists are good hard-working people who are trying to seek the truth. or the to the reader audience to make their determination on what they can believe. i do believe most journalists and news organizations are seeking the truth and do a really good job. host: they should keep watching c-span. guest: absolutely. host: beth, good morning. caller: they say a picture is worth 1000 words. there is one thing you cannot

dispute, the image of an elderly adult standing in a teenage boys personal space with a stick beating a drum. that is an act of aggression. when you get into someone's personal space, that's an act of aggression. lookinggain, we start at the elder being 10 years younger and the kid was three years older, would that make it better? both of them need to take responsibility for being there. ,f the student was old enough the elder was old enough. they both made the choice. joneswe want to thank tom for being with us. thank you so much. guest: thank you for having me. host: we would like to thank all

of our viewers and online followers. we will be back tomorrow morning at 7:00. hopefully, you will be there with us. have a good day. ♪ >> c-span, where history unfolds daily. in 1979, c-span was created by america's public television company. today we bring unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court, and public policy events in washington, d.c. and around the

country. c-span was brought to you by your cable or satellite provider. u.this is a live look at the n. security council to debate the political situation in venezuela, where the current president faces a challenge to his leadership with several countries backing his opponent. proceedings in a moment. first, a remark from secretary of state mike pompeo, who spoke their moments ago. good morning. on behalf of president trump and the american people i want to andk the foreign minister counsel for scheduling this meeting. my former colleague, ambassador haley, lobbied for a year to get the council to address venezuela, but her pleas fell on deaf ears. you know why it is overdue.

take a 37-year-old construction worker weeping over the tiny coffin of his deceased infant son who died of starvation. such scenes of misery are the norm in nicolas maduro's venezuela, where millions of children are suffering from now nutrition and starvation thanks to a socialist experiment that caused the economy to collapse. this human misery is not a secret. stories like this one are documented by our press corps you can read about men like carlos every day. people like him are why the united states called this meeting. because maduro has reduced ordinary venezuelans who lived in prosperity to rooting through dumpsters to find something to eat. we are here because scores of venezuelan women, some of them majuro's, have fled

madness to other countries and turn to prostitution to survive. we are here because of maria, a school psychologist, who said through tears we have a government dedicated to destroying, not constructing. another man, a farmer named never got more than a sixth grade education hoped that his step daughter gabriella could fulfill her dreams of being a lawyer. she says that our whole future has been taken away. that future for her and venezuelans did not disappear on its own. nicolas maduro regime stole that future. hoping to states is recover a brighter future for venezuela and we are here to urge nations to support the democratic aspirations of the d venezuelan people. the humanitarian situation

demands action now. it demands action today. today, nine out of 10 citizens live in poverty. millions lack access to drinking water and food. three out of four hospitals have been abandoned. 3 million venezuelans have been forced to flee their homeland, flooding the region and threatening international peace and security. are full ofsons political prisoners unjustly behind bars and graveyards hold dissidents that have been killed by the regime. i want to talk about one of them. a member of the city council of caracas. , he came to the city to meet with world representatives who gather here every year during united nations general assembly to speak about the failures of the maduro regime and hopes for a democratic and prosperous future for his country.

after that he went home. he went home to the country that he loved. 's secret police arrested him at the airport when he landed. he died in custody three days later. the pathetic explanations of the death convinced no one. to support the venezuelan people to recognize the new democratic government led by interim president guaido and end of the nightmare. no excuses. stands withtates the venezuelan people. many other nations have chosen to do the same thing and recognize the legitimate government of interim president guaido. the united states stands proudly with you as we stand in support of venezuela. you knew that the venezuelan people did not have a moment to spare. now it is time for every other nation to pick a side. no more delays.

no more games. either stand with the forces of freedom or you are in league with maduro. some countries have formally side.president maduro's china, russia, syria, and iran are four of them. this morning, we tried to find a way for this counsel to speak in one voice to the venezuelan people's support and democratic ideals of this council, but the russian and chinese colleagues refused to let this move forward. it is not a surprise that those who rule without democracy in their countries are trying to prop up maduro while he is in dire straits. these countries supporting international norms as they cynically claim. are propping up a regime to recover millions of dollars in assistance over the years. the money was never intended to help the venezuelan people. it lined the pockets of the maduro regime, its cronies and

benefactors. for years, cuban security and intelligence invited into venezuela by maduro himself, have sustained the illegitimate rule. they have trained maduro's security henchmen in cuba's worst practices. the cuban security minister provides president maduro's security. microphones to condemn for interference in international affairs. let's be clear. the foreign power meddling in venezuela is cuba. cuba has made matters worse. the united states and our partners are the true friends of the venezuelan people. the venezuelan people chose to take their country back on the anniversary of the day that the dictator was forced out of power in 1958.

we call for venezuelans to work peacefullyr to restore the constitutional government and return the country to a secure, democratic, prosperous path. as we read reports of peaceful venezuelan protesters killed or wounded, we repeat insistence that venezuelan security forces show restraint. clear.to be 100% president trump and i fully expect that our diplomats will receive to protections under the geneva convention. do not test the united states' resolve to protect our own people. we hope the international community will support the venezuelan people and the transitional government led by juan guaido. declaration with the full support of the national assembly and the venezuelan

people. our nations must stand up for the rule of law and support the leader that the venezuelan people have affirmed that there -- as their legitimate interim president. we hope fair elections happen as soon as possible. in 1961 president kennedy spoke s, "we will be partners in building a better life for our people." ambition has not changed. we stand with the venezuelan people as they stand to build a better life for themselves, and cannot ignore the suffering in this proud nation. nor should other countries who care about freedom and prosperity. we call on members of the security council to support venezuela's democratic transition and interim president juan guaido's role in it. >> live coverage now of the u.n. security council.

expect topeople we hear from our representatives from russia, china, and venezuela. >> it is indeed bearing this in mind that we call on the secretary-general of the united , to use antonio butera his skill and diplomatic experience to play the role of good officers and facilitator. i give my microphone now to the representative of france. president, i would like to begin by thanking the undersecretary general for her briefing on the tragic situation that is being experienced by the venezuelan people. for three years venezuela has been in an unprecedented crisis. a depletedno