facial recognition technology at airports. as always, we will take your calls and you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter as well. "washington journal" is next. ♪ good morning. it's sunday, july 14, two thousand 19, welcome to "washington journal" a day that's likely to see thousands of migrants detained by immigrations and customs enforcement officers for failing to heed deportation orders. we will keep an eye on the updates of those this morning and talk about the scope of the planned raids here on "washington journal" a we will start the program asking your opinion of the raids. do you support or oppose them? if you support the ice raids, the line you should use is (202) 748-8000. if you oppose the raids, the

line is (202) 748-8001. for undocumented immigrants, we have set aside a special line for you, that line (202) 748-8002. you can post your thoughts on social media. send us a tweet, tweet,@c-span.org -- @cspanwj, or a message on facebook, facebook.com/cspan. they were reporting last night and online this morning, the headline was immigration raids writein new york, they that federal immigration authorities attempted raids and at least two neighborhoods in new york city on saturday according to a person familiar with the matter one day prior to when president trump had said immigration and customs enforcement agents would begin national roundups of people illegally in the u.s. in new york city they went to residences in harlem, the harlem section of manhattan and the brooklyn sunset park neighborhood. they were rejected people at

residence because they didn't have lawrence but they planned to return at least two sunset park tomorrow, meaning this morning, according to that person. you can read more on our website -- website. here's what the president had to say as he departed from wisconsin. [video clip] >> these are great professionals who have done this for a long time. for criminals as much as we can, looking for the criminal population who has been coming into this country for the last 10 years. we have been taking them out by the thousands. specifically gang members. we have been taking them out by the thousands. specificallyally looking for people that came into our country not through a process, they just walked over a line and they have to leave.

>> the mayors don't want the ice raids. do.ome a mayor like the blahs he owed, probably the worst mayor in the country, from new york, i don't know his attitude. nobody does because he doesn't work very hard, nobody knows what the hell he does. but i guy like the blahs you wouldn't want the raids, but many mayors do. most do. you know why? you don't like to have crimes and they want their cities safe. host: those rates are set to begin say across the country. (202) 748-8000 if you support the raids. (202) 748-8001 if you oppose them. and for undocumented immigrants, that line, (202) 748-8002. we will get to your phone calls momentarily. we're joined next, though, by camilla debt shall us. she is with "rollcall," tell us

who is being targeted by the raids and approximately how many individuals? guest: there's a lot of confusion on who is being targeted in the raids. from the people i have talked to, experts on the ground the cover the issue, trying to target people who have come into this country unlawfully, that are legally present in the u.s., people who have been ordered final removal notices. the government is aware that they are in the country and are in the process of being deported or that they should, you know, leave the country due to violating certain immigration know, their, you case had been processed but they found the cannot stay in the u.s. there are a variety of reasons, but people have been given notices to leave the country, that they are primarily targeting this group of people, affecting thousands across the

u.s. that have been given notices of removal. all of these individuals had prior notice, give us an idea of the cities being targeted. they were primarily targeting a lot of cities across the u.s., including new york city, san francisco, denver. high are cities that have populations of immigrants in the country, but they are primarily -- they have a lot of resources for immigrants, to. 10 major cities across the country, from california to new york to the east coast. guest: any idea how long these -- host: any idea how long these raids were last question mark we read report today that some of the anticipated once had started last night in new york city. in the past they have

been from four days to 10 days. aen i reached out to candidate about what we can expect from immigration enforcement operations, they said that they were not inclined to give more information due to safety concerns that they had for immigrations and customs enforcement personnel, because last month when they put into heavy immigration raid, they delayed it due to safety concerns so that more people would have more information about what the immigration officials were going to target and exactly what areas they were going to target due to the safety concerns. in terms of the size of the raids, is this the biggest of the trump administration? can you tell us about typical raids during the obama administration? how many folks would normally be targeted? guest: it's hard to tell. usually in the past ice doesn't want to disclose exactly how many people are going to target.

also because a lot of people are not aware of what's happening. it does affect how many people there going to apprehend when these enforcements are carried out. this past week more people have been notified that it's going to happen. they have been sharing this information that people can deny search warrant's. deny deportation lawrence if not signed by a judge. things of that nature. it does impact the number of people they are going to arrest with more people aware of what cities are going to be targeted and what exactly the procedures are along with their rights when it comes to if they are allowed to deny an agent at the door or things of that nature. a really important reminder is that under the obama administration they deported more individuals compared to the trump administration largely due

to sanctuary city policies enacted after the obama administration because of how the people were deported, so it's important to note that under the trump administration, the levels of people that have been deported because of ice and because of enforcement operations are extremely lower compared to the obama administration, especially the first years of the obama administration. towards the end of the obama administration there were less people deported, but the numbers under trump have not exceeded what has happened in the past. guest: one more quick -- host: one more quick thing, you wrote about the democratic response in the last week that says that democrats denounced the raids set -- slated for the weekend. are they actively engaging in terms of the raids in terms of trying to protect immigrants or giving advice or guidance to immigrants? guest: a lot of the democrats i

have spoken to in the cities, a lot of them said that they are very tuned into talking about and monitoring the situations in their cities, talking to advocacy organizations on the ground the can provide resources to immigrants that are fearful that they might be next, that they will be targeted. there is a lot of uncertainty about who exactly they are targeting, targeting different populations. in talks and are negotiations about trying to introduce this, trying to prevent things from happening again like this. these types of an forstmann operations that target very vulnerable people. there is a lot of talk, but they seem passionate that this cannot go on again, that this could mean a lot of fear and intimidation in the immigrant communities that contribute a lot to the u.s. economy. they are really trying, the

guidance out there is that they are getting tired of the immigration raids, that it is being kept in the news, that they are terrorizing the communities across the u.s. our c-span listeners can read that at rollcall.com. homeland security and immigration reporter for cq roll cdc, thankitter at you so much for the update. this morning if you support or oppose the raids. let's go to our first caller, pete, leesburg, virginia, on the support line. go ahead. good morningld say to c-span and to c-span into my comrade open border dems, i'm in construction and i wish you would put a line on all the small business and construction workers suppressing my wages from this invasion from the world.

i'm a big listener here at c-span. when the christians calling here, the federal government is now their god. they want their government to take care of them cradle-to-grave. the lord said you go down there and help out. you preach to others, not tell the federal government to take care of people from cradle-to-grave and help the people flooding into this country. the federal government is there to enforce the law and to provide for the common defense, not to do everything for these people invading this country. what do you do with all the people that came here illegally and the people in came legally, the ones that waited in line? you let them jump ahead? three years and you can become a citizen after people have waited in line legally? it's totally unfair? the daca parents? they all need to go. the parents need to go, maybe we work something out. host: thank you, pete.

susan is -- susan's in germantown, maryland, opposing the raids today. caller: thank you for taking my call. let me just say that i think this is for his base pretty much. he hasn't delivered on his wall like he said he would. he is trying to show his conservative base that he is on , that it is the fault of the immigrants, that it is their lot in life. that he's doing this because he really and truly cares about the working class. it's disgusting, it really is. putting fear and hatred and he's running on this. susan, you said he's doing this for his base. what should ice do with people who do not respond to or he'd deportation orders. there are other ways of handling this than sending out agents to round up these people and send them back, there really

is. law.an go through the there's just other ways of doing it. to me this whole thing is for his base and his ego. he is trying to get rid of all brown people because he hates them and he just wants them to go. let's you from patrick, pittsburgh, who supports the raids. morning, how are you. the country, when you look at the numbers, i just talked to my friend from germany who had experienced one million plus immigrants coming into the .erman nation there is absolute outrage, it got so serious that right-wing extremist candidates were capable of garnering huge support in germany. the united states cannot withstand one million immigrants

per year. it is a national security crisis . anybody trying to turn this into an optic related coup for the democratic party is just absolutely ridiculous. you know, our nation has an infrastructure. the infrastructure has to have specific assets in order to support the influx of these numbers. the democratic party should be absolutely ashamed of themselves . particularly when you look at the numbers deported under obama. this is all about the media portraying an optic to create more and more crises. i'm absolutely convinced of this . this is an organized, and organized infiltration of our country on a monstrous scale. there was certainly democratic response to it, we heard from cory booker,

presidential candidate. here's what he said in particular about the raids. [video clip] >> we have a president using fear to go after people all around the country right now. we have blended families, people undocumented, married to americans, children, we are tearing families apart, permanent damaging the children who have parents centrally to land. and it is worse than that. local police departments, right now you have police officers griping because they used to get from immigrant communities and now people are afraid to report crimes. i was in nevada with a 14-year-old who said that her friend, and american citizen, was afraid to report an assault because they were afraid that their parents would have to show up and might be deported. this environment of fear right less safe andus

undermining the strength of our communities, hurting our economies and i will change this. we want to also remind you , more coverage from the campaign trail coming up today at 1:15 eastern, we will be covering kamala harris, who should be speaking in gilford, new hampshire. that's live at 1:15 p.m. eastern . the question this morning on the raids, the immigrations and customs enforcement deportation raids, (202) 748-8000 if you support the raids. (202) 748-8001 if you oppose them. for undocumented immigrants, the .ine is (202) 748-8002 on twitter, c-span wj, fontaine says that --

, the we go to the hill hill.com has an article this morning posting on the raids today. the nation braces with trump set to begin the ice raids. the specter of sweeping immigration raids this week, sparking unrest amongst advocates as the trump effortsration escalates to do for those here illegally and set to begin sunday. president trump earlier this month without that the raids would commence. a move has riled up critics and lawmakers who have an recent onks sought to shine a light the administration treatment of migrants, democrats and immigration advocacy groups have warned that the raids could lead to further family separations with increased populations in

overcrowded detention centers. olympia fields, illinois, jeff, hello there. caller: good morning. thank you for the opportunity to speak to america. i'm in favor of actual law enforcement doing their job. we are a system of laws. not in favor of using this as a campaign strategy to really engage his voice -- his base to divide this country for the local lives of race and class. i think that everyone is objectionable. he is promoting this from his office. how they normally do it on a he is creating a

large amount of fear in our society in a breaks my heart to see achieve executive officer doing this at a time when we need to be united. it just makes me sad for this country. when people in other countries , ie used this type of fear hope america wakes up and gets ready to vote in 2020. old forge,, pennsylvania, supporting the raids. caller: i was just want to say, i don't know what's wrong with these people who are calling. it's a law. obama did more of this than trump ever did. plus trump gave the congress time to fix this. they don't even want to do anything. the democrats are pathetic.

i have had it with this stuff and i want to know why these lawmakers have the right to go illegal aliens what to do and what not to do. -- next door store was going to be arrested. i told him i would be in jail. this is a disgrace to the united states. thank you. host: bradley is next. hi there. good morning. good morning, c-span. you all doing a really good job there. i support trump 100%. if you come to this country, you need to come legal. if you are already in this country, for god sakes, go illegal. this country supporting all of these illegal people coming over here and stuff, we can't afford that. right now the country is littered with all of this foreign stuff coming into the country. you would think that you would

buy a car, it would be made in america. it's not made america, is made in china. we need to clamp down on this, be america, get away from these other countries. shutting the borders down, shutting china down, those farmers raising cane? i feel sorry for them. why not produce the produce that comes from mexico with the farmers here. you don't have to rely on these other countries. be america, get strong, be american. you know, i'm a democrat and i will probably switch to independent because they have not go -- not got nobody on their agenda in that crowd of people that they have got out there that i would vote for for dog catcher. bradley, let's talk about produce. of the produce grown in the u.s., you would hire immigrant workers that come over on temporary visas. do you think that the kind of work is -- are there enough

americans around who are citizens who want to do that kind of work. caller: there's enough americans around, but the problem with the americans around is the americans around is getting so much free stuff that they won't go pick apples or fruit or vegetables for $10 an hour. i got apples last fall and they are getting this big orchard shutdown because they can't get nobody to work it. that's sad. your input.iate connie, jacksonville, opposing the raids. yes, iyes, i -- caller: oppose the raids. history repeats itself and this is very similar to hitler's getting rid of all the jews. there are laws already on the books and we can just follow those. thank you. host: (202) 748-8001 is the line

if you oppose the raids. good morning, half. go ahead. morning, america. hey. i just wanted to remind my fellow americans that was ronald reagan that took the penalties off of the employers that hire undocumented workers and say -- hey, we need there he pickers, come on up. but the real reason was to dismantle the carpenters union, the plumbers and pipefitters union's. the heavy equipment. i worked construction. i saw them come in and do my job for one quarter of the price. contractors hired them. they made money. everybody is making money off the cheap labor. but what happened is you decimated the country. and now they want to round them up and what you are doing now is causing fear. fear throughout the country. it's a low vibration level and it's not good. anyway, i wanted to put in my two cents. thank you. cruz in texasted

spoke about the raids today. earlier this week the senator talked about the political nature, his view of the political nature of the democratic response. here is what he had to say. [video clip] >> last week 12 people died. this is a crisis and by refusing to address the border crisis we invite child smuggling and child abuse. that's shameful and that is tragedy. we know how many illegal immigrants are being apprehended. know that more and more even legal immigrants are trying to get into our country and we know that the border patrol doesn't have the manpower or the resources to handle the humanitarian crisis of this scale. it's a fact. and it is a reality that our democratic colleagues need to face. ,obody who is compassionate nobody who wants to be virtuous, nobody who cares about other

would want to perpetuate what is happening at the border for even a single day. we should be angry. should be angry at politicians who say that this is a made up crisis. we should be angry at politicians who keep the loopholes in place that ensure that more and more children, more and more little boys and little girls will be abused at the hands of human smugglers. the passage of the $4.5 billion borders supplemental bill a few step,ago was a good democrats in congress need to finally do their job and work with republicans and president trump to secure our border. host: customs enforcement agents today will round up thousands of .eople ordered for deportation

we are getting your thoughts on the raids. if you support them, (202) 748-8000. if you oppose them, (202) 748-8001. our line for undocumented immigrants is (202) 748-8002. u.s. sent outos by twitter -- host: supporting the raids, johnny, new jersey. go ahead. caller: hey, good morning. i support much of his doing. him what's going on here -- what's going on here, democrats

are exploiting these people. they didn't care when obama deported more illegals bush or clinton combined or when obama put them in cages. he separated 100,000 kids from their families when in office. now they care? they don't care. if you care you would shut the encouragingand stop these folks to come along. like they exploited the black race for 60 years. they just exploit, they don't care. . have one more comment to make i wonder if that aoc lady when she went down there and spoke to those people, i wonder if she even mentioned the fact that she voted no for additional funding. i bet she didn't. thank you. florida, welcome. you are on the air. go ahead.

caller: first thing i want to of the electoral college. i say that every time i call. but i remember back in the 1960's and 50's, when they use to have raids on the factories that i used to work in, mother and father both work there. that was a new jersey. yet, south jersey. there were a lot of clothing factories. now of course everything is made in asia. people thato remind it was ronald reagan who gave all of those people amnesty. and when he did that, he just opened the doors for everyone else. my, poor today. enjoy your show, thank you. arthur, calling us from memphis.

opposing the raids. memphis, tennessee, arthur, go ahead. arthur, there you go. sorry about that, you're on the air. i oppose the raids. if they raid anything, trump should be the first one data port. thank you. host: union, new jersey, opposing the raids, jeanine, tell us why. caller: is that me question mark host: that is you, you are on the air. caller: i have spent most of my life being a republican. i lived in hudson county in that time, in bayonne. we were opposed to some of the things that the republican groups were doing. now we have no one to come and support some of those families. they came in from europe. that eastern area, like poland.

the hungarian area. they were being attacked for things that they never did. they were working hard, doing all that they can, getting any job they could get their hands on. unfortunately, it came to seeing and helping them to be documented, no one really cared. they came and they started attacking my husband and i. a white one and a black one. it was -- why are they attacking these people? they are trying to get a place to live. it was the republicans, my own republican people who pushed and pushed them out of bayonne. i just saw all of that happen and they said -- why are you supporting them, you know question mark you are black, why should you support those white folks?

we supported them because they were not bothering anybody. they did their best to keep peru for over their head, keep their family, their little children together. the schools didn't even want to take them. now i no longer live in they own. i'm here in union county. in union county you have the same problem happening with a lot of hispanics. immigration prison is right there in elizabeth. there are about five immigration prisons here in new jersey. host: the main detention facilities for immigrants question mark caller: yes. and i see that and i can't believe -- i say, my god, what is happening? jeanine, thank you for that. a report this morning and "the 2500 new adult," migrant holding facilities under construction in texas. the trump administration is opening a new holding facility for adult migrants here, constructing a large structure

close to the u.s. mexico border on the former site of a controversial shelter for migrant children, officials said on friday. roger mayer, spokesman for customs and border protection firmed that the work to build the facility began in the last week and that it would be designed to hold single adults who crossed the border and had been taken into custody and would not hold family units or unaccompanied children. your thoughts on the raids today, (202) 748-8000 if you support them. if you oppose them. and for undocumented immigrants, (202) 748-8002. elton is next, calling us from salina, oklahoma. hey, there. caller: hey. i am for the raids. i have to support my government and what it does. i think they absolutely do their best. unfortunately they have to round

up people to get to those who are guilty who don't really have our best interests here in this country. so i support them. thank you. is next, right, nic also supporting the raids. sarasota, florida. i'm an independent, i blame the republicans as much as the democrats for this, but for a different reason. they don't seem to be able to take the conversation beyond responding to democrats. the fact is that these people are not immigrants. they are just migrants. immigrants to me are people who come here to assimilate, bear laws and support the constitution, embrace our culture. migrants are here for basic economic reasons. there are two things that i think president trump can do and i hope somebody big watches your show their.

25% he needs to oppose a terrified all the money they wire south of the border. to, send an executive order the dea and the federal election commission telling them to work forther, everyone running federal office needs to be drug tested in the months preceding the election every month so that we can find out if these democrats or -- our plane crazy or on something. 10 cities across the country have been targeted. chicago is one of them. this is from "the chicago without it you everything we can to push back against the trump administration ." let's hear from charlie in trenton, florida. charlie, go ahead on the oppose line. caller: i oppose all of this. i was doing to make a point that

most of the people at the border are seeking asylum and we fail to remember that when we started the wars in iraq and afghanistan , hundreds of thousands of people that we put on the run who had to seek asylum in neighboring countries over there. but as i look at the topic of guessation and raids, i it more involves the people who are already here. we already -- if we know that the raids are going to be gathering people and we know where they are at, the only thing we have to do is to do it civilly, which can be done with legislation. it's the republicans were not doing any type of legislation. there is no reason we couldn't have a law that said that if you're here and documented or here without papers, come down to the office and get the papers and we will hear your case and we will figure out what to do with you and you can get in line to become a citizen if you want and that -- that has to be done.

it's not like -- this seems to be of the final stage of things, all of these individuals have been warned at least once that they need to leave the country. these attentions and deportations are the final straw, i would guess you say. caller: all of the cases haven't heard? that brings into account what cory booker was saying, these people have been here with families, so then what are they going to be doing? we are a civilized country. whon't understand the kooks think they can rip these people apart and send the back to where they come from. they can learn had become a citizen. maybe it takes 10 years, but they are here, they must be they have families in these kinds of things, there has to be civil ways to do this.

what we are doing, it's barbaric. it's just plain hateful. host: we were showing the article from "the chicago tribune, the mayor of chicago, lori lightfoot, reiterating that the chicago police won't cooperate with agents from u.s. immigrations and customs blasting the campaign for fear mongering and making scapegoats out of the immigrants were here to live their life. they write "advocates held a news conference outside of the ice office in the south loop and they plan another rally on saturday against the upcoming raids, passing out cards saying they should know their rights, that they are staffing hotlines for legal assistance for anyone targeted. that is in chicago. georgia, heather is on the line. good morning. listen, i believe that

this situation is perpetrated by the farmers. where is white america? to have all of these foreigners and everyone else who is not a u.s. citizen to come in and do the labor that ordinary americans, poor white and black americans would not do? like pick the crops and cut the we and clean the houses. now that trump is an office you once to get rid of these people. who is he going to go for next? people with temporary visas question mark people like me who are naturalized citizens not born in the u.s., but born in the west, raised in the u.s. virgin islands but a naturalized citizen. am i going to be next? there has to be a better solution for this. trump is wrong. host: let's hear from donna,

next. new mexico. your thoughts on these raids? caller: seesmic? host: what are you -- excuse me question mark -- me? host: what are your thoughts on the raids question mark -- at the raids? a waste ofc is money. trump has been a sexual predator his entire life and has enough money to not be prosecuted for it. host: this news from politico, a added tension center foundon saturday morning, dead after four police officers arrived and opened fire, authorities said. the tacoma police department said that the officers responded at 4 a.m. to the privately run northwest detention center

according to a u.s. department of homeland detention facility that holds migrants looking for deportation proceedings. ."at is from "politico another one from breitbart.com, "liberal activists gather for protests against migrant shelter , holding celebrity endorsed vigils across the country in over 700 cities to protest migrant shelters or what left-wing lawmakers like alexandria ocasio-cortez call concentration camps on the southern borders. here is rob, grand junction, colorado. supporting the raids today. hi there, rob. i appear to be the only person who has called in with my -- having gone to immigration court with my beloved. she was a resident alien who applied for citizenship and

found that she had been accused of scratching her husband's face, two misdemeanors. someone with a green card in their first seven years triggers as deportable. was rounded up. we spent five years going to court and found the judge that determined it was only one occurrence instead of two misdemeanors. such is two weeks to leave the country, she would have had to take her daughter with her or would have had to leave her with me. these people have their day in court. they all have. it'll just round up people in ship them out. i have already had a legal process. from what you know, five years, is that typical of the length of time that these proceedings take? caller: it's a long process, sir. the fact is they had to reschedule it a number of times because of the number of cases on the docket. if you have ever seen attorneys

for the prosecution, they bring in carts full of cases. they had to find someone, they had to find an interpreter, she's vietnamese. the cost about $10,000 to be able to do this. it's a long process. host: presumably now, you are married, so she's a citizen? married.o, we're not she's my beloved but we are not married because she really never learned how to speak the language and cannot communicate well. she is not a citizen, but she is still a legal alien and if she gets one more problem, she will be deported. all right, grand junction, that is rob. chester springs, opposing the raid is dan. first of all, i'm glad that she, the last caller's friend got off and she had the means to do that for

misdemeanors for scratching someone's face. but that doesn't mean that is a major crime that would merit someone for being deported. i think that everyone agrees that people who cause major crimes and have come over who -- undocumented workers should -- i mean undocumented immigrants, should be deported. i don't think there's a question about that. the problem that has become that there is just a lack of trust in this administration. we don't know what's true, we don't know what is in true. from both sides we don't know and that's the problem. we are making decisions and giving our views but we are giving it because we are ignorant to what is actually happening. i think we actually need someone or a group of people who are non-partial at making these decisions. that's what i'm thinking.

we appreciate that. congress obviously out for the weekend, coming back on monday with response in anticipation of the raids planned today. this is the house republican saying thatscalise, we must fix our broken at ourtion asylum laws border, but democrats are wasting time advocating for open borders that would make the situation even worse. paul gosar to, representative from arizona, saying that if you came here illegally have been through due process and have a final order of removal you must he deported. patrick leahy, saying that there are still unanswered questions from diane feinstein and senator durbin which we demand to know, has the acting secretary authorized the inhumane separation of children from their parents? will these raids amount to family separation 2.0?

beach, florida. supporting the raids is paul. tell us about that, paul. >> i just want to know, if this happened in any other country like canada, china, russia. why does this happen? the democratic party wants to open the borders out of new york and california. this is all they want to do. they want to give free shelter. i couldn't get in, the room was packed with people like me. i know that many of them are illegal. experience, 1979, when i came to this country i came from jersey city. running fast, late to work, rounded up by immigration agents who asked me for my id and a set

of forgot to bring it, sir, it's in my apartment. they followed me all the way to my apartment, major i had a green card, showed it to them and they let me go. i respect the law. the law should be respected. the democratic party does not want to care about this. all they care about is making another new york and new jersey. this is what they want to do. all right, albert is next. these people are using the system. i got two comments, by the way. they are using the system. they would round up undesirables in the country and go from there. like they did in germany. it's not really about the immigrants. it's about keeping america tight . meaning that if you oppose the immigrants, you have a system that would implement. the second thing i want to say, it's weird that no one talks

tout this, you don't try catch water. you go to the source of it. full those that if someone is threatening her family, they will kill you. they will do anything protect their family. why are they coming here question mark he spent billions on a war to bring democracy to iraq? we have companies investing money in these countries like mexico. me, whyo know, excuse no one talks about that. thanks. host: albert, are you still there question mark detroit question mark outward is gone. we will let him go there. article some focus of herald" on what to participate -- anticipate. "they will target miami, chicago, baltimore, washington, denver, houston, washington, new york city, and san francisco.

also writing about what to willipate, federal agents target undocumented immigrants with deportation orders but immigrant advocacy groups have warned that any person illegally in the u.s. may get tied up in the roundups on sunday, quitting those who enter the u.s. without legal immigration status, immigration -- people who overstayed their visa, and those with certain criminal convictions. more of your calls, (202) 748-8000 if you support the raids today. (202) 748-8001 if you oppose them. and a line for undocumented immigrants, (202) 748-8002. stanley is next in middletown, pennsylvania. good morning. i support the raids, but i don't understand president trump. he talks about not giving away your surprise in war and then he announces all of this?

these people have already been through the system. the asylum was rejected. they need to go back, get in line. our country cannot afford all of this, all of these people burdening the system. we have too many people here already, american citizens not getting help from day-to-day. these people just coming across the borders? we can't. that's really what i wanted to say. host: to los angeles to hear from eddie. hi there. caller: good morning. i support the raids. for a couple of reasons. i hear a lot of people talking deportinghe lady said -- but the black people wouldn't do -- that's a lie, read about the agricultural appeal where the black farms were stolen from us in 1985. they had just finished paying for it in the obama administration, where they took

about $12 billion from it. but no, this is, this is a racist program by the democrats who still have a thing about black people. they are using the illegals to dilute the debt that they owe black people. california was named after a black woman. this is crazy. we are supposed to be a country of laws. except when it comes to black folks. post""the washington weighing in, calling it cynical raids, with mr. trump suggesting the raids will be focused on criminals as much as they can, which would be fine if it were true, but in fact homeland security officials confirmed that planned operation said the roundup would mainly target migrant families. ice is an enforcement agency and is within its rights to deport undocumented migrants who have been removed, ordered removed after receiving due process

under the law. show, themainly for washington post saying that there are tubing main audience is, one being the nativist in the political base who may have noticed that despite his huffing and puffing and very likely partly because of it, undocumented migrants are entering the country at a rate unseen in more than a decade. the other audience, they write, is perspective migrants in central america who the administration would like to deter by sending the message with a deportation shall force of that trekking across the border is likely to be costly and ultimately fruitless. georgia, susan, good morning. caller: the morning. host: go ahead to you are on the air. caller: i would like to say that i lived in japan for two years and was in the country legally, respecting the japanese people and their culture and i was warmly welcomed.

we do the same thing in georgia. we welcome people to come from all over the world into our country legally. those that respect our country -- i have also adopted a daughter from india. i'm not a racist. i love other cultures and other people. we expect people to come who love our culture and our laws and respect them. we don't want people to come in illegally. we don't want people to come in this respecting our country or a -- or our culture. host: appreciate the call. frank, supporting the raids this morning, today, good morning. frank, rhode island, go ahead with your comment. right, -- frank, you are on? caller: i'm sorry, sir. host: mutual television, go ahead with your comment. caller: i support the raids.

early late 1960's, 1970's, my family came here from europe and we didn't cut the line. and we are all -- we support this country. these people are all criminals, coming over here illegally, they are cutting the line and it is costing taxpayers money and people don't see that. it's not right, you know, do it the right way, come here the right way. i support trump all the way. all right, here is larry in albany, georgia, supporting the raids. tell us why -- opposing the raids. tell us why. , presidentppose it obama was working for all of the american people. the daca program that was set up to keep everybody, keep their families together. the democrats, i don't understand why they are not president obama.

because he done a great thing. what president trump is doing is the same thing that neo-nazis did by putting people in cages, people are dying. this is not america. this is not what america should be. as for the immigration people working, the black and white poor, they have worked together all their lives in one of the greatest working forces in the world. a mexican cannot take control of what kind of work that you and i'm tired of hearing people say that the mexicans are coming over to get jobs that the black or white poor people don't take. host: appreciate that. we will get some reporting on the raids today. a couple of notes for you, this from "the miami herald." "all is quiet as advocates prepare for women morning raids and that immigration raids early sundaye in

have not materialized after daybreak in miami and and eight other cities targeted for enforcement. also from "the baltimore sun," take a look at that, nothing has happened yet, immigrant communities on edge with no ice activity reported sunday around baltimore. we will keep our eye on other reporting around those lines, your phone calls on the raids today. if you support them, (202) 748-8000. oppose them, (202) 748-8001. henry is next up. south carolina. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my call. first of all, i want to say that this is about cheap labor in it is what i call in america a rat race to the bottom. it's just not about democrats cominghere -- immigrants here and picking apples and avocados. i'm in the construction industry. i don't care of its highway or home construction, the jobs are

just not there hardly and if they are, the wages have been driven down so far that you can't really do it. to see a law enforcement officer telling people not to open their doors? i'm an american -- i know american citizens ago to jail for child support, outstanding parking warrants. it's our most as if -- if you want to see broken families and the result of it, go to the inner-city into these black housing projects. see a broken family. what was the outcry from the democrats about all of that? all i can now is broken families, broken families. drive down any interstate around these same cities talking about not supporting the federal government? cities, youroken got broken families at every one of them. but they are black families. i don't understand the democrats . i was a democrat but more and more i'm an independent. and i do support -- because it is illegal.

that's the key word, illegal. that is henry in south carolina. on twitter, this one says -- host: carol is opposing the raids today. she's in brooksville, florida. carol, go ahead. charlottesville, virginia, opposing the raids today. hello, alice. go ahead with your comment.

find a bit thing, i of hypocrisy coming from a president who is himself at vineyard, been employing about 20 some immigrants per year illegally on the -- legally on the h2 a agricultural visa. i wonder, you know, about all of these people brought in under that. what about that record-keeping? what ensures the people coming in on this temporary visa don't stay? so the people that come in on the visa come in legally, but you are saying that others come in that are at the vineyard, the winery, you're talking about that in particular? caller: legal, correct. but i wonder about the records that make sure that they leave at the end of this temporary time for the green card. also, supposedly -- there is

that model agency, the trump modeling agency, were even his wife actually was brought in illegally, supposedly, and the other models that were brought in and did work as models but did not have a legal work visa. and i wonder about how his wife's parents, in-laws, were able to come over and become citizens quite quickly and not have to wait, you know, years like some of the other people coming over to this country. and i question -- what i wonder about is the logistics of those raids. i saw one article where said possibly when they round up these people that they are going to put them in hotels? how is that going to work? are they renting out floors of hotels the house them until they, what, put them on a plane? -- whatput them on

types of planes? military plane's? just dump them in an airport in the country? host: eye on the story throughout the morning. we will get back to it later in the program as ice begins to conduct raids across the country , we will update you as best as we can. up next we will turn to presidential politics, we will hear from the daily beast political reporter hannah trudeau. howussing campaign 2020 and the immigration debate is playing into that as well. later on, julian sanchez discusses department homeland security use of facial recognition technology in airports and border areas. all that here on washington journal bearing ♪ -- washington journal. ♪

>> this month marks the 50th anniversary of apollo 11, man's first landing on the moon and a new c-span pole shows there is still widespread interest in the event. neil armstrong and buzz aldrin both continue to enjoy raw rain -- raw name recognition. three to three quarters americans saw the event live on tv or so footage later. we spoke with florida today's space reporter about the findings.

is thatnk the headline americans still support nasa overwhelmingly and have a positive and favorable view, but returnw really think a manned mission to the moon is a high priority. >> does that surprise you, only 8% say a man moon mission should be a top priority? >> it feels like it is surprisingly low, especially on the ee over your power anniversary. especially considering months ago the company -- the president charged nasa with returning to the moon. press aboutot of this excitement and new mission and yet polls are coming out showing very little support. whenwas interesting is they phrase the question in

presence of a competition, somewhat similar to what we had in the apollo era. it was really the space race. when that is presented that way now as a space race between china or israel, the support shoots up to 49%. if that kind of thinking gets our competitive juices going and when we first had that apollo era competition spirit happening, but not right now. >> you can find the results at c-span.org. washington journal continues. host: joining us are hannah hannau, pollock -- trudeau, politics reporter with the daily beast. i want to focus on cap in 2020 for the next hour or so. snapshot lookth a

at the polling and then this is the average of polling. no surprise here where people stand. joe biden with nearly 27% approval in the average of polls . elizabeth warren 15%, bernie ,, the hairs of 15%. it drops off with pete -- come harris at 15%. climbing upr steadily in those polls. joewas a bit further behind biden or bernie sanders, she got a big boost after that debate. >> josh, what about you? >> a standout night for kamala harris.

i think what was also interesting was looking at the fundraising numbers that came where shethe debate raised about $2 million in the first 24 hours. the kind of signals problems there before the debate and a question of what might have them -- might might have those numbers look like if she didn't have that standout performance. elizabeth has excellent numbers. in too far behind joe biden the upper echelons of fundraising. host: do those levels surprise either of you? guest: i was a little surprised by the warren number with the growth she saw from the first quarter. debate aboute whether or not she should resist the private fundraisers with big donors, i thought that was a

surprise especially that she outraised bernie. i think for me like josh mentioned, the biggest surprise was that one million or so more than bernie sanders. we haven't seen him really capitalize as grassroots donations and go have a little bit more than that and i think her ability to raise more than shows she isuarter gaining momentum. host: we saw congressman eric swalwell drop out of the race. debate, who has to up their game for this at -- in this next debate to avoid dropping out? mentioned, there are

about five people consistently polling anywhere near double digits and then it kind of trails off from there. anyone you didn't mention in your opening remarks will want to have a standout moment. i think it will be interesting ,hat happens with beto o'rourke whose mania seems to fade a bit. he might be looking for a good moment. to pickastro might want up some momentum he is gained. host: on beto o'rourke, the washington post this morning, they are focusing on texas alone and texas a legion -- allegiance to o'rourke is vanishing. guest: i think that is right. he wasn't particularly memorable in the first debate and we also haven't seen him and his fundraising numbers, we are not sure where he stands on that

front and i think i've spoken to some people in the campaign since the debate happened and they are very aware he needs to hit it out of the ballpark to really keep where he was. >> we spent the first hour raidsg about the ice happening. how big of an issue do you think immigration will continue to be for democratic presence of candidates? >> if they are wise they will make it a top speaking point issue because the trump campaign certainly is. we did a story a couple weeks ago about how the trump campaign is outspending democrats across the board on things like facebook, specifically on the immigration issue. what we found is he has capitalized on that talking point of his campaign and the rit largec candidates w are not doing the same.

there would wise to pick up momentum with the ice raids and with their platform of inclusivity and being more focused on that. to run again in terms of immigration, the president does have support in his base on his view on immigration. >> what will be interesting is how long the democrats will think they can do a values based contrast with the president about family separation, the cells, whetherg they can continue to just make a values-based narrative or put forward some concrete solutions of their own. secretary castro chided his rivals for not having comrades of plans to address those issues. i think democratic voters are ok with hearing yes i don't like the cages, i don't like the sub

durations -- separations. will there be more hunger for concrete proposals? host: we welcome your phone calls. 202-748-8000 free democrats, 202-748-8001 independence. -- for republicans. for independences -- independents and others, 202-748-8002. which candidate do you think has the most comprehensive platform to date? guest: a look -- elizabeth warren. a slogan she's leaned into, dapper -- definitely separating herself from some of her rivals. i think there is the political angle but i think she actually enjoyed the policy aspect, she has clearly chosen to run -- she has also laid down markers for the rest of the deal on where they stand, where they

stand on funding for historically black colleges and universities and other minority institutions. early she is carved out that lane. >> it appears to be resonating based on her polling and fundraising. in terms of her measured -- wast: another thing she did build on the momentum and platform bernie popularized. she made it more fine tuned. she has, with a slew of wrong policies, but she has also -- is also campaigning on some of the things he introduced to the public sphere last time. that works to her advantage. we are seeing some bernie voters break off to her because they said we likedhave him a lot last time but we like that warren has a strong comprehensive plan where he has

more broad talking points. host: is he treading water or gaining? guest: i think he is doing strong. still doing quite strong in new hampshire. challenge is holding onto that core base. much like trump, he has a strong amount of supporters that i haven't seen him be able to reach new voters so far and i think that is the biggest challenge and that's were someone like warren comes in. host: want to get back to the , i wantsue this morning to play this and see what you have to think. themsignificant number of are private institutions that profit off the incarceration of others and so many of the people there are the most vulnerable people not just from our country, but the planet seeking asylum ending up in these facilities. i put out a plan to radically

number,e a significant i would say much more than 75% of these. i'm not a person stands back and criticizes. i've been to the private immigration detention facilities. me, they are abjectly a violation of the very fundamental value of our nation. this is a president who has been inling us a lie that somehow order to be safe we need to separate children from families. somehow to be safe we need to privatize prisons and incarcerate people. that is a lie. we could have the system the protect our borders, but also affirms our values and as you said, you brought in the economic reality. we did cover senator booker yesterday in new hampshire.

he talked about his plan he has introduced. he did the i've been down here, i have a plan to address these. they value-based contract -- contrast. what will be interesting is how much longer, the plane he rolled out is pretty comprehensive. he wants to virtually eliminate immigration detention as a concept. it is unclear exactly how they andd get that to congress that's why you see cory booker and others. hanna, let me ask you about the setting. in new hampshire in someone's backyard. months away from the primary. those sorts of events seem to really resonate. guest: they do. retail politics is huge there. say is corywill

booker's not doing so well in the polls across the board. but he really does well in small group settings. what i found talking to people there is his name comes up as one of the people in the top three or four candidates at the top of their list to vote for now. does it signal they will vote for him? not necessarily. it does indicate there is excitement for his campaign style, he picked up a slew of local endorsements, so he does well in these retail politics settings. hanna and josh, we welcome your calls and comments about the campaign and more. 202-748-8000 free democrats. republic -- four democrats. -- for democrats.

202-748-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8002 for independents. democrat and trump i believe they are all running for second place. i think it will be hard to be trump this time. them well but i think it will be hard to beat trump. host: thank you. guest: i think the callers absolute right. i think a lot of democrats acknowledge that shouldn't take anything for granted this time around and it is going to be a hard fight. they are sitting on more than $100 million already, that is more than barack obama had at this point in his 2012 reelection effort. it will be a tough fight. democrats will have to figure out who the best person is you take him on. host: this is richard in california. think the sooner the

field weeds out, the better for democrats. i think the person of the best chance is biden. he really helped obama negotiate all kinds of things with the congress and senate and with foreign leaders, which none of those people running behind -- executiveden have experience. just as soon as they whittle down the field -- also the country and democrats want someone solid to bring some dignity and solidity back to the white house. that is no understatement. but they can't underestimate the stupidity of the trump voters. and make any huge mistakes.

they really have to get out and campaign and get the points all the way down the line. it should be easy, but it's not going to be because trump is a superior narcissist conman who has people believing he actually cares about them. voter asked the trump what he's done for you, i don't think they can name one thing that's improve their lives. host: joe biden made what he feels is a major policy just foreign policy addressing new york, do you think that will be his calling card when the not -- to win the nomination? guest: i'm not sure foreign policy will, i know that's top-of-the-line for older voters. i think looking at foreign policy if you are an older voter , a lot of world events and global affairs interactions so i think it's natural to look to

someone like joe biden for that policy area. the electability issue the caller mentioned, i think it is something i hear a lot from people. they think he is the best to be trump. i was just in south carolina, he is widely popular there for a variety of reasons. they feel he is well-equipped to take on trump. i think he has a lot going for him and he is the current front-runner in all the national , i think he is strong. host: josh, you said he continues to be the target of many of present trump's tweets. -- president trump's tweets. the theory that once trump says something against you, be the rest of the field does not echo that. maybe the field says we are to

defend our own against trump. maybe that's why joe biden is going down the line. >> this is ruth on the line. >> good morning. obama built those cages that are the border. , he sentted families troops to the border, he said there is a crises of the border another fence. this is not put out by cnn or , he deportedody twice as many illegals as trump we are a is because

nation, a nation has to have borders and we need to those borders intact. we need to be doing the right being these people deported today are the people that go into court that have been turned down by the united states and told they have to leave. host: back to the original point, are either of you surprised former president obama continues to be a campaign issue if you will and a winning one it appears are president trump? >> no. he is still probably the most popular democrat in the country. widely beloved and his party. is goingis endorsement

and ifidely sought after he is planning to do so it won't be until late in the process. what's interesting about obama and his legacy is how yes he is very popular within the party, but the candidates are running to is ideologically left on a range of issues from climate to health care to even some of his border policies and deportation policies. the debate over his legacy and whether or not it was to moderate could be playing out to the primary. >> just to go back to biden, we see him every chance he gets using obama's name on the campaign trail because he know that excites people and he is eager to bring up a range of initiatives he worked on our policies he helped obama craft when he was vp. he usually gets applause when he brings that out. host: you wrote an article on

endorsements. the aoc endorsement. pelositicism of nancy muddied the waters for seeking her doorstep. >> that was looking at previously bernie sanders and elizabeth warren really seeking out alexandria ocasio-cortez endorsement. arena right in the policy where they fit. she was also inspired by bernie sanders campaign. danceave had a delicate of who could potentially get the endorsement, they have worked on legislation together, she had lunch with elizabeth warren privately. this dance going on where they are both looking after her and her endorsement strongly but we are seeing she

made comments about nancy pelosi criticizing her that some of these 2020 democrats are unsure about how to address that and nobody necessarily wants to go up against the speaker of the house who is a popular leader. they also want to seek out her endorsement still so i think we are seeing a little bit of hesitation on how to respond to that. host: independent line. caller: hello? host: you are on the air. notice whenever they talk about the kids and all that --ff, do you think we could solve a lot of this we can get the supreme court to vote on the 14th amendment. thatren't we enforcing birthright?

we will let you go there. a little off topic. shores, michigan, go ahead. caller: i would like to say we haven't been able since the election to allow this president to work. that's all i hear on the news is the negative side and he is being accused of our problem with the immigrant families and whatnot, yet not a people during the eight years of obama. obama started the cages, obama started all of this. trump fell into this yet i hear no news. that's all i hear are these junior congressman, this cortez person talking about separation and kids being kept in cages -- fergus as a -- anticipate the planks

of that platform of the accomplishments the trump administration can tout present trump in 2020? for us as reporters and voters trying to figure out what might actually be an accomplishment and what might be , withration on his part this president and by new more difficult. it's undeniable the economy continues to grow, it was growing under the obama administration and present trump has a good economy at his back. the ongoing question is what happens if the economy can't go on this historic string of growth we've seen for the last eight years or so. i think the economy will definitely be one. winning on the global stage with china will be another number renegotiating nafta, measuring the actual benefits of those for

middle-class americans. ont: we saw the headline friday, the wall street journal nbc poll enters the democratic primary voters. andbiden, elizabeth warren kamala harris. we want to remind viewers and listeners we will be covering kamala harris in new hampshire coming up today at 1:15 eastern here on c-span. bob is next on the and appended line. go ahead. good morning. as far as each of these democratic candidates for the , they needination

pick one or two things that's important whether it's the orironment or health care second amendment rights or andtion rights or whatever -- none of those things is nearly as important as the number one thing, we need a president with the maturity and experience to be able to stand up to vladimir , you don't want to send a rookie against somebody like that, weuse if we lose are all dead and none of the other things will matter.

all the other initiatives can wait until somebody is elected from one party or the other and address those things later on. right now we should only be focused on who is next -- fit to stand up to the existential russia andm china, north korea. guest: i think that's a good question. i don't know that there is a lot on theter about russia campaign trail. that is some of the candidates have gone out of their way to say we talk about this a lot in washington and we are waiting eagerly for the mueller report to come out but we have yet to hear a voter at a town hall ask about it, so i'm not sure the russia investigation broadly as part of the campaign discourse

between voters in the candidate, but that being said, at the same time, they are also not on the in electionvesting security or insecurity as a topic. amy klobuchar has made a pet issue but she is not really a top-tier candidate. you don't hear joe biden or bernie sanders talking about needing to protect the election system. his bigdate jay inslee, campaign issue has been climate change. he talked about yesterday. here is he had to say. -- look i as a party think we've been too timid on this. we need to stand up against the fossil fuel industry, we need to take away their $20 billion largess of subsidies. we need to do something real. i'm serious about this, we

cannot defeat the climate crisis by sending hallmark cards to the future. we need to face down the fossil fuel ceos and say your days are over and i'm proud to tell you on the candidate and i'm the only candidate to say this clearly, defeating the climate crisis has to be the number one priority in the united states of america. i believe that wholeheartedly. i believe that because if it is not job one, it won't get done. i'm the candidate that says we have to move on this. time is wasting. this is our last chance. i'm the candidate, the only candidate that says this. we have to get off coal in this country, that is the only route to survival. jay inslee talking about climate change. his number one issue based on the polling, doesn't appear to be breaking through. no, but i will say have

seen him with his supporters and it is a very laurel -- a very loyal bunch very passionate out -- about what he was speaking on. they want his conversation, that counts towards these debate thresholds. -- he was a lot of people second or third or even fourth candidate of choice where they like the climate message. it could be interesting how long that is sustainable if he can get the donor -- host: we haven't talked about that. the debates of the end of this month, what is the threshold? guest: the same as the first in miami where you have to have six 5000 donors and 1% in the polls.

and then it will be raised for the september debates in houston and there they have to hit 130,000 donors and 2% in national polls. >> based on what we've seen, any idea of what that number, the number of candidates on the willoughbyate stage, 15 -- will it be 15 on stage? think it will probably be around half. getting 2% even if you can have a really stand out fundraising quarter, getting the 2% will be the challenge. democrats line in georgia. good morning. caller: good morning. called, first of all i would say elizabeth warren is most prepared with policy. preparedrris is most

to fight. pete buttigieg i also like. is why isalling about no one pointing out we have asked columbia to take in 2 million venezuelans as refugees, inhave asked jordan to take half of their population and syrians as refugees. we have asked turkey to take in a quarter of their population as refugees and we expect them to take in refugees, but we are a country of 300 million people and we can't take in refugees from central america? what is wrong with us? think about this. crazy definition

of what refugees are that we are trying to put forward. host: any thoughts? guest: that goes back to the foreign policy question from earlier on. we don't hear candidates necessarily talking about the middle east the way we did, i heard him say jordan and turkey. i think that is an interesting point. we are focusing more on the latin american immigration population at this point. i think it will be interesting to see if anybody mentions what he just brought up because clearly in the election with obama there was much more of a focus on the middle east, now it is more russia and china and the immigration populations from latin america. host: president trump tweeting this morning his focus is on democrats often. doing so this morning as well.

so interesting to see democratic congress women, the -- if they even had a functioning government at all now loudly and viciously telling the people of the united states the greatest and most important powerful nation on earth how our government is to be run. why don't they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came and then come back and show us how it's done. these places need your help badly. i'm sure nancy pelosi would be very happy to quickly work out free travel arrangements. the president successfully in many cases continuing to use the democrats as a target. guest: and also they are completely -- and also taking advantage of internal disagreement between four freshman democratic congress women women of color who had

disagreements with the aboutship in the caucus immigration policy. these will make for an interesting down the hill tomorrow. when reporters will be swarming aoc and pelosi to ask about trump taking advantage of this internal division. host: one candidate is senator kirsten gillibrand because she is on the front page, america's ignoring kirsten gillibrand, is it her fault or hours? where did she stand in the race? >> she has been interesting candidate to watch. she is a senator from new york, that should speak a lot on a national stage but it doesn't. she struggled to meet the threshold for the first debate, so i think she is really -- has really struggled to catch on for whatever reason.

i hear a lot of the twitter chat or online is about her calling for al franken to resign and i also hear that on the trail occasionally. what i also see especially back to new hampshire is she does really well in the small settings, particularly with women, she prioritized being the woman candidate. it hasn't paid off because there are three other prominent female members running in addition to her. she faces a crossroads here with getting traction. host: let's hear from joe in missouri on the republican line. one reason i would never vote for a democrat is i'm tired of having transgender crap pushed down my throat. i don't give a dam about climate change. biden is note

going to be trump. kamala harris is trying to convince us she is black and she is not. think kamala't harris is black? we are going to let you go. bonnita springs, florida, independent line. caller: thanks for taking my call. i've always been an independent, i voted for both tickets pending on the issues and the candidates and the way they reflect my beliefs. the reason i voted for president trump this last time, by the way i voted for president obama the first time he ran and was extremely disappointed by the time he left office. of fillingin light an airplane with billions of dollars in cash to send to iran. i digress.

my main point is the reason i voted for donald trump is because he wasn't bought off, the system of politics in this country is getting out of control corruption. it the wealthy on both parties and most of the candidates, everybody knows it. viewhe globalists point of has taken over because multinational corporations don't have any loyalty to united states. people have got to understand this. , youook at citizens united look at hillary clinton talking about the north american union. sorry, i want to be the united states of america. host: would you vote for him in 2020? caller: i'm looking at the democratic candidates. i sent $10 to bernie sanders believe it or not.

when he started talking about letting convicted felons in jail like murderers and rapists vote, i was floored. they have lost their minds and the democratic party and i am absolutely against illegal immigration -- host: all right, that is tina in florida. guest: that was a nice cross-section of a bunch of issues that are top of mind for a lot of people, the first thing i heard was the corruption and not being bought and sold. so it makes sense she donated to bernie sanders at one point. he shared some of the support with people who ultimately end up voting for trump who voted for sanders in the primary. idea of corporate interests and money in politics is something the democratic pol -- party has increasingly gone away

from in the 2020 election. elizabeth warren specifically saying she won't attend big-ticket fundraisers. almost every other candidate saying i'm going to rely heavily on small donor support, joe biden and pete buttigieg being notable exception still taking the article -- larger donations. she didn't support obama the second time around and voted for president trump, how do democrats -- democratic candidates make inroads on voters like tina? guest: i think they'll have different ideas for how to do that. i think joe biden thinks he's the best person to go back to the white working-class and talk to those obama voters who flipped to trump, talk to them about he has met with people he disagrees with, suggesting he

would move on from an identity politics way of talking and try to talk about jobs in kitchen table issues. that type of stuff. what was really interesting to me about that call was when she was talking about the iran, piles of cash, this goes back to what you were saying about how we aren't talking about the middle east and the obama administration was kind of caught up in the middle east and he wants to get into asia so bad and now that's what we are talking about. i thought we were in a time warp when she mentioned iran. host: linda on our democrats line in maryland. my comment will be little different. , the pricerecession

of graduate schools went up significantly, $5,000 in one year. the price it was so high. the government loans were up and there were no jobs during the recession. debt talked about student , but the't hear anyone --dent at this is where it should be the concern because of not paying on and theause of no jobs highest interest rate and highest price. host: student debt certainly several candidates have put

forth plans on that. guest: student debt has been thrust into this election discourse in terms of policy platforms. bernie sanders campaigned on an 2016, it didn't get as much attention as his health care platform but we've seen elizabeth warren come out with a detailed plan, promising to a must eliminate student debt for the majority of people who have it. different of candidate spectrum we see someone like pete buttigieg who in terms of the free college for all platform says i'm not -- i don't support giving free college to the kids of billionaires or millionaires. there's a wide range of candidate stances on student free college and student debt. host: who is talking about health care on the campaign trail? guest: i think about all of them.

bernie sanders and medicare all, he is right when he says it was viewed skeptical in the mainstream of the party. the kind of position themselves differently. cory booker said i'm from medicare for anyone who wants it. mayor p kind of started saying that too. people thought they had a little thoughthe bernie people they had a little bit of an edge on warren because she had equivocated a little bit about whether she was for just lowering the age and then during that debate she was one of the people who put her hand up to say she supported medicare for all. an update on the story we've been following.

the huffington post is reporting ice rates have begun in new york. mayor de blasio says agents did not succeed in rounding up residential targeted neighborhoods. thepress corps is saying mayor is getting reports a nationwide crackdown on immigration -- immigrants facing deportation is underway in his city. hannaspeak with josh and , here next from judy in indianapolis on our democrats line. >> good morning. i was thinking about the lady who called in from florida who voted democrat and then voted for trump because she said there was so much corruption in politics. persondy is a typical that shows how confused people are with all the lies donald trump has been telling. donald trump told lies to get

into the white house, he said he wasn't going to do anything to hurt people with their social security, their medicare and different things and he came in and did the opposite. he tells lies every day. this lady is talking about corruption in politics. donald trump is corrupt, his cabinet is corrupt and you've got people running for the democrats who are not taking money from big donors, who are taking money from the american donations and that shows you these people are not corrupt and then these republicans are going to vote for this corrupt man again. i don't quite understand how donald trump was able to get that. he is really shading people. morningety did this

telling those young women they need to go back where they came from is just ridiculous. they are americans, they got elected because they were americans. if they weren't american citizens they couldn't have been elected. this man is nothing but a hatemonger, he is a liar, he has committed all types of crimes allegedly. corruptione issue of , alleged corruption, will that have any traction as a campaign issue? guest: the polling through the midterms found political corruption, money and politics and reducing it was the second most thing people were enthusiastic about behind the economy, a lot of moderate democrats ran on that type of message. housel the splits in the -- house democratic caucus.

election security on money in politics, they reached their first bill they got out of the house, every democrat voted for it. host: money in politics seems to cut both ways successfully used by the president and his first campaign, draining the swamp and continues to be a criticism of the deep state by republicans against the democrats. guest: i think he will continue to use it in 2020. we see him start to go out on the trail more and more, he is saying he successfully drained the swamp. never mind that some of the members in his cabinet are former lobbyists, but he and many people's eyes has done what he said he was going to do. i think that will be pretty effective. ,aving the massive cash on hand

he has that money advantage right now. >> let's hear from the independent line from charlotte, north carolina. my thing i wanted to say first of all i believe probably donald trump will be reelected as president again and as far as is biden, the thing with him he is an empty suit and i believe the democrat party does best when he doesn't really talk very much because when he does, he puts his foot in his mouth. the last thing i wanted to say and i am thrilled, finally racism has come home to roost in the party that created it. it is about time and what is going on with aoc and nancy and kamala and joe is showing you

where all this began to begin with. thank you so much for taking my call. host: focusing on her comments about the joe biden and his famous gaffes in the past. he hasn't had that so much on the campaign trail. guest: he hasn't had his gaffes but he did have a poor debate performance where he didn't quite know how to respond to the issue of race on busing, which kamala harris landed a major critique of him on on the stage and he started to give a little bit of a defense and then ended by saying my time is up. maybe he was trying to prevent himself from making a major gaffe. ashaven't seen him campaign actively as others are. he waited until later in the race to get in because he didn't that kind of

exposure early on that summa like eric swalwell or others who are much less lower tier needed to have in order to get her name out there. i think we see maybe fewer gaffes but if you are interfacing with regular voters. host: what you hear from that collar? r.est: -- calle guest: i think think democrats are having now about they want to be trump, so the number one -- when i ask voters what's the number one issue, this a beating trump. -- they say beating trump. sayhear a lot of voters they think joke impeach trump and i think what she was talking about landing that blow on the debate stage it was the first

real notch, you might look back at this moment in the primary and say it was the first notch in that electability aura around him. the more democrats cannot get that, that's his number one argument right now, the more democrats can chip away at that, the better chance they think they will have it overtaking him as the front runner. host: we talked about a little bit about new hampshire, but i just want to show this des moines register interactive piece. there may be 2500 more presidential events in iowa with candidate visits show more public events so far than in the three -- past three caucus sidles cycles. there are a lot of candidates out there. which candidate is focusing on iowa as opposed to new hampshire or south carolina? guest: first one that comes to

mind is elizabeth warren. she has made iowa a huge part of her strategy. in addition to new hampshire. she has an advantage. in iowa specifically i remember in 2018 when candidates had not yet announced, it was focused on the midterms. she was already testing the waters in iowa a little bit and people were saying we aren't doing anything in iowa, we are focused on the midterms, but i think that sort of early preparation helped her make initial contact on the ground and i spoke to people in iowa in the midterms, they said it is already brewing in excitement for elizabeth warren. hanna pointed out, iowa requires feet on the ground, retail politics. think her and cory

booker have the largest ground presence. announced in office. well sayingr as this is my backyard. in addition to those high-profile candidates, there are a lot of people like steve bullock or congressman john delaney, lower tier candidates going all in on iowa. likely they would stay on until the caucuses regardless. guest: i think a lot of them would like to have they have the money. that's what will let them know if they can stay in or not. richard -- richard on the republican line. caller: i'm joe biden asking

myself i'm a racist, why does barack obama choose me as his running mate for eight years? a couple back and now years later i'm no good, i'm a racist, it's because you're a white man. he does not realize that. the democrat -- democrat party is pushing for a black person to run for president against donald trump and i'm going to say this. i will no longer vote democrat. thank you. host: response. guest: ok. interesting call. one thing i will say is i think that's why joe biden took that approach is he probably felt he was being accused of racism and i think biden has said well barack chose me. i think the nuance there is it's not about being a racist, it's

just about this policy is supported in the 70's and 80's, but you can grow and mature and recognize you are a hardliner in a way that is no longer in the mainstream of democratic thought. that's completely different than calling him a racist. i think maybe he is learning that, he apologized in south carolina last weekend, it it took a long time but he did apologize. there's a difference between saying i think you are a racist in i think your policies on race in the 70's are out of the mainstream now. host: one more call. leonard on our independent line. caller: good morning. i'm gonna say some things. i've watched both democrat debates and afterwards i scratched my head. i have no idea who i might vote for. until 2017.crat up

president trump is the one that persuaded me to change parties because if you look at what happened in 2015 and 2016 it seems that the democratic party was out of the loop. on the basis of health care, one thing i found interesting on the last debate was when they were asked to believe these immigrants coming across the border should have health care. was a legal phase , he crossed the border in 1914 happily. he taught himself how to read and write by listening to the radio and reading the newspaper. he made sure we spoke english. that being said, it will sound hypocritical, but let's worry about health care for american citizens first and then start trying to cure the ales of the world. hanna trudeau.

guest: i think that was summing to got almost unanimous support. yes, that is something that got i think unanimous support. the democratic candidates, maybe they have seen some polling that it is something to get behind, or maybe they have talked to enough voters on the ground, so i think that appears to be kind of a nonissue among their platform. i do not see too much gradient from where they stand on that. i think it would be a pretty drastic shift if somebody in the next debate or on the stone somewhere said i did not mean that, i take that back, because it seems to be something everybody wanted. guest: there are some democrats who just make a purely economic argument to do so. some will say for humane,

humanitarian reasons, they should get covers or should be provided for. if they say something like our costs will go up if we are subsidizing their -- if they come in just uninsured through an e.r. and cannot pay their tab. host: do you think the mayor's argument may have helped him on the campaign trail? ofst: i honestly think a lot voters that i talked to this season are surprised to know that this bright guy from a small town in indiana -- i think people are just impressed with the way he speaks, the way he talks, the way he can back into an issue. he is a very good orator. i am not sure i've heard a voter mentioned his experience. yes, he really ran in south

bend, so great, now i think he should be president. [laughter] guest: but i do think people are taken aback, he is a new face, and they love the way he speaks. guest: it is a broad feeling. host: hanna trudo, the daily beast, josh jamerson, national political reporter for the "wall street journal," thank you for being here. guest: thank you. host: here next on the "washington journal," we will be speaking with julian sanchez of the cato institute about facial recognition technology and border areas. later, we will keep you on top idsthe i.c.e. rates ara happening across the country as "washington journal" continues. ♪

formerght on lgbt "q&a," new york police deputy inspector -- pegues talks about his book "once a cop." ey: it is ironic that i have a picture of me in my book, "once a cop," in elementary school, and i am holding my feet , i had cardboard in my shoes, so that my socks would not get wet. i got involved in the streets, and my friends were selling drugs. it was the thing to do. >> tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's "q&a."

>> in 1979, c-span bringing you more content and beyond. , c-spanision and online is your unfiltered view of government, so you can make up your own mind. brought you as a public service by your cable or satellite provider. >> "washington journal" mugs are available as c-span's new online store. g, checkc-spanstore.or out the "washington journal" mugs, and see all of the c-span products. "washington journal" continues. ist: joining us this segment julian sanchez, a senior fellow with the cato institute in washington. we are going to talk about facial recognition

technology. it is used at airports and elsewhere. julian, explain what biometric facial technology is. how does it work? guest: think of it as a way of automating what we do all the a facehich is recognized by checking it against a database of faces. traditionally, face recognition operates five measuring particular fixed differences, the corners of your lips, your ears, and using those relatively constant small number of measurements to compare against a database of photos that have been taken for that purpose. the traditional method, increasingly, narrow neural n are developing different methods that do not rely necessarily on a fixed number of predefined measurement spots, but they are evolving their own process for generating

matches, essentially you train the system on photos until it returns accurate results. host: how rapidly are these systems developing? guest: you know, the disturbing thing is we do not know, , atuse, as we are learning least the federal use, state database is much more extensive than we previously recognized. and one of the reasons it is hard to keep track of what is happening is because this is a technology that uses existing infrastructure. there are cameras already in a lot of places. there are databases of photographs held in a lot of places, the department of motor vehicles, and so it is not like the government needs to go out and take samples of everyone's dna, you can use existing infrastructure and add a layer on top of that without necessarily the public

recognizing what is going on. host: in your experience, is it more pervasively used in public spaces or private spaces? we are particularly talking airports, other public spaces, border areas. is it more used in restaurants, malls, city streets by police agencies and such? guest: it is hard to say. in terms of what we know publicly, probably public spaces like that are the most common vector, but there are concerns use offor example, the police body cameras, other body networks to begin deploying facial recognition. host: we have you on an part in response to an article that the "washington post" published last week, saying the fbi and i.c.e. saying state licenses or a gold mine for facial recognition services. drew hollowell wrote --

host: does the fbi have access on all of the state's databases? guest: they have access to dmv records, but what we are learning from these disclosures is that the process is pretty uneven. in some cases, you have records the end turned over -- being turned over in response to a subpoena. in many cases, you have an investigator emailing and saying "we are interested in," and sending a photo. that seems like a dangerous mechanism for allowing someone access. host: and what is the cato institute's interest in this issue? guest: we are generally issued in protecting civil liberties against government overreach.

surveillancecy and and a wide array of applications. i focus on electronic surveillance, the surveillance act, and this is one aspect of the outcome of the mechanism that is increasingly used by our investigators by a range of services. part of that is things like automating the validation of someone at a border crossing. someone has a passport, we use face recognition to check that the person representing the passport masses the file you passport.hat assigned criminal suspects assigned to identify serious crimes, immigration violations. most disturbingly, we have learned over a range of cases where facial recognition have been used to it if i people of

-- to identify people at public protests, most recently at the protest of the pol deathof freddie gray. have heard that authorities, we have recently found that they have access to such a wide range of data from one of the concerns is you have thousands of municipalities and local police departments who may be exploring new ways to use this technology, and ways that the public is unaware of, and ways that the technology can be used without your knowledge, that you can be in a crowd, and be scanned with a camera, have the image compared with a database, and have no one the wiser. host: we're talking about facial recognition technology. our guess is julian sanchez. we welcome your calls and comments. (202) 748-8000 for democrats.

republicans, (202) 748-8001. and for independents and others, (202) 748-8002. thatsion the 21 states share their driver's license information with the fbi. a look at that chart from the sharing on some level driver's identification, mug shot information, and of the states where facial recognition technology is prohibited, there are really seven of them, i believe -- alaska, washington state, oregon, montana, missouri, oklahoma, and louisiana. as this become a big issue in states, whether to share this data? guest: we have seen an upsurge in concern about that. san francisco past what may be the strictest ordinance in the essentially prohibiting governmental use of facial recognition technology.

massachusetts is considering similar legislation. so, yeah, we are seeing a bubbling up of concern about this. we do not necessarily want to prohibit all facial recognition for every purpose, but the concern is that the way that the technology can be used is changing so rapidly in ways that are not visible to the public. essentially, there is an increasing sense of, a, we had better slowdown. we do not want to create an infrastructure for basic social monitoring and then discover it is already in place before we have had a chance to publicly deliberate about it. host: do you keep an eye on other countries? i am thinking of particular china. guest: sure. dystopianneed the science-fiction anymore about surveillance and control. we can just look at china, which has developed a pretty extensive system, almost like an episode of "black mirror," of social credit scores, including online

activity is being pervasiv rize pervasively tracks, how good of a citizen they are. host: what do they do with those stores? guest: a range that they can supervise benefits or advantages to people, how likely you are to have a government job, how likely you are to be hassled by the authorities as someone who is suspicious or antisocial. host: you mentioned the congressional hearing of this past week. this is the hearing on thehill.com. trump as offics defend the use of facial recognition technology. one of the witnesses, here he is talking about the just vision used of facial recognition technology. software. [video clip] >> cbp has developed a plan

beyond that for foreign nationals. we have the entire travel spectrum. for it is solution airports, airlines, and cruise lines. why? because we do not have a transportation system allows the easy departures. previous efforts fail because stovepipeo have a process. as we know, those efforts were cost prohibitive, and there was significant opposition from the airlines and travel industry. has a mandatory facial recognition process that goes on today when a traveler presents a passport to establish their identity. lookingear, cbp is only at previous photos provided to the u.s. government for international travel. this is not a surveillance program.

airlines and others are already required to write a statute of international interior is. -- international itineraries. these photos are primarily from passports, visas, and international arrivals. a photo was quickly taken against a search for mother by validating the biographic data that has already been vetted by national security and law enforcement concerns. we do not run the photo taken at the airport seaport against any other data or sources of information that masses the pre-staged gallery photo. if a traveler matches the passport, then a new photo taken is deleted. there is no reason for us to keep it. u.s. citizens are not part of the biometric entry/exit transit system. host: john wagner saying fairly emphatically this is not a surveillance program. guest: what he is talking about, that may be a fair assessment,

but he is describing essentially ,he use of existing databases for example, photos of u.s. passport holders to compare with summarizing presented passport to ensure kind of the backup against the human agents sort of check of a passport. yes, the person carrying the passport matches the photo of what we expect someone to look like. that is maybe one of the least controversial functions of the use of facial recognition or biometric technology. the concern for members of congress is it was effectively integrated with a program, the exiting travel system, which had been designed foreigned strictly on nationals, and it is not exactly what they are doing in this instance is illegal but rather thatthere is a concern congress understood, they were authorizeing a program that

would be used on noncitizens, and they may have found a local way to do it, but this was without congress taking any further action to authorize this, the u.s. person sort of validation function was bundled in using the same technology, even though they are not storing the photos. i think this is illustrative of the concerns people have about the rapid development, where -- is this particular application of facial recognition technology a problem? maybe not. should we be concerned that agencies are, essentially, don't seem to think they need additional authorization to experiment with the use of the technology before there has been a chance to debate and deliberate about those uses? host: we are talking about facial recognition technology. julian sanchez our guest. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. republicans, (202) 748-8001. and for all others, (202) 748-8002. we hear first from clyde in

oklahoma. caller: yeah. good morning. host: you are on the air. go ahead. caller: it is kind of like them airplanes, you know, they are trying to build software to keep them from flow falling out of the friggin' sky, get out? they are still violating people's rights. it is like we are stepping backwards in time where hillary is, holding people hostage down there at the border, violating people's constitutional rights seems to be the norm nowadays. jenin ands go to g& forcent springs, kentucky julian sanchez. you, juliank sanchez. i appreciate the cato institute, and thank you c-span, for this.

facial recognition is being done throughout the entire world. i have researched the medical metadata research centers in utah, compiling information on the u.s. citizens, which is a violation of our constitutional rights. also, there have been studies done about facial recognition, it is not validated.it is not reliable . if you can talk about -- several members of congress have matched them up with people in prison, and i think there were about 25 and validated issues. that is a big issue. another concern i have is some of this is being done in the states feared ohio is one. out here in kentucky, we fought so we realize you have a choice between the real i.d., which they basically mislabeled, or you can have a regular driver's license. what i have told people to do is

to get a regular driver's license and then get a passport. i do believe that is a violation of the fourth amendment, due it is a violation of the first amendment, which is freedom to travel, and i think big brother is alive and well, and so it is going to come to the point where it is going to show me your papers. another thing i would like to address is using the real i.d. that have been given to you on your driver's license, there should be a gold star on your driver's license. behind that gold star is a chip, which is collecting the metadata upon you, which can be used by your health care and other issues by the federal government. host: janine, we will let you go. you put a lot on the table. guest: the data collection i think is a reference to the nfa's large datacenter there, not directly connected to the conversation we are talking about here she did reference a study that i think the aclu did

using, i believe it was amazon's facial recognition technology. they ran photographic members of congress against several databases and found 28 matches. the software identified 28 members of congress of potential matches with criminal suspects. one interesting thing to note is i think a little under half of those 28 false matches, you can make the obvious jokes, none of the criminal matches were actually supposed to be the member of congress, but nearly half of the matches were people of color, which is not, unfortunately, half of congress, which highlights one of the issues that folks have raised about witches, for a variety of reasons, most facial recognition systems are less accurate at identifying women and men, younger people than older people, and so to the extent ineradicable an

part of the system -- host: has anybody got into the ? why that ist happening . guest: you have a lot of white male engineers training, so it tends to get better at recognizing people who match that. part of the reason is they are harder to optical, so light skin areus dark skin, there optical reasons. cameras are better at getting details off of lighter faces. part of the problem is we also have a system of disproportionate policing, racially, in this country, so the extent databases are drawing on existing police photos and arrest photos, if you are disproportionately arresting members of a certain demographic

group, you will have searches that are run against that group more often. false matches, because that is a bigger part of the data pool. whatever the rationale, of course, for that, the line is the extent that errors are an a ineradicable part of any investigative tool, that will tend to create disproportionate burdens on people who are already getting the short end of law enforcement. host: let's go to fort collins, colorado, and hear from ed, republican line. fort collins. hi, ed. you are on the air. caller: hi. thanks for c-span. back in 1984, a book was written -- or before 1984, a book was written about 1984, it is like here we are. jobs startand steve

of the computer revolution in the 1990's, it was great and, did not know how no to game the system. now it has gone stupid viral, and we do not have privacy anymore, it is a terrible thing. it has gone backwards. i don't know. maybe when there is a war and they take out the satellites, people will find out, whoa! host: julian sanchez. guest: 1949, actually. whichare a lot of ways in -- the world seems to have gotten a closer portrait. imagination, surveillance was something that would be imposed in a very obvious way, you have a tele-screen in the home, big brother forcing it on you, hustley, i think,

imagine the surveillance in a much more seductive way, you would be coaxed into giving information about yourself. talking about dhs and biometrics at the border, one of the things we have done is to make it sort , that people are happy and think it is a privilege to give up their paper is and submit a background check for something like tsa preacher for faster injury. tot a benefit that i am able speak through onerous security lines that did not exist a few decades ago. i am pleased to give up my private information for this new benefit. host: here is michael from ohio on the republican line. michael, go ahead. caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call.

i am glad i got on. i am 65 years old. i have had a social security number since i was 10 years old, and a driver's license since i have been 16. forms of identification. and i have got no problem with this facial recognition. the only people they need to worry about is if you done something wrong. i pay my taxes every year, i follow all the laws, and, you know, the only people who need to worry about that is if they have done something wrong or they are hiding something. host: michael, are you concerned about your privacy? you would not want someone stealing your social security number. what about your facial identification? are you concerned someone might use that for some thing other than positive reasons? caller: no, i am not worried at all. i follow the laws. i do everything right. i pay my taxes. i pay all my bills, and i have got nothing to hide.

host: ok, michael in ohio. so why should folks be concerned about this? guest: i think there are a couple of reasons. one is, history suggests that is a mistake. if we look to the 1950's and 1960's, we see that surveillance authorities were used by the fbi and other federal agencies not to neutrally enforce the law but to target a variety of civil rights and antiwar groups under programs like the fbi's programs, illegal surveillance, for example, of dr. martin luther king, apparently in an attempt to force him to commit suicide by sending a legally recorded audio tapes of him in hotel rooms having affairs, to home with a threatening letter, suggesting it would be exposed he did not do the right thing, kill himself. exercise your right to

process than had find yourself on the wrong side of someone in power, but those can be used against you. thing to worry about is, well, who defines doing something wrong? often laws change over time. as we get more ability to track what kind ofy find rules are subject to interpretation, and deciding when someone is doing wrong, kind of the cliché that police can find something if they wanted to charge you with, disorderly conduct or disturbing givenace, and, you know, the use of that vast technology to monitor people at protests, we should be worried about that and worried about the chilling effect more generally. there was a case in the ukraine

a few years ago, wher cell phone tracking technology was usede, so people who sent texts on their phone, the next day saying "we know you were here, and just wanted you to be aware that the government is aware that you showed up at this protest." may very well reasonably be if, for example, you are employed by a government agency, and it becomes normal to be able to automatically and is additionally identify -- and is instantaneously identify people at protests, that may limit people's right to process. host: we are talking about facial recognition technology with julian sanchez. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8001, republicans. an independents, (202) 748-8002. the issue is leading the news. in the "new york times" this morning, frontpage, "quietly hoarding millions of faces

culled from the web." write -- host: we hear from anthony next in newport, tennessee. welcome. caller: go ahead. good morning. host: good morning. caller: i have a couple of questions come and i will wait for the answers. other countries have tapped facebook and others and using it as a database. once you stop a foreign country from getting a good guy's face, like the gentleman, if you ever watch movies, they can make anybody look like anybody, and they walk in, who is going to be arrested? but i that they said, "oh, that was him"? or, no, that was not him.

i was in the military. , guarding pretty much everything, like the military guards its own bases. the individual has got to guard himself. you are putting up a picture where other countries can get it , ande it to commit a crime they are going to go to jail for something your computer to. host: i will let you go there. more broadly, julian sanchez, the use of facial recognition technology in nefarious ways like that. guest: there is certainly reason to be concerned about bad actors' access to the data being compiled. one of the subjects that was raised repeatedly at the hearing we discussed earlier was a per actor named

prospectic had apparently improperly removed facial recognition images from cameras, stored them on their own network, in violation of their contract with the government, and hackers accessed that data and later leaked it on the dark web, and part of it included many thousands of facial recognition images taken at the border . it is not exclusively the photographs but also information about who is traveling, and what time, and with whom. rick the alabama next, and in birmingham, democrat line. caller: yes, respectfully speaking to mr. sanchez, i am an engineer and have been for 20 plus years, surrounding as a computer engineer, software engineer. the way that he characterized how this technology works is not coming through clearly, because

he said that people of color, there is more probability there might be a mismatch, and people of non-color, there will be a better result, so machine learning, that is how machine learning works. machine learning works when the data set is the largest, you get the best result. when the data set is smaller, you get worse results. so i do not know, sir, if you are an engineer, technically, i do not know. i do not know your credentials on that. guest: i am not an engineer, but i think i see where the confusion may have come into play. so there are two issues. one of the training data set. one reason there is an issue of false positives is on the training site, again, especially early on, you may have had more training on white and male faces, so these systems may be left without at accurately -- at accurately identifying faces of color.

the second issue on the search side, a separate issue, that when, for law enforcement purposes, photographic images a run against criminal databases, arrest photos, the fact that we have a system of racially biased policing means there are a disproportionate number of people of color in the system being searched, not when the system is being trained, but when you are looking for matches, the fact that there is a disproportionate number of black or dark skinned faces in meansarch pool you are disproportionately likely to get a search for a dark face. understand the misunderstanding, it was two different pools. host: rick, in a quick thoughts? caller: sir, i would like you to be crystal clear on this. that costly mentioned

people of color are disproportionately accused if we want to be humane, we need to be clear about information that we put across the people that are non-technical and will be put on juries at some point. i have been watching your show for the last month i think very critically, and i think you all need to do a better job. when you come on here, you need to speak with clarity, sir. you are dealing with people's lives. host: thank you, rick. guest: i hope that clarification removes the confusion. ont: we go to gary, indiana, independent line. caller: yes. i have a question about the abuse of power in the government, especially with the president of the united states. i know we are talking about facial recognition, about people face recognition, are we giving the president too much

power, and is congress getting less power? because it just seems like he is doing what he wants to do, and no one can stop him, and we keep on saying, wait down the line and stuff. i think we should be trying, for ca that weesident, have never had anyone in office like this president, are we going to make laws to stop all of this stuff, like you are talking about on the border. andrew, with facial recognition technology, we talked about that with the homeland security committee. this is what mike rogers of alabama said in support of the technology, then we will hear from julian sanchez. here is mike rogers. [video clip] sen. rogers: additionally, we should use facial recognition technology to enforce our immigration laws. recently, i.c.e. have been using identifying.

i do not believe people have a withnable issue of privacy drivers license photos. facial recognition technology's can improve law enforcement by ridding this process of bias in human error. each of these uses while measures as part of the process. technologies cannot and should not replace the officer's final judgment, but it can speed up the item verification for millions of people. it is an easy way to avoid hard questions. is not goingsy way to fix the problem. to consultcontinue with experts. dhs leadership should assure that this biometric databases are secure and have clear privacy guidelines, and congress

should continue to educate itself, as we are today, about the way that we can employ this technology responsibly. host: congressman rogers sets, and his opinion, "no reasonable expectation of privacy in a government-issued photo i.d." guest: yes, and one of the reasons it is not regulated is it just slipped through the crocs, regulating government searches, so if you think about wiretapping or physical searches of a home or access of databases, typically there is some type of system, federal regulatory statute, to describe when it is permissible to conduct a wiretap or surveillance. face recognition is really a form of massing that works on non-secret information, public information like your face, and other systems of databases, which is the photograph at the

dmv, that are already in the government's possession. again, existing regulatory statutes, it is not a wiretap or any other kind of existing, regulated law enforcement techniques. in terms of the fourth amendment, the fourth amendment tends to define a government search of something that violates a reasonable expectation of privacy, and usually that is perceived by the court at something that is secret, information in your diary, your home, or your email, as opposed to something visible to the public, like your face, or available to the government already, like a database, photographs. the problem is it is not exposing something secret and bringing it to the public, but if you can imagine an extreme case, a face recognition system city's tied in to a camera network, like what we have in d.c., cities like london, and now it is able to

identify anti-to a confirmed identity, everyone who is walking down the street, publice who is in place. is that exposing something that was private? not exactly. but it is creating a capability to search for all of an individual's public activities, that was before effectively unprecedented, that would have required, before this technology, essentially tailing someone 24/7 whenever they leave their home. the way the courts think about a certain fourth amendment terms is not really adequately capture that and something that is regulated by the fourth amendment as a kind of government tracking that implicates constitutional rights and interests. we have seen in recent years, there was a case called jones involving gps hacking, where one of the opinions, it was one of

these confusing cases where there was a majority opinion, and then a couple of diss ents, one of the opinions suggested that even when you are tracking something that in principle or publicly observable, like the location of a car. , if it would have previously, under prior technology, have required a full-time stakeout or having someone followed 24/7, which would have been prohibited, and lifts it serious cases, the national considered a kind of monitoring that should be triggering fourth amendment scrutiny. and i think we will have more and more cases develop where the court is going to have to think about whether our constitutional right against government monitoring and locate is that do not involve privacy in the sense of secrecy. host: julian sanchez, senior fellow advocate elicited, thanks so much -- fellow at the cato institute, thanks so much for being with us. guest: my pleasure.

host: coming up, we will hear about deportation rates and other news here as well on "washington journal." for, this week, "newsmakers" interviews jim brought inside. ofresponse to public opinion space exploratio. view, america is committed to space exploration. here we are 50 years of apollo, celebrating the 50th anniversary of apollo. by the way, during the apollo arogram, it was no popular program, but when it was achieved, it was not only popular when it was complete, but it is popular 50 years after it was complete. table of apollo. project namednew after the twin sister of apollo, artemis. artemis is the twin sister of

the moon. we are going with a very diverse and highly qualified astronaut corps that includes women, so we moon undermen to the a program named after apollo's twin sister artemis. view, is, in my absolutely beautiful, but the polling numbers, in my view, show that space exploration is necessary. no?inecessary, yes or 77% said yes. what is exploration? it is going to the moon, going to mars, and going beyond. i think it is important to note that americans support space exploration and general. also important to note that this unique capability that we have built and that we are continuing to build has resulted in an economic opportunity not just for the united states before the entire world. host: and you can watch the entire interview with jim bridenstine, the nasa

administrator, today at 6:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. you can also here on c-span radio and watch online at c-span.org. remainder of the program, we open up our phone lines again and get your thoughts on the ongoing raids reported today by immigration and customs enforcement officials, the deforestation raids against people previously asked to leave the country. (202) 748-8000 is the number to call for those of you who support the raids. (202) 748-8001 for those of you who oppose the raids, and you can also send us a tweet @cspanwj. we will also take a look at facebook, to help people are posting. a number of reports, we want to get to a few of them, this one from nbc news, saying that fear of the raids has led some u.s. citizens to carry their passports.

host: again, there are 10 cities across the country that have been targeted, 10 major cities across the country. we are showing them on your screen. we will remember for you. miami, atlanta, chicago, baltimore, denver, houston, los angeles, new orleans, and new york city. here is a report in the hill at hill.com. in theotel chains washington area, they write, use not allow i.c.e. to hotel rooms as backup centers for immigration raids." "our hotels are not configured to be the ascension centers,"

wrote yesterday. this is rufus. good morning. i oppose it, but i would like to speak about the spaceship thing. if people just listen and understand what happened with spaceshiptuff, that did not do nothing but hate go up to the sky and hit the orbit and come back. you go up to the moon, where did they know where to land when they come back to the atmosphere? that is what i wanted to say. host: from ohio, supporting the i.c.e. rates, this is rebecca. caller: my comment is -- what part of "illegal" two people to understand? andou go to another country you stay there, you are kicked out of the country. i mean, why don't they just go

to the door, not on the door, and we will let them in, do it legally, and we will be graciously happy for them to come, but if you are saying here, and you are illegal, then that is wrong. ok, that is becky in utah. this is the "baltimore sun." "nothing has happened yet. immigrant communities on edge, but no i.c.e. activity has happened early sunday from baltimore."

host: we go next to hillsboro, oregon, hear from dan, supporting the raids. caller: yeah, hi. how are you doing? host: hey there, dan. caller: i support them doing these raids. these guys are just trying to do their jobs. heck, you never know, like where i live at here, coming around the city here, who might be one of these people that they are looking for. i mean, heck, i know a lot of good hispanic people, and a lot you just don't know, and sometimes you just don't feel safe standing next to somebody in line, and then you have got people like my congressperson, suzanne bonamici, down here at the courthouse all the time with know,eriff, you

supporting against everything that i.c.e. wants to do. i do not know why they just do not let them do their job. and, you know, as far as people that oppose this stuff, i do not want anything to do with them. host: ok, dan. we will go to charles, another supporter, in loganville, georgia this time. charles, go ahead. caller: how are you doing? host: doing fine, thank you. caller: i have got no problem with immigrants coming in. i think it is the greatest thing in the world. , but when you break the law, then you pay the consequences. i mean, it is just how it is. i want to go one step deeper than this. the democrat problem is they are trying to buy votes. if they get rid of all the democrats, they will lose, what, 8, 10 seats in the house? that is their only concern about

illegal immigrants. host: here is what the democratic leader had to say about the raids this weekend. chuck schumer. [video clip] senator schumer: when it comes to intelligently using our immigration resources, the intelligence should focus on the small minority that are actually criminals, not families, and not 10-year-olds! these raids will not make america safer, they will not solve our immigration challenges, for the reason i mentioned. they will instead terrorize innocent families and rip children away from their paris. and i warm president trump, the picture of these raids are not going to be pretty, and average americans who agree with him on many issues will be appalled. president trump, you will have to back off from this issue, because the american people are a lot better than you, and they will see the pictures. what are they going to do? a father is driving his child to

school, they stop car, pool the father out. they have done that. an eight-year-old sitting in the car, traumatized. they have done that, and president trump, mark my words, there will be huge backlash against this. notamerican people are cruel like you. host: vice president pence went down to tour order facilities, president trump tweeting this morning that friday's tour showed vividly to politicians and the media how well run and clean the children's attention centers are. sorry, can't let them is my into our country is too crowded. problem solved. jean in yorktown, pennsylvania. caller: first, i would like for the president to stop referring to them as illegal aliens. let's be respective.

i do not support businesses who want to a feed i.c.e. and do their job. i support it, because i.c.e. should have been doing their job all along. they were doing their job under the obama administration, which is why obama leads in deportation. no one is trying to be a great here. i say do it on monday when they are at work, when there are thosesses that are hiring that have not done the proper documentation, should be penalized for it. they should pay a fine. i would also say stop targeting the kids, using the kids. parents have a responsibility to care and provide for their children. now, why -- i still do not understand when you have been in a country for 20 year, why didn't you go through the process to be here legally? i also say for those who do not know, if you served your country, do not say now you have

been deported because you serve your country. you have eight years that the military will give you your citizenship. all you have to do is apply. you have a responsibility also. host: ok, jean. we will hear next from charles, who opposes the raids. he is in killeen, texas. caller: good morning. host: good morning. caller: i kind of look at it to different kind of ways. on the one hand, having people just haphazardl coming into the country, i know they are desperate and need help, which i am willing to help, but on the other hand, i want to hear from democratic candidates for holdingy are employers accountable for hiring illegal aliens. i mean, that's -- you know, they are taking people's jobs, you know, they do not just do jobs nobody else wants to do. i drive 18 wheelers, and i see them out there operating heavy equipment, forklifts, cranes,

they are foremen, you know. and i would also like to say that they are putting a lot of people in homelessness, you know, let alone losing, you know. thank you. host: thanks, charles. some reaction on twitter, force "if -- first from beverly, these people are already here ,orking, contribute in society and living with their families, leave them alone. .udy says "i oppose the raids go after cook's, not crooks -- crooks, not folks. and the president is the biggest criminal of all. tim says i support the law and national sovereignty, so i support i.c.e. as well. and on twitter, the wait for is 10 immigration

to 20 years. today.on the line this is what happened to the jewish in germany. they started taking them out, and the next thing we know, what is going to happen? that is not right. thank you. host: a couple more minutes here. (202) 748-8000 if you oppose the raids -- if you support, rather. (202) 748-8001 if you oppose them. and the south dakota, elena, hello there. caller: hi. host: hi.you are on the air. go ahead. caller: yes, i opposed to this raid. these people really come here to work. they do not cross the big river just because they want to be here and live free. why can't the government just take all of the military that they are sending to europe, uh, and send them to south america

to fight the cartels, and that way these people can stay home? i am sure they would rather be at home. why can't the government think along those lines, instead of putting these people in cases like animal. it is really sad. thank you. host: very supports the raids. he is calling from center arbor in new hampshire. caller: hello. i would like to share experience. i was discharged from the army in germany. as an alien, i had to register with the police. i had to tell where i was living and anytime i moved, from one town to another, i had to do the same thing. we need a system like that. here in the united states, the immigration control is not controlled for a long time, because we make no effort to track these best when people come here illegally, we make no effort to track their whereabouts, and therefore when overstay their visas, we

have the first problem. host: barry, would you agree there must be some effort to track their whereabouts, because these raids are from people who already received a notice before in some form, whether that was through mail delivery, in person, or email or some sort. caller: that is certainly correct, but a vast number of people are roaming around the country, and they do not have to report to anyone periodically to theire government nknow whereabouts, and i know that this personally because i happen to meet a woman who overstate her visa when she came here to study, she applied for citizenship and got it legally, but the system has so many , and we have a lot of people living here in overstaying their visas. host: to be clear about it, too -- thanks for your call -- these raids today are not about people

who have overstayed their visas, these are people who have received deportation orders and have not done so. a couple of calls, southampton, pennsylvania, lou also supporting the raids today. caller: yeah, hi, how are you doing? i just do not understand how people can be against the role of law. this is your own country that they are coming into, and the taxpayers giving them health care and everything else and taking care of them. any other country would never let that happen. host: all right, let's hear from oklahoma city, and barbara gets the last word, opposing the raids today. caller: hi. host: hader, barbara. caller: i just get so frustrated, because they keep saying they are illegals. you do not see the illegals coming across the border, that is how they come and legally. you let them say that every time , and you let them say that obama built the cages.

obama did not do that. there was no problem. he reported everyone else still, and trump keeps hiring them. debt topaid off a big a bunch of them that he had to pay them, they had to go to court with him, and nobody says anything about that. when are we going to stop them from hiring them? host: appreciate your call, barbara. "washington journal" is 7:00 a.m. every day. tomorrow morning, we will do our preview of the week ahead in washington at 8:00 a.m. eastern, hearing from reuters white house correspondent jeff mason and vox reporter ella nilsen. and economic policy institute's heidi shierholz and mercator center's michael farren

will discuss efforts to raise the federal minimum wage. thanks for joining us this morning. hope the rest of your we get is great. we will see tomorrow morning back here at 7:00 a.m. eastern. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2019] >> next, newsmakers with nasa administrator. after that, the court of appeals hears oral arguments in a trump v. mazars. democratic presidential candidates are campaigning throughout new hampshire this weekend.