alina talks about u.s.-russian relations and the binding administration. be sure to join the discussion with your phone calls, comments, text messages and tweets. washington journal is next. ♪ host: good morning. this is sunday, january 31. welcome to washington journal. a recent headline caught our attention. we thought we would ask you this morning. it says that, amid calls for unity in washington, president joe biden and republicans do not agree on what unity looks like. the subject of unity for the first hour of the program, how to define it, how important is it and back to the unity pledge enforced by president biden when he began his term in office a

very short while ago. here are the numbers to call about president biden's unity pledge. democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. you can also send us a text, the number is (202) 748-8003. please leave your name and the city or town where you are texting from. you can also post a comment on facebook.com/c-span. the washington post has this headline, biden struggles to define his unity promise for a divided nation. the story goes like this, barack obama offered hope and change. donald trump vowed to make a great -- make america great again. george bush promised compassionate conservative. for president biden, it comes down to one word, unity. he campaigned on and came to office promising the concept of

unity, a feel-good catchall that crawford bipartisan -- offered bipartisan unity. now biden and his team are working to implement that gold which has already been weaponized by republicans who disagree with biden's policy aims challenged by fellow democrats. facing a deadly pandemic and a troubled economy as well as congressional majority, biden and his advisers are attempting to implement the blueprint of unity where countries can only seem to agree on how much they disagree. last week, biden was asked about this concept of unity and his unity is moving forward. pres. biden: unity requires you to eliminate the vitriol, make anything that you disagree with about the other person's

personality or lack of integrity or not decent legislators and the like. we have to get rid of that. i think that is already beginning to change but god knows where things go, number one. unity also is trying to reflect what the majority of the american people, democrat, republican and independent, think is within the fulcrum of what needs to be done to make their lives better. for example, if you look at the data, and i am not claiming the polling data to be exact, but if you look at the data, i hope i am saying this, you may correct me if i get the number wrong, i think it is 57% or 58% of the american people including republicans, democrats and independents think that we have to do something about the covid vaccine, we have to do something about making sure that people who will be hurting badly, cannot eat, do not have food, or in a position where they are

about to be thrown out of their apartment, have them opportunity -- have an opportunity to get a job, that they all think we should be acting, we should be doing more. unity also is trying to get, if you pass a piece of legislation that breaks down party lines, but it gets past, it does not mean there was not unity, i prefer these things to be bipartisan because i am trying to generate some consensus and takes out of -- take the vitriol out of all of this because i am confident from my discussions, there are a number of republicans who know we have to do something about food insecurity for people in this pandemic. i am confident they know we have to do something about figuring out how to get children back in school. they are easy ways to deal with this. if you are antiunion, you can say it is all because of teachers. if you want to make the case that it is complicated, you say

what do you have to do to make it safe to get in those schools. we are going to have arguments. for example, i propose that because it was bipartisan, i thought it would increase the prospects of passage. the additional $1400 in direct tax payments to folks. there is reason for people to say, do you have the lines drawn the right way, should it go to anyone making over x number of dollars and why. i'm helping to negotiate those things. host: president biden this pass week on unity. what do you think about it, how do you define it. then -- ben is calling from connecticut. caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. one of the first things we ought to do is set what the boundaries are and look back and listen to some of the older people who put

up with this before. one of the best places to go would be the freedom to choose channel on youtube. they have a documentary, autonomous soul, it takes about one hour, but i think it is well worth the hour to watch, and then think about what he says. some of these older people from the 1960's and 1970's who lived after the civil rights, they have a better perspective because they went through it. if you think about what they say, they make a lot of sense. host: thank you. on to anthony from the democrats line. when you think of the word unity and the president's unity pledge, what goes through your mind? caller: a quote of mine.

thank you for taking my call. and that quote is, i am in the community, not part of the community. refusing to be torn apart from it. end of quote. the reason i state that is because if we go around saying i am part of the community, that means it is easy for someone to drive a wedge between one issue and another persons issue. when you are in the community, you recognize that you do not have time to let others come in -- host: let me jump in. is there one particular issue on your mind where unity could really solve a problem for you? caller: yes. the fact that we have not been

civil to each other. we talk about the civil war is over and the fact is we have never been civil to anyone in america from its founding. if we had, then we would have unity because the moment individuals stepped on this shore, they would know that unless you serve in the military, there is no america. when we are brought on our missions, we talk about going back to the states. we don't talk about going back to america. host: thanks for calling. joseph from boston, independent caller, thank you for waiting. what do you think this morning? caller: good morning. we have to get back to one of the biggest issues that tore us apart in 1977, that is congress

-- separation of church and state. i grew up in new york city and lived all over america. i have always been an atheist. i went to catholic school, i went to church of christ university. religion is part of culture. what happened after 9/11 with the patriot act, congress gave money to religious organizations and with religion, they have the tendency to want to force their view on other people without respecting other people. those people who stormed the capital at the insurrection, i work with those type of people down south. i was in the marine corps. i work with them. either you don't agree with them and accept them, they go to church on sunday whether it was in texas or georgia, and they believe in their god and you have to respect that. at the same time, when you have immigrants coming here from pakistan who might be a muslim or from india who might be a

indu do, you have to respect them. the only way you're going to respective -- that is where the government needs to step in and say, you cannot trample on these people. that is why we have a problem. i was a democrat and i was independent. i voted for the president. i think he is a good man. the democrats have no respect for the people who voted for president trump. with separation of church and state, we control our desire to force our view and automatically give them respect. i think the two biggest mistakes america made was in 1929 when they had the trial with the high school teacher from tennessee that wanted to teach the theory of evolution. that is where we made the mistake number one. mistake number two was in the 1960's with the red scare, we

put in god we trust on the dollar bill. because of that, we are not expressed -- not embracing science. host: joseph, thanks for your participation. we want to get some other viewpoints. a little bit more from the washington post or. even coming up with a common definition for what unity should mean is impossible to unify around, "i think it remain -- means a lot of different things ." when we would ask people what was joe biden's message, they understood it was unity. they would say bringing people together for unity. it may have meant different things for them. maybe it was bringing the different parties together or healing the country by using a different demeanor. the post goes on to write republicans citing various initiatives that biden has put forth have already founded anti-unity alarms claiming the

fact that biden is governing as a democrat means he is not committed to his campaign mantra. senator elizabeth warren defined unity differently still, arguing recently last sunday that the phrase perhaps should mean democrats being unified against insurrection, a reference to the january 6 attack on the capital by a mob of angry trump supporters. they also point out the upcoming impeachment trial of trump over alleged role of inciting that riot underscores the nature of the nation's politics. of all of the five republican senators voting to change -- towns the constitutionality. a republican of wyoming, member of the senate leadership on the floor earlier this week on president biden's recent actions on executive orders and the democrats threats to go it alone

on covid relief. [video clip] >> is built to provide 900 billion dollars of relief was signed in december. president biden want to double that amount of funding. democrats may try to ram this through the senate budget reconciliation. this entire cost will be added to our national debt. if it occurs, it will likely be done without a single republican vote. this is not unity, it is not bipartisanship. it is not healing our divisions. this is a time for president biden to heed the words of his own inaugural address. we need to work together to lower the cost, produce more energy, to create more jobs, to create more opportunities for every american. that is how we bring our nation together. that is what we ought to do now.

host: the republican from wyoming, one of the items he was talking about was the sweeping budget blueprint for pandemic aid. the measure would set the stage for quick movement on president joe biden's 1.9 trillion dollar coronavirus relief pan, bypassing a filibuster. what they are going to do starting tomorrow is release budget blueprint in the house and in the senate which could potentially clear the way for this bill to be passed under those reconciliation procedures. it means they do bypass the filibuster, maybe without any republican votes & that bill into law. it is a long process, many weeks it could take. the process could start tomorrow. watch for it on c-span. we are nine days away from the impeachment trial. it starts tuesday the ninth at 1:00 p.m. on c-span2.

lawrence from st. paul, minnesota. the topic is unity this morning. here in washington and around the country and joe biden's unity pledge. what are your thoughts? caller: thanks for this opportunity. i like what the guy talked about. that is not why i called. i think unity begins with what is it that we all share in common which is the constitution. argue yes, no, but the constitution was designed to limit the scope, the boundaries of government. in a free society, government cannot be all things to all people. the second thing that unity is, it is a diversity of thought with respect to that diversity of thought. we really need to respect differences of opinions and we cannot hold the word diversity hostage so that it just returned

-- refers to profiling characteristics. my final thought is this, i deplore everything that the white supremacists stand for. but under our constitution, they do have the right to peacefully, and i emphasize peacefully, march and speak on main street. as much as it pains us, if we cannot embrace that reality that as a constitutional protection, we will never have unity. host: thank you, lawrence. we are checking in this morning, congressman tim ryan, a democrat from ohio, a member of the house who may run for the senate. he says there is no unity without accountability. we have performed our solemn duty in the house, now the senate must hold the president accountable for quarterbacking a violent coup against our democracy. angel writes that there can be no unity without account ability.

jerry parker, unity should be allowing differences of opinion without being canceled. we have robert on the line calling from clearwater, florida. republican line. good morning. caller: thanks for taking my call. i'm a republican but i do agree with biden about giving the stimulus out. a lot of people are losing their rent. some people in my family, their cars broke down. i think the economy will come back stronger if they do it. for that guy that don't believe in miracles, one day i found this -- in my house and it was over 200 years old. i do believe an angel saved my life. i had it checked out first. i asked everybody in the house if they lost a cross.

then i went to another store before the steering wheel came off. so i kept it and the steering wheel came off and i believe god saved me and i believe there is a god. for that atheist to say there is no god, there are angels and they watch over us. host: thank you for calling, robert. stephen is in baltimore on the line for democrats. good morning. caller: i would like to make a point about the riots that happened over the summer and that happened at the capitol building on january 6. that is how we feel when police officers abuse citizens and we have no recourse. that is the way a lot of people feel. understand that if you are frustrated and you are going to commit violence on the capital,

there should be no violence at all. about unity, i don't think it would be possible for biden to unify this nation because we still have a lot of people in this generation who just don't see minorities and people who are coming from south american countries like mexico. they just don't see us as individuals who are equal to the -- equal to them. this is not going to happen as long as they have this view and this picture of not holding a sequel to them. -- not holding us equal to them. a lot of this talk about the constitution. but a lot of times, they ignore the constitution like they did trying to ignore the votes from atlanta, trying to change those votes.

they are going to vote him, they are not going to convict him for the things that he did and that is not according to the constitution, that is not justice. without justice, there is not going to be in unity. i am sorry. thank you. host: allan from spring valley, new york. what do you make of the president's unity pledge, how it is playing out so far? caller: good morning. unity is a good thing. i hope in the name from the holy god, unity. look in florida, they did not have lockdowns. it is very good. also i want to say about the schools, we need to open old schools. it is really not good for children. we need to open all the holy places. and also, look what joe biden did.

if president trump was doing that, all media was screaming. about joe biden closing the south african border, nobody is screaming, nothing, nobody. everybody have a nice day and everybody should believe in holy god. host: thanks for calling. allen referring to the coronavirus outbreak, adding urgency to vaccination efforts. the road to herd immunity something looks longer. the emergence of more transmissible potentially vaccine-evading variants threaten to extend the global health disaster and make 2021 feel too much like 2020. as we pick up the metro section of the washington post, we read in maryland, a new south africa variant is confirmed by governor hogan, the first case of this highly transmissible mutation in

the region, in the metro station -- metro section of the washington post. not more on the coronavirus -- much more on the coronavirus coming up a little bit later. let's get more from don in indiana -- i'm sorry, independent from wisconsin. go ahead, please. caller: i am one of 14 children and i think family is getting to be something that is not talked about enough. there are a lot of hurting people and if unity means anything to anybody, it's got to start with the family and it is the simple basics of working together, playing together. so i guess that is all i've got. host: what do you think about the president's unity pledge? what would that mean, what would that look like in washington or politically?

caller: i think honesty is one of the transparencies of being able to see somebody's actions, not so sure that he's got himself set up to where people can look at him and believe him. host: thanks for calling this morning. michael in portland, oregon text this about unity, we may not agree on what unity is but maybe we can agree on what unity is not. impeachment, filibusters, condemnations of politicians, zero sum thinking. representative val demings writes in, some of my colleagues in congress talk about unity while blocking critical relief to americans they don't like. house democrats are working to bring us through this pandemic together, writes the democratic

representative from the orlando area. adam schiff, democrat from california writes, some republicans seem confused about what unity means. they seem to think that if you don't give them what they want, you are not for unity. that is not unity, that is my way or the highway. we are in crisis and americans need help. let's unite around that. that is from adam schiff. a republican senators marcus all right, joe biden's decision to cancel the keystone pipeline puts hundreds of good paying arkansas jobs at risk. president biden promised unity and to build back better but his first action was to kill jobs, getting to some of the legislative pieces. newman from san antonio, texas, democratic caller, good morning. caller: good morning. i don't think it will ever be possible for anyone to unite this country because when we put people in office, they set their

days according to what side of the aisle you are on. they are the ones dividing this country. all they do is get in there and divide. if these people would get out into society, it is a lot of people we get along together. these people need to get out, really go into society and see how people think, how they react with each other. i don't care what your nationality is. they stop that. all these politicians do, people need to open up their eyes and think. i hear what you did about that republican. when trump was in power, i did not hear them hollering unity.

they did not tell trump to stop doing the things he was going to bring the country together. first thing they say, i cannot speak for him. but now they want to speak for biden. host: thanks for calling, newman. we will get some other calls in a moment. an opinion to joe biden, unity is more than just words. the president's early actions do not match his promises of consensusbuilding. this comes from david winston who is a republican consultant for many years. he writes, that is what america wants, more unity, less division, more attention paid to the 50% of voters who are not part of a party base. recent history shows us the president indicates to the party base especially in the first year. he goes on to write, bought his first actions in office suggest that the views of the 49% of the electorate who did not vote for him, almost half the country,

are not likely to factor into the democrat's plan for america. you can read that at roll call. here was the white house present very -- press secretary last week. [video clip] >> the president came in to lead the country at a time of great division, where there was a great need for healing. he spoke about that in his inaugural address last week. unity to him means approaching our work on legislative issues through bipartisan lands, working with democrats and republicans, trying to find a path forward on how we can work together to address the problems the american people are facing. it also means projecting that he is going to govern for all people and address all of the issues that the american people are facing. for example, that means talking about how the pandemic impact not just democrats, but republicans. not just blue states, but red states, ensuring that he is reaching out to democratic and

republican governors, mayors, and conveying at every opportunity he has that this is a problem we are facing together. i think it is a little bit different than how you can mark achieving 100 million shots in the arms of americans in the first 100 days. unity is about the country feeling that they are in it together and we will know that when we see it. he is going to be working on that and committed to that every opportunity he has to speak to the public. host: the white house press secretary and from earlier this week. danny is calling from farmington. caller: i'm calling independent. good morning. host: thanks for clarifying that. caller: i am a constituent of josh hawley. you don't know how appalled i am of some of these things. i am not just singling him out. some of these other people that

just stand up there and say whatever they want. there is just no repercussions to this rhetoric and this non-response to this terrible virus that thousands of people are dying from everyday. talking about unity, if we cannot come together, listen, if we cannot come together and defeat, control, at least control this terrible disease -- these politicians are up there spewing deceitful and hateful things constantly, inciting -- it is a shame that they are getting paid with our tax dollars. host: danny, you mentioned josh hawley, the republican. what you think his future is in

missouri? caller: i call his office regularly and tell him my opinion. i think that more people shed -- more people should express their opinion because it is destructive. he is not trying to -- you know, he is just working for one side. he is not trying to include everyone. he is just trying to include one spectrum of people. host: danny, thank you for calling. on to howard, democratic line. good morning to you? caller: i hope you can hear me ok. host: we can hear you fine. caller: great. everyone wants unity. i think the comments regarding unity related to things like unity in getting past this

pandemic, we ought to unify and bring prosperity to all people, not just for a few. those things we need to be clear about and we also need to be clear about the reality that we have today and that just that we are not united and we should never be united with white supremacy, with the trump supporters that stormed the capitol. these are awful things and we need to be united against those things. we are trying to assume or act as though unity means you should somehow -- we should somehow figure out a way to get along with white supremacists. host: how do you get there, those things that you pointed out where this country should be going to, how do you get there? where do you start? caller: the first thing is very important, the legislation that is pending for recovery, the $1.9 trillion bill to get help

to the american people, that needs to occur quickly. if republicans cannot get along with that, the democrats need to remove the filibuster and remove it quick. this generation of the republican party is a lost cause. we should never try to unite with these people because they are in an awful generation, they elected donald trump, that ought to be enough said right there. host: thank you for your participation. the washington post the last couple of days, no, president biden has not already renounced unity. they write that president biden uses his inaugural speech to issue a cause for unity then he signed a series of executive orders on climate change, lgbtq writes, racial disparities and other controversial issues. for some critics, this is a contradiction. president biden promised unity and his first action was to kill

jobs, that tweet we just read. there was no contradiction, writes the post, unity does not mean once i get every thing is once -- at once. in a dictatorship, unity is easy. one must agree with the leader on all matters or suffer retribution. in democracy, unity is the most elusive of things, mr. biden said in his speech, because policy disagreement is at the core of the system. the president bears no more responsibly to surrender his principles on entering the oval office that mr. kotten does sitting on the senate. both men promise to represent believes on the national stage and both should try to advance them. it is the matter of trying where unity can be found in a democracy, unity of democratic values, focus and process, the recent editorial in the washington post. here is a text from jt in kentucky, the solution for unity and for people to unite, joe biden should passes bill to the republicans.

if your state does not want the $2000, it will go only to the people that vote for it. states that do not want the stimulus can turn it down. states that need to stimulus can accept that everyone should be able to unite around that, writes jt. barbara is in florence, alabama, republican. good morning. caller: i want to know how biden, i am willing to give him every chance, but when he talks about unity and how we need to put food on the table of the poor american people and then every time he picks up the pen, he is hurting the american people. i am not talking just republicans, i am talking democrats, we are talking african-american, latino, everybody. when they shut the pipeline down, we are talking about many people, not just one republican or democrat or anything, and that is going to hurt. it is also going to hurt the

people as far as gas and how we heat our homes and everything. and i don't think that is unity when you get up there and you say one thing and you sit down with that pen and you do the opposite. host: thanks for calling. michael calling from clearwater, democratic line. caller: unity is when a group of people are in charge and direct things. joe biden is in charge right now and i like him leading the country. let me give you an analogy, the homeowners association with a five-member board. the five-member board unites to vote one way against the shy grin of other people living there. that is the way it is because they are looking out for the good of all and that is what biden is doing. you guys are not giving him a chance. unity has different meanings. we are unifying and if republicans do not want to go along, leave them behind.

we need democrats to vote, get the 51 and pass his stuff. what happens is when republicans get control if they do in 2024, they will reverse everything that joe has done just like he is reversing everything that the idiot for him has done. i guess that is it. host: bill is calling from pa, republican line. caller: the first thing i have to do is call you out because i have only heard two republican voices and it is 7:38. review the tape of the last 40 minutes and see exactly what i am saying. that being said, the last guy had no vitriol, calling our last president and idiot -- an idiot. we are the united states. out of many comes one.

what is our strength? is unity our strength or is diversity our strength? how can you have both? unity means to form one out of many, to diverse means to break apart. and the rulers of all parties, both parties, red states, blue states, divided, divided, what you have is a monied organization, a monied class that loves seeing the democrats and the republicans fight. while that happens, they are losing this country. our wages do not buy what they used to. this hurts everyone. we are printing money, just like the one senator said, we just gave $900 billion to stauch --

we are not fighting the pandemic, we are fighting the collapse of our economy. it was a long time coming. i really want to say, we are one nation under god. you are not under god when you tell a girl who was running track her whole high school career, you are not getting a scholarship because that guy who has long hair and put lipstick on is going to run against you and win and now you are not getting the scholarship. he-she is, is that unity? i don't think so. host: bill on the republican line. stephen is calling from vero beach. good morning. caller: how are you? host: doing well. caller: i just want to get to the root of it. sometimes i think we get off the rails.

what we hear every four years is term limits. you hear about it during the election cycle. there is no more said about it. people have lifelong jobs and they have no repercussions for the way they act. i guess we have elections, but some of these people are not carrying the best interest of this country. even when george washington was in office, they wanted him to run again. he said, we don't need another monarchy. all this speak of unity, nancy pelosi is ripping up the state of the union behind the president, is that unity? host: let the ask you to respond to something the last caller mentioned. he said in this country, you're either diverse or your unified, you cannot have diversity with unity. you agree? -- do you agree? caller: people wanting to have

their civil liberties and wanted to be left alone to raise their children and live their life, you cannot please everyone. it is impossible. the level of hypocrisy is crazy. when trump came into office, he has all of these executive orders, he is not using the legislative branch. order we have here, it is -- what do we have here, it is the same thing. i don't know what the answer is. every four years you hear about term limits. they get voted in by these crazy districts. i don't know the answer, but this should not be a lifelong job. people should have a certain amount of time to get the job done and they should be out. host: stephen, thanks for calling. we will do this for 20 more

minutes, talking about president biden's unity pledge and what that means for you both in terms of the debate in washington and around the country. it is snowing quite a bit in washington, already the big storm that has been moving east. congress is due to come in this week. we mentioned the budget revolution coming up that could clear the way for a covid relief bill in the coming weeks without a bipartisan vote. we will see how that plays out. it is going to be a big week of nominations as well and we are expect a more votes on the senate floor. hearings, agriculture, education, labor, a busy week of confirmation hearings on c-span. we have been talking about impeachment this sunday morning, here is rand paul, a republican senator from a pub -- from kentucky, criticizing democrats for continuing with their push for impeachment and now, conviction. [video clip] >> this impeachment is nothing more than a partisan exercise designed to further divide the

country. democrats claim to want to unify the country, but impeaching a former president, a private citizen, is the antithesis of unity. democrats brazenly appointing a pro-impeachment democrat to preside over the trial is not fair or impartial and hardly encourages any kind of unity in our country. no, unity is the opposite of this travesty we are about to witness. if we are about to try to impeach a president, where is the chief justice? if the accused is no longer president, where is the constitutional power to impeach him? private citizens do not get impeached. impeachment is for removal from office. and the accused has already left office. hyper-partisan democrats are about to drag our great country down into the gutter of rank or and -- rancor and vitriol, the

likes of which has never been seen in this country. instead of doing the nation's work, the senate and the executive branch, democrats are wasting the nation's time on a partisan vendetta against a man no longer in office. host: again, that trial begins on tuesday, february 9, 1:00 p.m., c-span2. for as long as it happens, we will be there gavel-to-gavel. this morning on political, trump's top impeachment lawyer has left his team. there a picture. they write that he and another lawyer are no longer expected to defend trump in his trial which is days away. they say the president has lost his impeachment lawyer days before the trial. butch bowers, a south carolina lawyer who is reportedly said to play major role, is no longer with the team. another south carolina lawyer will not be either.

they described it as a mutual decision and said names will be announced shortly. cnn reported last night that a third member of trump's perspective legal team, josh howard, was also leaving. it was reported that he wanted his lawyers to focus on election fraud rather than the constitutionality of impeaching an ex-president. it raised two immediate questions, both about what compelled him to part ways and who will play the role of lawyer to trump when the trial begins in early february. politico.com. david, good morning. caller: good morning. i just wanted to say that i believe that president biden is a good person and a good politician and he believes that that is an excellent goal, being unity. however, it is not a reality

because of the people that believe the other way, not just being a republican. in congress, it will travel to wyoming to berate a woman that wrote a certain way. it is commenting on some congressman that believe in the way she voted. those people will not be, regardless of what the president does, on that, they will be unified. other than that, there are so many reasons they go the way they go and they will never unify with any democrat. that is just my opinion. host: on to daniel in washington, illinois. independent caller. caller: good morning, sir.

the idea of unifying the country is fantastic. it may be harder said than done. i also believe in the voting process. if any official get selective, they should represent their community whether they are republican or democrat. if they get on the floor and they argue for something that might not make sense to you, they are trying their best to represent whether you agree with that or not. the unity problem i have, i believe this has been a long time coming. i am pretty sure everyone would agree what we consider ethical or core issues might change from person-to-person, even your neighbor. it is hard to get everybody on board with a lot of stuff. my belief in the lack of how

divisive the country is is because it used to be news had to be factual. if it was news, it had to be factual. now you can call news and give an opinion, therefore people may be believe it to be true, whether it is or is not. the accountability of what facts are in reporting the facts, we have lost and that might go back to when the fair time act was rescinded, where you had to hear both sides. now you can hear what you think you agree with and maybe makes sense and be talked into something that makes a lot of sense, but does not have to be factual, therefore i'm going to believe it. these are very difficult things. when you are told something is true and it does not have to be. i would like to see s get back to where we held people accountable for lying, no matter

what -- no matter who you are, whether you are elected or not. we have to be a little fair to our elected officials. if they are on the floor saying crazy things, you think, and they represent constituents, that is why they are there. they got reelected, they got elected, whether i agree with them or not. host: on to mike in atlantic city. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. it seems many people do not want to compare unity to the word respect. c-span digs all around in passed history and present history of people who have said this and that. remember, there was a million man march in washington, dc where those speakers never called for the overthrow of the american government, never called to hurt anybody, but yet the white supremacists and the proud boys get so many

accolades, even from elected officials. where is the justice that? -- where is the justice in that? how can we unify if you don't want to recognize that there are people trying to pull people together who might not agree with whatever buy things and says. most of the speakers, you can tell whether or not they are trying to unify or divide. thank you very much. host: thanks for calling. on twitter, unity is politicians working together for the common good. after all, that is why they get paid, but both sides have to participate. we don't have that now because one side wants to destroy democracy. i need not name names. the republican senator from florida rights, a radical leftist agenda in a divided country will not help unify our country, it will only confirm 75 million american's biggest fears about the new administration. marcus writes in the washington post, honeymoons are not what they used to be, this is in the

opinion pages. she writes, biden is going to mess up maybe sooner rather than later. he is joe biden, after all, reports of his prowess have been exaggerated. he has been in office for all of nine days. in that time, he has confronted more crisis than any president. he has moved to undo some of trump's worth policies and fixing the pandemic disaster that trump left behind. the execution has been solid. there has been no distracting -- the subprime is not a change of heart -- the surprise is not a change of heart, it is that they managed to get it done so fast, writes mark is in the washington post. there is a new york times piece, dop leaders are not in -- gop leaders are not in step. the two men leading the republican party usually aligned

during political crises but the chaos splintering the gop is not only testing kevin mccarthy and mitch mcconnell, it is also highlighting their differences and hampering a united strategy for retaking congress. that is just the lead to that story. philip is calling from pennsylvania, republican. what is the name of your town? go ahead, please. caller: tdu, pennsylvania. i just wanted to talk about the whole abc-nbc, fox, everybody has different opinions. i watch both and i see who is not and it just seems to me that if we want to unify things, we need to be held accountable for what is being set on the news. host: how do you do that? caller: i have no idea. if i did, i would be where they

are. host: is there a particular issue out there as you look forward with the legislative agenda where unity would really come in handy for you? caller: yeah, i think if they would just do something about all of the riots, making it out like it wasn't -- the sixth was bad. all of the riots on the west coast were horrible. many people died. they need to own up to it. it happened. a lot of the congressmen and senators -- i don't know how to put it, antagonized it and tried to say they did not. host: philip, thank you for calling. surely -- shirley, good morning. when you hear the word unity, what does it mean to you? caller: i don't believe that we

are going to have unity until we learn how to lose an election graciously. i am at the point where i feel like the united states has no class, has no character, and has no conscious. the united states is supposed to be united, but if you cannot lose graciously and you attack the winning team, we will never be united. all i am going to do is just pray for the united states of america. host: thank you. down to our last of several minutes. we will get a few more calls. here is news out of west virginia, senator joe mansion, the democrat there, he is reelecting -- reacting to the interview they did with kamala

harris, the story out of charleston says, the exclusive interview with kamala harris drew national attention. friday morning, the white house answered question about her appearance, one in arizona, one in west virginia. the interview took senator manchin by surprise. he visited one of west virginia's covid vaccine sides one day after the vice president spoke with amanda barron about the proposed america rescue plan. it says, i cannot believe it, nobody told me about it. we need to work together. that is not a way of working together, he writes. responding to a local interview that the vice president did on a station. we will see what moore comes to that. mildred is on the line waiting

in delray beach, florida. go ahead. caller: for the last four years, every channel on tv has crucified president trump. they never gave him a chance to prove or do anything. now you have biden come in and every channel is praising him, he has not done anything yet. those people for four years were brainwashed and i believe they are brain-dead now. they are so brainwashed -- the executive orders he signed, he signed them like nothing, without consulting. he is undoing all of the good stuff that trump has done. he is losing jobs. the unity -- unity is working together, talking to people, getting their opinions. it is so opposite, it is a

double standard and it is a shame because everybody sees, or at least half of the people in this country see it. host: what would you like to see happen here in washington that would represent unity to you? caller: democrats trying to work together without just trying to undo the good. host: is there a particular issue or bill? caller: they are going on about the virus and everything. trump has done more to get this virus going, with vaccine, and they are saying he did not. now you have amazon offering when amazon did not offer trump. number one, trump is a new yorker and a businessman. he is not a polished politician and that is what people don't understand. they are so used to politicians catering to them -- you know what i mean. here comes a new yorker who is

strong and they are not used to it. host: we do get the point. thanks for calling. democratic caller, jackson in plant city. good morning. caller: i would like to first say from 1992 to 2020 i was registered republican. after seeing everything our former president did to divide this country, it is a shame. president biden has been in office for about 11 days now and everyone is on him about unity. it takes time. it takes folks like one already leader mcconnell who, for a year -- week or more, stalled the senate to get on board. it takes folks like nancy pelosi to stand up -- she's got a majority in the house.

chuck schumer has majority in the senate. we've got to try to push through ideas and policies of president biden and we can get this country back on track. unity is not just about one side. the democrats cannot fight it alone. those republican senators that have supported qanon, ted cruz, josh hawley -- they are part of the problem and the only way we are going to fix things is they recognize that former president trump did a lot of damage to this country as far as everyone wanting to unite. we can do it, but it is going to take everybody across the board. it is not just a one-man mission nation and president biden understands that. he is trying to reach out but at some point, you have to stop trying to reach out and you have to do things through executive order, which he has done. host: let me get a republican

parler -- republican caller. shirley. caller: i am so glad i got to talk this morning. i was looking in the dictionary to see what the meaning is of the word that you have. it was kind of frightful for me because to unify is to divide everything you have. i hope that is not what you are thinking of. everybody needs to get their own impression of it. they can look on their computer or telephone or on webster dictionary like i do. they need to read it and see what they are talking about. host: thanks for calling. in connecticut, republican again, elaine. caller: i am glad i got through

after a year of calling and calling. host: thank you for your persistence. we are glad you got through. caller: i am very glad. when trump was in, they disrespected. they did not even know what the word respect, never mind unity meant. every talk show, the view, they are so filthy. i cannot understand why grown men say things on the night show about him. when he was making a speech, nancy pelosi stood up at the end of the speech and ripped the papers up. they should've taken her by the arm and gotten her out of there. her and schumer have been in there long enough. they should take them out. start with new people. as far as biden unifying anything, i say trump won the election. there was fraud. biden sat in the seller and had

that smirk on. he did not do anything. trump had millions of voters. and he came in, he did so many things for the veterans. biden already shut down the pipeline. my gas has gone up $.50 a gallon. what does he think he is doing? we are living on $35,000 a year and he is doing all this and talking about unified? he does not know what that word means. we all love trump. host: elaine gets the last word for this hour. it is 8:00 here in washington, snowy day in washington. in the senate and in the central and eastern part of the country today. we will spend 45 minutes about the virus, the new variants that are out there and what it means for ongoing vaccine development.

later, we will look at u.s.-russia relations under the biden administration. we will talk with alina polyakova. we will be right back. you are watching "washington journal." >> tonight on q&a, investigative journalist lawrence roberts talks about his book, made a 1971, which examines the spring offensive when tens of thousands of anti-vietnam war protesters including veterans came to washington, d.c. in an effort to shut down the federal government. >> it is a story about how we as a nation, as a people, as individuals go into one of those periodic emergencies in american democracy. people stay by principles or are

caught up in self-preservation. it is a story between the clash between an embattled president, in this case richard nixon, who confronts a social movement in the streets, just as he is fighting to get reelected. what constitutional lines to his administration cross in an effort to stay in power? >> investigative journalist lawrence roberts tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's q&a. >> you are watching c-span, your unfiltered view of government, created by america's cable television companies in 1979. today, we are brought to you by these television companies who provide c-span to viewers as a public service. >> washington journal continues.

host: joining us now is andrew pekosz from the john hopkins -- johns hopkins bloomberg school of public health. thank you for joining us. let's get some of your take first on the washington post story today. it talks about you tatian's that are out there now, adding urgency to the vaccination effort. they write that the road to herd immunity looks longer. the emergence of more transmissible, potentially vaccine evading variants threatens to make 2021 feel too much like 2020. what do use the out there right now -- you see out there right now? guest: the term variant is a broad term that characterizes viruses that appear to be doing two things. they appear to be getting better

at infecting our respiratory tract. the second thing they are doing is they appear to be getting mutations that are preventing some of the antibodies that can be induced by vaccination or infection from binding to new variants. these two things happening at the same time are the concern. we do not want anything to derail our vaccination campaign. these new variants and their ability are things we are going to have to consider as we go forward. host: are variants in a case like this surprising and how does the medical community tackle these strains? >> viruses always mutate. this particular coronavirus mutates at a slower rate than many other viruses. it is not surprising that these mutations have occurred.

scientists have been monitoring this -- for this for a long period because we assume to something like this would happen. this convergence of mutations that appears to increase transmission and evade immune responses is something that was a bit unexpected. the fact that these were occurring globally -- some of these viruses are being generated in different places. some are spreading from other places. it seems like there has been a incredible increase of activity over the past two or three months with this virus, and that is what is really getting this virus even more on our radar screens of it was not before. host: phone numbers on the bottom of our screen for our guests. he is andrew pekosz with johns hopkins. we are talking covid-19 variants, vaccine development. numbers will be split regionally. eastern and central time zone, call (202) 748-8000. mountain and pacific, (202)

748-8001. separate, third line for medical professionals this morning, (202) 748-8002. our guest is educated at rutgers and has a phd from the university pennsylvania. he is a overall addressed. broaden the conversation for a moment or two. what else are you seeing in terms of vaccine development and its response to these variants? guest: there are problems with vaccine rollout. if you think about the vaccine itself, in the u.s. in particular, we are fortunate to have two vaccines showing good responses. the pfizer and moderna vaccine seem to be inducing strong immune responses, in many cases

stronger than what we see in people infected with the virus. that is good because the stronger the immune response you have, the less likely it is that the virus can evade that and the better protected you will be from infection. two new vaccines are coming down the pipeline, one from johnson & johnson. the johnson & johnson vaccine is particularly interesting because it is one-shot immunization and that vaccine does not need that cold that the moderna and pfizer vaccines have. the johnson & johnson vaccine may help increase the rate at which we vaccinate because there are less constraints in distributing the vaccine and storing that vaccine before it needs to be used. i see a lot of good things from the vaccine standpoint that will happen over the next few weeks. host: you refer to problems with the rolling out of the vaccine. how many people need to get

vaccinated for it to start making a broad difference to turn things around? host: there are 2 -- guest: there are two answers to that appearing we could immunize highly vulnerable populations, the elderly, health-care workers getting in contact with this virus at high rates, we could almost immediately see a downturn in the number of severe cases of covid-19 and hospitalizations from infection. there is interesting data from israel that shows exactly that. the vaccine campaign was robust and the almost immediately saw a downturn in the number of hospitalizations from covid-19. if we are talking about the general population, different numbers have been discussed, but i think you want to get around 75% of the adult population immunized before you can see a significant downturn in terms of

numbers of cases that are out there. it is not black or white. as we get more vaccines into people, case numbers go down slowly. it is that 75% number many are targeting to achieve before fall 2021 to make sure we immunize enough people to prevent another outbreak like we saw last year. host: a call in for andrew pekosz. larry is calling for minnesota on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. i have a question. do you remember when ebola took off in africa? guest: absolutely. caller: ok. do you remember the procedure they used to control ebola? guest: there were multiple ones, so i'm not sure which one you're

referring to. caller: do you remember the word quarantine? host: why don't you keep going and make your larger point? caller: ebola, they quarantine everybody to keep it from spreading. the chinese did not and neither did the cdc. they sent everybody home who was sick and told them there was no medication to help them. it seems opposite of what they did during ebola. my point is, if ebola comes back to the united states, are we going to listen to vouching again? -- fauci again? guest: there are a few things that are different. the important thing about the covid-19 outbreak was, from the beginning, people showing

symptoms were suggested to go home and quarantine, and we were monitoring for people showing symptoms. what we did not know at the beginning was there was such a large percentage of the population that were getting infected and showing mild or no symptoms. it is really that population that drove the spread of the virus into -- globally. so the public health interventions that work for ebola, finding people showing symptoms, quarantining them, and identifying people that came in contact with them do not work as effectively against covid-19 because of those large numbers of cases where people are not showing symptoms. that is why we want to have social distancing and mass wearing to try to prevent the transmission from people showing low amounts of symptoms or no symptoms at all. host: we will get to more calls. we are not doing party

affiliations for this segment. it is eastern and central. that is one number. mounted and pacific, that is another number. we will put phone numbers on the bottom of the screen and get more calls in in a moment. that last caller mentioning dr. fauci. here's dr. fauci talking about some of the questions surrounding the new variant at the white house news conference last week. [video clip] >> the variations do have clinical consequences. as you can see, even though the long-range effect in the sense of severe disease is still handled reasonably well by the vaccines, this is a wake-up call to all of us that we will be dealing, as the virus uses its devices to evade pressure, that we will continue to see the evolution of mutants. that means we as a government,

companies, all of us there in this together will have to be nimble to adjust readily to make versions of the vaccine that are specifically directed toward whatever mutation is actually prevalent at any given time. finally, this all tells us that it is an incentive to do what we have been saying all along, to vaccinate as many people as we can as quickly as we possibly can because mutations occur because the virus has a playing field to mutate. if you stop that and stop the replication, viruses cannot mutate if they do not replicate. that is the reason to continue to do what we are doing, intensify our ability and

implementation to vaccinate as many people as possible as quickly as possible. host: anything you want to respond to that from dr. fauci? guest: dr. fauci is correct. what we are seeing is the results from the novavax and j&j clinical trials were showing some of these variants were still being protected by the vaccine, but it was not as efficient as the protection against the older strains. the older strains were seeing 80% to 90% effectiveness of vaccines against them. that dropped to 50% to 60% against newer variants. that is not a bad thing. we understand viruses are evading some immune responses but that is telling us the vaccine is still working against variants. we really need to do now is continue to get ahead of this virus, come up with ways we can generate booster vaccines that

might allow more specific control these variants, and work that into our vaccination program along with vaccines currently being rolled out host: -- rolled out. host: nikki is in texas. caller: it has taken me almost a year now to finally get a hold of myself of masks that say they are n95. i am excited about that because i have not been trusting the cloth masks and things like that . they did not seem to be appropriate or adequate. i have two questions. with all the variants, it seems like it is important now that we stop the spread. why is and the seat -- why isn't the cdc and others advocating more forcefully for the use of the n95 masks? now that i have these masks, i am concerned about aerosolized

particles entering through the eyes. i wondered if you could recommend what kind of eyewear would be adequate to protect against aerosol particles entering through the eyes. guest: let's start from the last part. having the virus enter through your eyes has not been shown to be a major route of transmission. we do know things as simple as safety glasses, sometimes regular glasses. in the hospital, we have used face shields and we use those things as a second set of barriers in addition to a mask to continue to lower the amount of potential exposure one gets. she brings up a good point. there is no one perfect way to keep yourself healthy from infection. what we are trying to build here

are layered approaches. so you put a mask on, you keep social distancing, you avoid crowds, wash your hands. those things each contribute to our protection from infection. no one of them by themselves is 100%. even the n95 masks, studies have shown that if you do not wear the 95 masks effectively, you will not do that added protection that the n95 masks gives you over a regular cloth facial covering. the important thing is, if you have an n95 masks, make sure you know how to wear it correctly. we have a test we do to make sure people are buying the right mask and wearing it correctly. it is multiple approaches, no one thing that will protect you from infection. it is that layered approach of several things that will cumulatively allow you to protect yourself from infection.

host: the new york times has a double page spread for folks wanting to learn more about what to expect when it is time to roll up your sleeve. they do a lot of q&a, from where do i go to sign up for a shot to when i can start going to movies again. what are the most important things people should be thinking about? we just talked about masks, washing hands. what else should they be thinking about? guest: the vaccine is one to be one more layer of protection that we are rolling out in the population. for the first few months, you would not expect too many more changes from what we are doing in terms of our regular approaches in public health intervention. vaccination of the general population is low, we are going to ask people to maintain almost -- public health interventions like social distancing, limiting meetings, limiting large

gatherings. we are going to try to make sure that, as people roll out the vaccine, we have that as another layer of protection. i'm hoping by the time we get to the summer case numbers go down. we will start to see public health interventions start to be eased a bit. the goal will be to get to 70 percent of the adult -- population vaccinated by december to make sure when we get into the fall -- september to make sure we get into the fall we do not have a repeat of last fall and winter. host: paul is calling from england. caller: is it enough to have just one injection?

will every country have vaccinations? at the moment, some countries cannot get any. host: how would you describe conditions in? the u.k. right now? -- in the u.k. right now? i am sure caller: -- caller: i am sure that will get sorted eventually. it is doing well in this country and fingers crossed that we get even better. guest: as more vaccines come out, they will be under different schedules. the j&j vaccine will only take one dose. our infrastructure in terms of medical record-keeping and new things put in place to monitor for vaccine -- vaccinations will keep track of who gets what vaccine. the issue of equity in terms of who gets the vaccine, how

vaccine is distributed, that is a difficult question. it is outside my area of expertise. we have to remember this is a global pandemic. immunizing 100% of one country is not going to reduce the threat as much as trying to make sure we are minimizing the virus globally in all countries. we have to think about our vaccination level as something that has to occur everywhere. if we leave any part of the globe smoldering with the virus to mutate, that will eventually come back to be a problem for all of us. the global vaccination program has to be considered as we are generating vaccines. host: to georgia now, or scott is on the line. caller: i read an article this

morning in the washington post on all the mutations. they made the point that actually when these mutations happen your vaccination rate has to go off. supposedly, as it mutates, it loses its verrilli tea or whatever, meaning the severity. so far, that has not happened and it makes me wonder -- here's a question. the longer the virus is in the system, does it mutate more because it has more time? or is it a shorter lasting virus, meaning it blows through a whole population and never mutates? is that a positive? or if -- the longer the game is played, does it mutate more and possibly avoid the vaccine and all that? do you have to go back to the

drawing board and come up with another vaccine? host: interesting question there. guest: it is not how long the pandemic is going. it is about the number of cases and whether the virus is then allowed to mutate or replicate completely. when you have a high number of cases, there is more likelihood that the virus will mutate. it is more likely it will mutate in a place that might give it an advantage. by lowering the number of cases, that is how you can limit the chance of mutations from occurring. it is not about how long we have been with the pandemic. it is trying to keep the number of cases down because that will limit the chance of the virus to mutate in these particular sites. we tend to think of viruses and humanize them, but viruses are not smart. they have no intelligence. they mutate randomly across

every gene they have. it is only by chance that they can mutate once in a while in an area that gives them an advantage. by dropping the number of cases, we can limit the chance, the probability, that a mutation will occur in one of these areas that will give the virus and advantage over previous strains. host: a new forecast from the university of washington, best case scenario, close to another 200,000 americans are likely to die between now and may 1. basically, in the next three months on top of the 400,000 plus. your reaction to that figure? explain to what extent these variants, mutations will increase that number. guest: i have not seen the modeling study you are referring to, but certainly people are

working really hard at trying to understand how vaccination is going to be balanced by the movement of variants that may be spreading more efficiently the population. vaccinations are taking time. the nature of the vaccinations, trying to get it out to the most vulnerable populations first, has also contributed to the slow nature of rolling out the vaccine. it is going to take a few weeks before you start to see the effects of vaccination in the population. i would hope as we ramp up the vaccines the number you just said will be reduced as we get more efficient. host: manny is calling from california now. caller: good morning. host: what would you like to say or ask? caller: i am a retired law

professor in havana, cuba and california. there is a huge difference between two countries. 1.7 is the number for 100,000 deaths for cuba and here it is 130 per 100,000 deaths from the virus. in the u.s., -- i do not think communist countries like china, vietnam, even north korea are given enough credit for what they have done to combat the virus. host: to what you'd -- do you attribute the difference? caller: i think the cubans are doing it the old-fashioned way, like the chinese, the communist

governments, even though they are totalitarian, they seem to have their way of isolating, convincing people to isolate. out here in california, if you are for trump, you do not even wear a mask, that type of thing. i wanted to see the guest's point as to what are these communist countries doing right and what are we doing wrong. host: thank you for explaining those differences. what is your take, dr. pekosz? guest: i would not just say it is communist countries. there are countries like taiwan, south korea that have done a good job in terms of limiting the number of cases, limiting the spread of the virus by very extensive testing, testing done

in a rapid manner. and putting in place public health measures and making sure those public health measures are being followed by members of the general population. you also get a greater buy-in from the population then we have in the united states. there are examples of countries that have been able to control the numbers of cases. i forgot about new zealand and australia, for instance, as exec was a countries that are not totalitarian -- as examples of countries that are not totalitarian that limit the number of cases. we can do this. it takes a will in the general population itself to do these things effectively. here is a headline from the wall street journal and other places.

the cdc is going to require masks on all forms of public track for tatian tuesday, reversing the trump administration policy. how much of a difference will this make? guest: i think it will make a big difference. here at work, as soon as people start coming up, everybody is supposed to wear masks at all times. a similar situation on public trust for tatian, places where people are coming together and you need multiple lawyers of production. masks will be one of those things. we have to continue having a society that is functioning. people do need public transportation. i have several people in my laboratory that use public transit rotation to get to and from work. anything we can do to increase the level of compliance among the general population in situations where people are coming together is going to be

important and limit the number of cases occurring. host: we heard this yesterday. a congressman in massachusetts -- a couple folks. a representative from covid-19 -- from massachusetts got covid-19 african his second vaccine shot. how can it happen -- after getting his second vaccine shot. how can it happen? guest: the 90 plus percent efficacy with the pfizer and moderna vaccine happens two weeks after your second dose. previous to that, your immunity is being developed. it is not at that level that will get the 90 to 95% efficacy you saw on the study. you will see people who after

their first vaccination maybe got infected, people who after their second vaccination, particularly within 10 days of that second vaccination, may have gotten infected as well. some of that is not surprising. overall, there is probably a number of people that get enough immunity to be protected. if you think about immunity from the vaccine, it is two weeks after the second dose before you reach that level of high protection. previous to that, you've a greater chance of being infected. 95% efficacy means 5% of the population will still get infected after being vaccinated. we expect to see some of those cases. the vast majority of people will be protected. host: in florida now. caller: good morning.

i do not know if this is typically the end question you can answer, but at least it will get the word out and maybe something will help. i am a homebound person, 71 years old, multiple things that could cause me to be a severe case of covid. i have a primary that comes to my house once a month, which is a wonderful program. she says they are not going to get the vaccine until lord knows when. i do not have a computer any longer. getting an appointment and getting to get these two shots are astronomical. i have been out of my home since last february 3 times. so i do not want to ruin that record and get covid because i

have to go get the covid vaccine . i am wondering -- when they set up that it is designed for over 65 people to get the vaccine, how does a person like me get on that line? i feel like maybe next september or something. medically, i need to see my doctors. over the phone does not do a lot. i am very frustrated. i would gladly go to get it, but everything is filled up. if you do have a number you can call, there is nothing available. why can't a doctor that comes to

my house get the vaccine for shut-ins? nobody has talked about shut-ins. host: a lot of concern there come out logistical issues, getting to the place to get the shots without getting sick. what would you say? guest: my own father is homebound. my mother is the primary caregiver and it has been the same situation the caller has been in, barely able to go out over the past few months. my brothers and i have been trying to help in terms of food deliveries and those things. i feel the caller? situation so personally -- the caller's situation so personally. i have been trying to get them onto a vaccination campaign with no success for the reasons the caller mentioned. these are the things that the

greater leadership from a centralized federal level -- there are ways we can do this. we have vaccination teams that can do with the caller says, go to individual homes, give people vaccines, and do that in a safe manner. we need to be better logistically at doing that. it is one of the things i think the new and ministration's pandemic preparedness plan will hopefully speed up and do more efficiently. the problems he caller has brought out, i have heard them in many places. i am hopeful that a few more weeks of organization, better leadership, better guidance from the federal level will help smooth out some of these things. host: craig is in titusville, new jersey. caller: i am an anesthesiologist. host: tell us what the situation is like in new jersey with

covid. caller: well, i'm not sure what the situation is at the moment overall. i saw statistics that new jersey leads the country and highest per capita deaths from covid. i have a comment in question. i would like to give the for all just some statistics. according to the united nations, an additional 270 million people globally have been pushed into starvation as a result of the economic effects of covid. 117 million children globally are not being vaccinated. malaria is projected to double. more americans will die because

of the economic effects of the lockdown. according to the cdc, drug overdoses are up. cancer screenings are down. one million cancers are not going to be diagnosed. coronary deaths are up. suicides are up as well as long-term psychological and social effects. according to a colleague of yours i heard on tv recently, 40 million americans on medicare, 6500 have died of covid. my question is this. to you and dr. fauci and your colleagues, do you believe medically or ethically it is moral and ethical to place over 400 million lives at the direct risk globally -- or is it irrelevant how many hundreds of millions die as long as they do not die from covid?

i never hear it discussed, these collateral effects discussed by infectious disease. guest: i will not speak to the numbers being quoted by the caller, but i will say that those types of implications of the pandemic and public health interventions we have put in place are a major focus of governments and public health departments. it is clear we have to make sure that kids get the vaccines. we have to make sure people get health care that they need to deal with all the medical ailments they have that are going to happen even in the presence or absence of the pandemic. we just have to learn how to do those things safely and more effectively. i think that is also going to be variable in terms of the country you're in and the economic position of that country. i do think those concerns are being addressed here and as with

many things with the pandemic, everything is harder to do because of the public health interventions. all you have to do is look at numbers in the u.s. in terms increased number of deaths over the past year during the pandemic that can be directly attributed to infection, and that number is high. we have to get that under control before we can really start to open the economy and work at a better level for some of the things the caller was talking about. host: onto las vegas now, where mel is on the line. caller: hello. yes, i have a personal question. i am 89 years old. i have macular degeneration now. i get a shot every month. i had bell's palsy. whenever my eyes get dilated, my

nerve on the right side of my face gets aggravated and my teeth ache. i am concerned that if i get the shot it is going to aggravate the bell's palsy again. i'm also on a drug because i had a fibroid bypass years ago and it helps me keep breathing. i am concerned whether i'm doing the right thing or not. i am 89 years old and a little concerned. if you could help me out, i would appreciate it. host: thank you for calling. guest: i do not want to give personal medical advice over the phone because obviously that is not appropriate. i will say the cdc has been considering things you're talking about. all that information is being captured on the cdc website. i would encourage the caller to

have a conversation with their health care provider to go over all these things. when it comes to the moderna and pfizer vaccine, many of these types of conditions do not necessarily preclude you from getting the vaccine. it is important to have an in-depth discussion with your medical provider to make sure the combination of things are being considered before you make the decision about vaccination. host: what are you seeing around the country in terms of acceptance of getting vaccines? guest: it has been encouraging to see that more people in the country are willing to take the vaccine. i think that is important, that people understand the process. this was a vaccine that was speedily put into the market, but corners were not cut with respect to the safety and

efficacy of the vaccines. communicating that effectively to the population is an important thing that needs to continue. i am seeing a lot of people -- i heard even callers today who are wanting to get the vaccine and trying to get it. that is a good thing. we need to encourage that and send the message to people that we are continuing to monitor safety and efficacy and those things are a primary concern. host: also wanted your take on a new york times story making the point here that 18.5 billion has been spent on vaccines with just a $.2 billion on other therapies, drugs like monoclonal antibodies. vaccines versus other treatments, what is your take on what is going on? guest: in the public health

realm, we talk about prevention being more of a critical factor. the emphasis on vaccines is to get the immunity out there to prevent cases. it is not to say there has not been progress on treatments. there has been significant progress. we know the mortality rate from covid-19 specifically in the u.s. has been dropping as we have gone through this pandemic. it is because the medical community has learned how to treat more severe cases and limit the mortality from severe cases. vaccines are on the other end of the spectrum. they were going to prevent infections and have a trickle effect into severe cases. i agree we need more work on therapies. we need to understand that, in a virus disease, treating early is always going to be better than trying to treat late. we have to focus more on

therapies the start early in the infection process that could be more efficient at turning the course of the infection rather than waiting until someone gets so sick that it is a huge medical problem. host: rita is a medical professional as well. caller: i'm a registered nurse. host: any perspectives from kentucky on covid? caller: the pcr testing that is used for testing people for covid is 90 plus percent shows false positives and numbers are based on that. i'm concerned about that. how does a man-made virus replicate? guest: a couple things. the false positive rate the caller mentioned, that is not true. the pcr test has a low false

positive rate. one of the issues with the pcr test is it can tell you you are positive after the period of time you were able to transmit the virus. that has caused confusion in the population because, 10, 11 days post infection, you can still be pcr positive but at that point you have so little virus in the system -- your system you cannot transmit the virus to anyone else. the test has to be put into its proper perspective but it does not have a false positive rate the way the caller mentioned. host: our last call from north carolina. we read on the screen you had covid at one point. is that correct? what was the experience like for you? caller: me and my family -- fiance had it. she had a hard time with it. i had very few symptoms for a couple days. we have suffered from long

systems which are good -- symptoms which are getting better now. when i went to the doctor and had a positive, why didn't they aggressively treat it? all they told us was to -- if we got short of breath, do not come here to the hospital. am i safe to take a vaccine after having covid? what has happened to the flu and cold? is it because we are wearing masks that they are not rampant? host: before covid -- guest: before covid, my laboratory focus on influenza. it seems like public health interventions put in place to limit covid are having a greater effect on flu, cold, and respiratory viruses. we are not seeing those

infections presumably because of public health interventions that we are having. there are three questions there. host: he did have covid at one point and wonders if it is ok to take the vaccine. guest: people in vaccine studies were in exactly that situation. a number of people had covid when they were enrolled in vaccine studies. getting the vaccine after having covid resulted in strong immune responses. if you had covid, make sure you line up for the vaccine as well guarantee vaccine should help strengthen your immune responses. vaccination gives stronger immune responses than infection, particularly in the case of a caller with a mild case. if you had covid, stolen him for the vaccine when it is your turn to do it because that vaccine will help strengthen your immune

responses and get you to a high level of immunity. host: andrew pekosz is an immunologist. thank you for your expertise and insight on things. guest: you are welcome. host: we will take another short timeout, then return to questions from earlier today. we asked folks what they thought about president biden's unity pledge, how it is going, what are you expecting. here are the numbers to call. democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. again, president biden's unity plan as he begins to take office. later in the program, we will talk with alina polyakova with the center for european policy

analysis, look at the issue of u.s.-russian relations under the biden administration and talk about protests happening throughout russia. we will be right back. >> tonight at 9:00 p.m. eastern on afterwards, charles blow on his book, the devil you know, a black power manifesto. >> if black people had not migrated, it is possible black people could control up to 14 senate seats were be the majority part of the coalition to do that. it is possible they could have controlled more electoral college votes than california and new york state combined. it is possible they would have real power on a state level. what i am saying to black

america, particularly young black americans, i saw you in the streets. i have seen you protesting about this. if you really want a shot at changing the systems you are protesting against, one of the quickest ways to do that is through state power. i am asking that they consider reverse migration, which a lot of people are doing without thinking about political considerations. do it with political intentionality. >> watch afterwords with charles blow tonight on c-span2. >> with the biden administration leading federal response to the coronavirus pandemic, follow the

latest at c-span.org/coronavirus. search coverage of news conferences and remarks for members of congress. use the interactive gallery of maps to follow cases in the u.s. and worldwide. >> washington journal continues. host: more of your phone calls on a theme we touched on earlier in the program having to do with president biden's unity pledge. we will hear from the president in a moment and take some of your calls, but this is what god is interested. biden struggles to define his unity promise for a divided nation. they write that barack obama offered hope and change. donald trump vowed to make america great again. george w. bush promised compassion. for president biden, the slogan

comes down to one word, unity. the biden campaign came to office promising unity. a feel catch all -- a feel-good catch all with few tangible specifics. now the right biden and his team are working to lament that call, which is already been weaponized by republicans that disagree with biden's policy aims and challenged by some fellow democrats. here is a look at president biden's from -- president biden from recently, a news conference he did. [video clip] >> unity requires you to illuminate vitriol, make anything you disagree with about the other person's personality or lack of integrity or not decent legislators. we have to get rid of that. i think that is already beginning to change. god knows where things go.

unity also is trying to reflect what the majority of the american people, democrat, republican, and independent, think is within the fulcrum of what needs to be done to make their lives and the lives of americans better. for example, if you look at data , and i am not claiming the data to be exact, if you look at the data, you have -- you may correct me if i get the number wrong. i think it is 58% of the american people, including democrats and independents, think we have to do something about the covid vaccine. we have to do something about making sure the people who cannot eat them up do not have food are in a position where they are about to be thrown out of their apartments, etc. have an opportunity to get a job, that we -- they think we should be acting, doing more.

unity also is trying to get at a minimum, even if you pass a legislation that gets passed, it does not mean there was not unity. it is not just -- it just means it was not bipartisan. i prefer these things to be bipartisan because i am trying to generate consensus and take the vitriol out of all of this. i'm confident from my discussions. there are a number of republicans who know we have to do something about food and security for people in this pandemic. i am confident they know we have to do something about figuring out how to get children back in school. there are easy ways to deal with this. if you are anti-union, you can say it is because of teachers. if you want to make a case that it is complicated, you have -- say what you have to do to get into those schools? we are going to have arguments.

because it was bipartisan, i thought it would increase the prospects of passage, the additional $1400 in direct cash payments. there -- there is a legitimate reason people say, do you have the lines drawn in the right way? i'm open to negotiate those things. host: joe biden from a news conference last week. a snow we look at a news conference. this headline on usa today. president biden and republicans do not agree on what that looks like. frederick on the line, independent caller. what you make of the president? unity pledge -- the president's unity pledge? caller: i want to simple fight it by looking at the first paragraph of the constitution, the preamble. if all people would read that

for themselves, there would be less controversy up there in washington. part of that says, ensure domestic trend quality. that is a form of unity from that standpoint. i hope all people read the preamble so they have understanding. it is simple. and it greater would understand. -- an eighth grader would understand. caller: i voted for trump. when obama was in, i respected the fact that he was my president. i was disheartened at all the stuff out of for lucy and all of them about deprogramming me. i do not need to be deprogrammed. i just have a difference of opinion. last time i checked, the constitution gave me that right.

they are tearing us apart. it is not him. it is pelosi and all them calling to do this terrible stuff to us, taking us off the internet. leave us alone. you won. let's get on with getting this country in peace. host: from martha to joe now. caller: all this talk about unity and bipartisanship is kind of a misdirection, deliberate misdirection. we have too much unity for the last 75 years in support for a $1 trillion budget going to the military-industrial complex, cia, secret police, and all of its foundations and think tanks

that turn up on all the radio, television, and newspapers. we need other alternatives to this demonization of russia, china, cuba venezuela. there seems to be nothing but a totalitarian unity colt of demonization of these countries to feed the military-industrial complex $1 trillion of our tax money while the rest of civilian society goes. it is so close to the commemoration of martin luther king. i recommend people listen to and read his printed and taped speeches at mlk's antiwar speech at riverside church. he called the united states the greatest purveyor of violence and war and imperialism in the war -- world. we never hear that, only the

pretty platitudes of the i have a dream speech. there is deliberate censorship by the media and other sources and information clearinghouse are completely excluded from any exposure on any of the media, which i believe is controlled. alternatives. host: we do get the point and we want to get rob's point. what do you make of the unity pledge? guest: of course, a lot of us democrats think it is a great idea, and we wouldn't want anything more. it is definitely going to be an uphill battle. i wouldn't even know or suggest what the first or second steps would be. talking about deprogramming.

i grew up in upstate new york, my dad was a republican trustee for 17 or 18 years, the mayor of our town. i helped on his elections. i didn't know any democrats. my mom held bible studies. the democrats beat my dad once in the primary election, and my mom went up to the democrat winners and cursed like i've never heard her before. fast-forward to 1991, i moved to massachusetts. it took me about a year to be around democrats and smart people that were into education and health care and smart people who talk about smart things. it took me a whole year to start thinking maybe i'm not a republican, i kind of agree with a lot of these democrats really i think it could start from the parents and the kids, sort of like racism and prejudice. fortunately, i did not have a

lot of that. host: an earlier caller in the first hour today said a very diverse country, the united states. you cannot have diversity and unity at the same time. what do you make of that? guest: i'm not sure. i tend to be a little bit more optimistic, but the pessimistic side of me is still there because you have other news outlets like fox news. i can't believe that they are not even held accountable for not bringing any unity. they don't have programs like yours where people can call in and say their opinions and things like that. i have lost family members and friends who think i'm crazy because i watch you and i listen to npr.

sure, i think my optimistic side, of course you can have that rested and unity, you just have to start young, i think, at this point. again, from my own example. host: thank you for weighing in this morning, we appreciate your participation in the program. headlining usa today, republicans say bidens agenda does not unite. here is a republican in wyoming. members of the senate earlier this week talking about a flurry of executive orders announced. >> a bill to provide $900 billion of relief was signed just in place december,. president biden now wants to double that amount of funding. the democrats may try to ram a bill through the senate using it progress -- a process called budget reconciliation.

it will likely be done without a single republican vote. this is not unity, it is not bipartisanship. it is not healing our division this is a time for president biden to heed the words of his own inaugural address. we need to work together to lower the cost of living, to produce more energy, to create more jobs, to create more opportunities for every american. that is how we bring our nation together. that is what we ought to do now. host: talking about the reconciliation efforts in congress. here is a headline. the measurement set the stage for quick movement on the president's coronavirus relief pan, bypassing that effort --

coronavirus relief plan, bypassing that effort as soon as tomorrow. talking about unity. in washington, and around the country. president biden's unity pledge bill. texas, republican caller, what do you think? caller: i don't think we are going to get anyplace on the concept of unity until we have equal opposition of law. we can't let individual prosecutors make up their mind. we can't have a forum on whether we are going to enforce this law, enforce that low, a -- law, and side that we are going to have our government do anything at all. we can't trust them to do what we asked them to do. we cannot pass a law in which each individual politician makes up their own mind. and the vitriol has to stop. because we just don't need those

nasty people. thank you. host: will, california, democratic caller. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my call. the thing that unity, we are not going to have unity until we deal with this coronavirus. everyone is talking about the project, republicans want money for businesses and like, but until we solve this coronavirus and get over this, we will not get unity. maybe when this happens, we will have unity. thank you. host: a couple different pieces here. don't permanently censor the capital, threats can be met with an adequate number of police and national guard troops.

the senate needs absentee voting is another of the editorials in the new york times. they think chuck schumer should take a more pragmatic approach. if anything, the senate should be 50/50 split which makes every vote more critical and makes a need for a plan that much greater. making any plan temporary and contingent on specific conditions being met. the office acknowledged that this is a serious issue and told the board he is looking into it. they are talking about absentee voting on the floor of the senate. basque continues to extend rules to continue to allow for proxy voting this week. one more thing to show you within the washington post, it ties the pandemic and with the

economy. mom, i am hungry is the quote. one in nine u.s. adults say they do not have enough to eat. crisis made worse by the pandemic. showing folks that are point up to food lines. a little bit more on unity and what folks are saying. marco rubio, a senator from florida, republican fury and radical leftist agenda and divided country do not help if i, it will only confirm 75 million americans' biggest fears about the new administration. another quote, unifying, buden biden ends partial ban on transgender soldiers and u.s. military. terry from pennsylvania, republican. caller: hello. biden asking for unity is really rich.

where was the unity during president trump's term? all i ever herad w -- heard was ranker from the left. i don't think that biden is earnest. this is about power, that is all it is about. that is all the democrats want, is power. as far as i'm concerned, president biden is just blowing in the wind. host: another call from vero beach. in florida, independent line. hello. caller: biden, it is hard for him to unite the country. number one, i am independent.

you have to purge donald trump and the far-right. in order to do that you have to have a leader in congress, republican leader in congress. even mcconnell. mcconnell also has to be replaced. we need the middle, not far-right, not far-left. this is number one. second, what if biden catches coronavirus? thanks so much. host: are you still there? caller: yes. host: you said you voted for donald trump in 2016. i asked who you voted for in 2020.

caller: i voted for biden because after i voted for donald trump in 2016 i found out he was just a joke. he doesn't care about other people, he cares about himself. i can give you examples. he nominated his sister as a judge. donald trump attack hillary clinton. hillary clinton nominated your sister and you attack his wife? host: thank you for calling.

last call for the segment on the president's unity pray. indiana, democratic caller. >> good morning. thanks for taking my call. i think there is something to be said about unity. he was trying to bring the country together. we need to slow down the rhetoric. the rhetoric that is coming out of the trump office. before biden. i think unity is a place to start. it has only been a week or so, so let's see. host: thanks for calling.

that is the last word for this stretch, we will take another timeout and then bring on another guest for a segment about russia and the u.s. our guest will be from the center for european policy analysis, and will tell us what is happening with that phone call between president biden and president putin the other day. and the riots in protests in russia. she'll take your questions and comments. we will be right back. announcer: former president trump became the first president to be impeached twice. this week, how's impeachment managers delivered the articles of impeachment against the former president on incitement of insurrection to the senate with marilyn democratic rep. sinema: jamie raskin -- marilyn democratic reppert of jamie raskin -- maryland democratic representative jamie raskin reading before the senate. >> the disqualification to hold

and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the united states, so help you god. announcer: the following day, senators were sworn in as jurors in the trial. rand paul requested a point of order to dismiss the impeachment charge is unconstitutional. >> i make a point of order that this proceeding, which would try a private citizen and not a president, a vice president, or civil officer violates the constitution and is not appropriate. announcer: the motion was tabled. the senate was adjourned until tuesday, february 9, marking the start of the senate impeachment trial. watch the senate impeachment trial live at 1:00 p.m. eastern on c-span two or listen on the radio app. you are watching c-span, your

unfiltered view of government. c-span was created by america's cable television company in 1979. today, we are brought to you by these television companies provide c-span to viewers as a public service. announcer: washington journal continues. host: eric guest's president and ceo of the center for european policy analysis. thanks a lot for joining us at the table here. we appreciate your time, you are here in washington. we are seeing more pictures and more headlines about massive numbers of people protesting arrests throughout russia. here is reuters.com. 2700 more arrested today why are people protesting in moscow and around russia these days?

guest: it has been incredible to watch this weekend, certainly. this is the second weekend of protests and demonstrations across russia. last weekend, there were approximately 4000 people arrested. the authorities have come out with a show of force this weekend, and this has all been due to alexei navalny, who is currently being jailed in russia and moscow and he is the one calling for these protests against corruption and putin in particular after releasing a very, very explosive video claiming that mr. putin has billed himself on the black sea. host: tell us more about alexei navalny and his recent history. guest: alexei navalny is a really interesting individual.

he has been involved in russian politics are many, many years. he is only 44, very young. but he obviously has had ambitions and would love to run for office but has been prevented from doing so by the russian authorities because they charged him with a federal crime that was politically motivated, does not have any legal basis as far as any european courts have been concerned. in a really brazen fashion over the summer, he was traveling in siberia and fell ill. he was later found to have been poisoned by a nerve agent that we know the russian intelligence has used in the past and the u.k. he recovered from that, in germany and just returned to russia about two weeks ago and was arrested immediately. now there have been all of these protests in support of a more just, more free, more democratic russia.

he has really become a symbol for so many different things and many russians. even if they may not like him or support him personally, they understand what he stands for, and that is for in russia that is more equal, that is less corrupt, and that works for its people and not for the people of the top. host: now we read this morning that his wife is among thousands arrested during protests in russia this weekend. how is that likely to exacerbate the situation around the country? guest: the situation around his wife has become -- is that she has become a really common activist feud many women have taken a lead in russian opposition leadership including another interesting leader who is leading many of these protests. his wife will likely be released, she has been arrested many, many times the including

last weekend but clearly, his supporters are not going anywhere. they feel that there is a huge amount of anxiety from the regime. the show of force, i don't want to underestimate how profound the regime has approached these protests. this is the greatest show of force that was seen in modern-day russia. many russian protesters have been comparing this moment to something i can to the great repression of the 1930's, which resulted in the deaths of millions. certainly, we are nowhere near matt but it is reminding people of a very dark time in russia's history. host: phone numbers on the bottom of the screen for our guest. she is president and ceo of the center for european policy analysis. we will have separate lines for democrats, republicans, and independents. (202) 748-8000 free democrats --

for democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. independents, (202) 748-8002. remind us, what is the center for european policy and how are you funded? guest: my organization is a nonprofit, nonpartisan public policy research institute. we focus on the transatlantic alliance and believe in the strength of alliances, being the u.s. national security. we are a think tank, we are funded by a variety of social foundations, many foundations to support our work because they believe it is in the interest of our security in the united states. we are absolutely independent, not affiliated with any political party. host: let's get to the biden administration for a moment. this is a tweet put up by the secretary of state. the u.s. condemns the use of harsh tactics against protesters

and journalists by russian authorities. we renew our call on russia to release those detained are exercising their human rights, including alexei navalny. here is the secretary at his briefing last week very briefly. >> as you know, we've already express our deep concern for mr. novotny specifically and more generally, with the human rights situation. in russia. it remains striking to me how concerned and maybe even scared the russian government seems to be of one man, mr. navalnt. -- mr. navalny. across the board, at the president has said, we are reviewing all of these actions. whether it is the treatment of mr. navalny, and particularly the apparent use of the chemical weapon in an attempt to

assassinate him. we are looking very urgently as well as solar winds and various implications. we are looking at the reports of bounties placed by russia on american forces in afghanistan, and of course, we are looking at these questions of election interference. all of that, as the white house has indicated, is under review. i don't want to get ahead of where we are on those reviews. as i say, we have a deep concern for mr. navalny's safety and security. the larger point is that his voice is the voice of many, many, many russians and it should be heard, not muzzled. not ruling out anything, but we want to get his full review done and then we will take it from there. >> one more question, president biden spoke with the russian

leader, mr. putin last week. what did they talk about specifically, what was your take away? guest: it was a very interesting phone call to follow. certainly president brian bought out a slew of issues -- brought up a slew of issues that we have not heard a u.s. president bring out over the last couple of years, including alexei navalny and the fact that he was jailed and he expressed his concern with the repression and the jailing of independent voices in russia.

diplomatic, u.s.-russian relationship. with this president, this phone call signals they were going to see a return to diplomatic relations between our countries where the leaders speak, that personal relationship does not form the nature of the broader

u.s.-russia relationship. i think some return to normalcy frankly also must come from the russian side who have been very keen to work together with the united states on the nuclear arms treaty, for example, and the last administration, despite the president's stated desire to have a closer relationship with russia, it never got there, never got that extension. we see a very different, almost 180 turn with president biden in terms of how he and his ministration are approaching russia. host: berkeley springs, west virginia, republican caller. good morning. caller: good morning. i have a couple of questions. you know, every time i put something on facebook, they tell me it could be partially wrong, fact-check. i would like to ask you a couple of questions. the media told us for three years that trump was a russian

asset. i want to know if you believe that and another question, has anybody ever looked into the mayor of moscow, his wife sent hunter biden $3.5 million. for what? could you answer that? there is no reason other than it is a money-laundering station -- scheme. host: thanks for calling. guest: certainly the last administration, president trump, i can only go by what we heard in the open source, i don't have any classified information. it is possible in 30 years we will get them on classified documents that reveal more than what we know. certainly what we know now is that the president, former

president, he openly stated that he wanted a closer relationship with mr. putin. he sought out that relationship and many around him later came out publicly to say that they advised against this, and could not go forward with. regarding the second comment about potential money laundering schemes, after say i have not seen any convincing evidence to support that theory. certainly, i would be open to seeing some convincing evidence but for now, i have not seen anything to show that hunter biden had done anything untoward or illegal when it comes to any financial relationships with anyone from russia. host: so far, a couple mentions of the massive solar winds hack. what real and tangible steps has the u.s. been taking, and what could they take? guest: the solar winds hack, we

really can't underestimate how profound of a breach this has been from the russian intelligence and security services. last we learned, over 250 u.s. federal agents, just u.s. agencies had been affected, as well as potentially thousands of private companies, large companies like microsoft and many other tech firms. for now, the biden administration has said that it seems like this is from merrily and intelligence gathering operation, meaning that whatever information was stolen has not been used for the purpose of attacks yet, but that could certainly come at a later point. this has happened before with some of the nsa tools that were stolen and then leaked online, by who we assume to be russian entities of proxies, later used to carry out various attacks across the world and in the united states as well. what we know so far is the new

administration, president biden has ordered his new head of intelligence to carry out a full investigation of the solar winds hack and to produce a report. we don't know when that is coming, how much of that will be classified. i'm guessing a large amount of that will be classified but certainly we are still in the phase where we need to learn more because last year when this all came to light, there was no investigation by the previous administration. hopefully now in the next couple of months, this could the a priority by this administration, to learn what was stolen, when, how, and what can we do to prevent this happening again? host: our guest holds a phd from university of california, berkeley. we are talking here about u.s.-russian relations and the biden administration. jack is in wiggins, colorado. caller: thank you for taking my

call. i've had a big concern with the way trump has always communicated with putin. over the years, i've seen whenever they have met or something, you never heard anything about it. you had all these meetings where no information has come out. my biggest concern is he has talked to putin several times over the years and we have never heard on the news other than they supposedly receive these news reports that these news companies have seen on the russian television. there has never been anything from trump or whatever that said he talked to putin. it was always positive for russia and negative for the u.s.

is that true? have the reports come from russia? that we have heard? all that has come from russia, nothing has been reported on our local news stations? guest: certainly, the trump administration, what we saw over the years from the administration was formal communication from the white house. normally, when the u.s. president speaks to a world leader like president biden did recently, we get an official readout that is shared with reporters, we get a readout from the kremlin as well. and the last you years, we've seen less effective munication. not just when it came to mr. trump's calls with president

putin, but other world leaders as well. yes, there was a certain period when we would get a readout from the kremlin but we would not get a similar readout from the white house in one of these phone calls. what that signals is that these readouts don't always match. of course, what we were forced to rely on was what the kremlin wanted us to see and not what the united states wanted everyone to see. that is certainly a mismatch and an imbalance that emerged. again, this is not particular to russia. we seen that for other world leaders as well. host: as we go back to these protests in russia, what are russians able to see on tv in their country about what is going on now, and what is their

access to the web these days? guest: these are fascinating questions. first, we have to understand that russia does not have a re-media space by any means of the word. russian television, most radio, most newspapers are state-controlled, meaning that the government puts out whatever it wants the russian people to see, and the majority of russians across russia are still getting most of their information based on some of the surveys over the recent years from television. of course, the number of young people come of age and make up a greater portion of the russian population, so that number has started to shift. still a majority of russians gain information from television and what that means is they are getting information from the government. but mr. nabelny -- mr. navalny, in a very smart way, has harnessed the power of social media. if it wasn't for youtube and

instagram, telegrams, facebook, twitter, all these social media platforms, there are a few russians probably would have ever heard the name alexei navalny because he was never given access to state resources, meaning state media. he was never mentioned. if you want russian television right now, i can guarantee there's maybe only an offhand remark or a mention about the protests going on in russia today, and this would not be the top story like it would be in the united states. it is just going to be mentioned somewhere deep in the background. interestingly, despite all of these barriers, mr. navalny's video about mr. putin's corruption and this really of seen power that he has built has now garnered over 100 million views. it is a huge achievement by a

man and his supporters who have really been barred and repressed by all means available to the russian regime. it is truly incredible when you think about it. host: before we get back to calls, showing you a picture of some of the protests in the washington post. that headline i wanted to ask you about, putin's new war on the opposition suggests he sees it as a real threat. to what extent is what is happening in russia right now a threat himself -- to putin himself? guest: what is interesting about this particular moment is not that we have not seen this in russia before, we certainly have. demonstrations in 2011 and 2012 by some estimates are perhaps even larger than what we are seeing today. and these were demonstrations against what protesters at the time saw as a fragile and illegitimate reelection of mr.

putin back to the kremlin after a short time. but certainly now, it is very different for a few reasons. one, mr. putin's own approval ratings have been slipping because of the mismanagement of the coronavirus pandemic in russia, because of the declining standard of living among russians. we have to remember that many russians outside the rich neighborhoods of moscow and st. petersburg are struggling on a day to day basis. the public health care system has also been completely ravaged by corruption and is unable to provide basic health care services. and russians see that and they are then confronted with pictures of what looks like something bigger than the french versailles palace being built by their president and it really looks like a spot to stay safe from most of them. the kind of repression that we've seen, the number of riot

police, the aggression with which they have been harassed and arrested over the last two weekends i think signals a new turn in the russian peoples' ability to contest regime power and certainly mr. putin finds himself in a very insecure place. his term currently is supposed to expire by the end of 2024, but he has recently pushed through a change to the russian constitution that will allow him to stay in power until he dies, so he will be president or leader of russia for life. certainly now at this moment, many people want a different option. they are not happy with the way things are and this comes at a very, very insecure moment. we are seeing that insecurity expressed in the kind of repression and the kind of anxiety that many russian protesters are also sensing on

the streets today. host: 20 minutes left, so let's get back to calls. arlington, virginia, democratic caller. caller: thank you. thank you for this, it is a really fascinating conversation. i have a quick question. how much credence do you give to the claims by the russian businessman that he actually owns that palace? and how much credence do you give to the idea of turning it into another trump hotel? and the real question, does navalny actually represent any kind of a party or organization? sorry for my ignorance, but i would just like to know if he is sort of a lone wolf or what his... thank you. host: we understand. thank you. guest: sure. in terms of any claims of this

massive palace on the black sea, one, president putin has actually denied that this was his property. that in itself, that denial i think is very significant. there is an old soviet joke that nothing is true until the kremlin denies it. that is likely the case here as well. when the president has to deny something, it is likely that it is truthful information. certainly, the investigation is quite long, but there are english subtitles. it is quite fantastic to say the least, to watch that. i think many will understand why the russian people are protesting today when you see something like that. it is quite unimaginable to have a leader embezzle as much money as that.

what is this affiliation? again, i think it's important to remember that alexei navalny was a leader of the russian independent political party until he was thrown in jail on trumped up charges of tax evasion and embezzlement, that is the european court of justice that has thrown that out, there is no basis in those. it is a politically-motivated case against them. and he has been banned from ever running for office. certainly, if you would have the ambition to run for office, there is no political party. so what he has done instead is run as an independent nonprofit looking at corruption called the anticorruption foundation. it is run by him and many others around him, and that is the orders asian that he has been using as a vehicle to produce these films and to also mobilize

people around him. what is really fascinating is that even though he is in jail and obviously has not had access to his usual social media accounts, those accounts, you will see if you check out his twitter or his instagram, are still posting on occasion. what that means is that he has really built a network where his colleagues have access to those accounts and they are posting on his behalf and that will continue to mobilize the population. in my mind, what is really coming in russia is a reckoning to what extent the russian government will continue to allow independent social media to function in russia today, because that is the primary reason why alexei navalny is able to organize these protests sitting in jail. host: south carolina, eric. hello? caller: yeah, with all due respect, let me just make a

couple of comments, first related to president putin and then mr. navalny. c-span, i wish you would have the late professor stephen collins from nyu on before he passed recently because he was really the only fair-minded, objective person that i hear when it comes to president putin. i am sad to know that he has passed away, but first of all, the russians have never lived any better than they are living right now. president putin has done wonders for the russian economy, for living standards. if you look at the numbers, they have $600 billion in foreign currency reserves. they are now the leading economic power of the age. if you look at the weapons they are producing, they are the leading expert in the world. living standards have been growing for 20 years, at least because of the coronavirus this year. president putin is immensely popular in russia.

i have friends in russia. navalny has been trumped up by the american state department, by the cia as this dissident figure. he is a relatively insignificant person in russia. ok? and these protest are not as big as the western media is claiming them to be. the real objective here is to kill the nord stream project. the united states does not want europe to sign on to nord stream, so that mr. and a volley -- so they are making navalny out to be this glorious figure. if the russians wanted to kill navalny, they could have done so easily. this whole poison thing has been a comical joke. host: thank you for laying out your points in your view. eric, by the way, where did you get your information these days? caller: that's interesting. as i mentioned, the late stephen

cohen. if you listen to more objective media from other parts of the world, we get a lot of misinformation from organizations which represent american interests, economic, corporate interests. ok? president putin has not allowed american banks, american corporations to get in there and to gain access to their economy for their benefit. ok? that is why he has been vilified. if you look at nato expansion, it is a direct threat to their borders. if you look at the coup organized in ukraine in 2013, that is why crimea was taken. it was a national security threat. putting missile defense on their borders as a way of stripping them of their nuclear deterrent.

these are the provocations that president putin responded to. i am not saying the man is perfect, but we are not getting an objective -- host: thank you for your participation in the program. there is a lot there to cover. can you tell us what the nord stream project is all about? guest: i do think that eric has some valid points, but i do want to make sure we get some facts straight, and this is from independent reporting, from russia's own economic, financial, and local sources. it is true that for the first eight years of putin's presidency, since about the year 2008 or so, russia did experience a growth in their financial living standards. most of that, however, was tied to the price of oil and gas, which still make up a huge

chunk, more than 50%, of russia's state revenue budget. the ruble itself tracks very closely to the price of oil. when the price of oil crashes, the russian economy tends to decline. if we look at russia as an economic global power, there's very little to support that statement. russia's gdp makes up less than 2% of global gdp. between 20% and 25% for china. certainly, russia is not an economic global power by any means of the word. yes, it is a nuclear superpower, that is a legacy that it has inherited from the soviet union, but in all other ways, militarily, russia's defense budget is a small fraction of the u.s. defense budget. they cannot compete with other global powers, not the united

states, not the nato alliance, and probably not china in the very near future. russia is in a very difficult position, to say the very least. living standards have declined quite significantly for average russians. i think if people are able to visit russia and moscow, which of course, is the urban center for the entire country, russia is the largest country in the world, but it is significantly underplayed and economic around despite some advantages. if you go 30 to 40 miles outside of moscow, what you will see is quite sad, and unfortunate poverty that many russians live in. i think that is a testament to the mismanagement of the economy by the russian government. that is to say that we would have to really understand what the realities are that many russians face.

many russians don't see a future for themselves and that is really the problem here. nord stream to, since the caller brought that up, this is a pipeline project that the russian state controls. gas company, it is a gas monopoly. it has been laying a pipeline that would allow russia to export gas from russia going under the baltic sea. if some viewers have a map in front of them, it delivers gas directly to northern europe. right now, a lot of those exports are going through ukraine, which is a more direct route to europe. there is a pipeline that goes underground past the territory of ukraine. the reason the united states has imposed sanctions on this project which is almost finished is because a variety of reasons. one, it goes against europe's energy security. it would make europe more

dependent on russian gas, versus being more diversified as europeans themselves say they want to be. two, it would allow russia to completely, potentially shuttle gas transports to ukraine which would deprive ukraine of allowing transport to its territory and potentially it would allow russia to just shut off gas to ukraine, depriving ukrainians of heat during the winter, which is something they have done multiple times before, while still allowing gas to go to europe via the northern route. it is a very controversial project for all these reasons, that multiple u.s. administrations have seen as a detriment to transatlantic security. we will see what happens, but there is a reason why the u.s. has disapproved of the for so

many years and so many administrations. host: miguel from albuquerque, republican. caller: good morning. what i want to say is that being a republican and seeing a lot of it, whether it be storming the capitol or black lives matter and antifa, it seems like there has been a lot of upgrading when it comes to the people all over the world, and now we are seeing it in russia today. it's not really a question, but i want to make a statement in support of the russian people. being an american, we always see the russians at the bad guys and we see them as the dark cloud that is always after us when in reality, the russian people are amazing people and great people. it is so great to see people from other sides of the world fighting for what is true. the u.s. with hedge fund managers, russia fighting the

oppression of opposition. i just want to say i support the russian people and anyone who is fighting russia worldwide. host: thanks for calling. any thoughts guest: i agree, i think it is really important to separate the russian regime and mr. putin from the russian people. i agree that for the russian people, it would be best for them to live in a country where they see growth, they know their children will have a better life out, than they do. they have something to look forward to, i think that is very much a universal desire and a universal need and want. i think many americans around the world can relate, and i think that is what is partially driving the kinds of protests we are seeing today in russia. many more people don't see those kinds of opportunities themselves or for their children, and that is not a

bright reality to live in. host: bring us up-to-date briefly on nuclear arms, the updated negotiations. we know the u.s.-russia treaty was signed back in 2010, started in 2011, it limits u.s. and russia to delivering nuclear weapons, extends provisions for five years. where is the u.s. and russia right now on updating any nuclear arms agreements? guest: the most dangerous development of the last couple of years has been the collapse of what was in nuclear arms infrastructure, agreements and treaties that began at the end of the soviet era, when the first agreements were signed between president gorbachev and president reagan. this was a breakthrough in then-soviet-u.s. relationships.

two nuclear superpowers were able to agree on limiting their supply and the production of a nuclear over the last several years, we've seen the inf treaty which limits some intermediate-ranged missile development, that was violated by russia, so the u.s. then left as well under the trump administration. open skies is still a big question mark. russia has told the united states they will leave that treaty because of russian violations, so there is a lot of back-and-forth. the reality is that more or less, open skies is also dead in the water. the only thing we have left his governing agreement of nuclear arms production deployment to provide for verification that is very important. we have to trust and verify when it comes to these agreements the

new start treaty. i think it is a very good development for the security of our country and the world to have an extension for five more years but unfortunately, there seems to be very little faith and very little future for resurrecting some of these now-defunct treaties, and i think that presents a dangerous situation when it comes to nuclear arms going over. host: rockaway park, new york, independent caller. good morning. caller: good morning. i have been listening, i have a couple of questions. can i make a brief statement for your viewers? the moderators here have no viewpoint. they let you speak your conspiracy theories or whatever you care to speak about.

they let you speak your voice. this is a good platform. do not attack greta, john, pedro, or any other moderator on c-span. if you want to call in, if you don't think they are telling the truth, don't even call in to c-span. please, give the moderators a chance. alina, i would like to ask you two questions. i would like to ask you about ukraine's ambassador. i think that is her name. it has been a while. she was vilified, she was threatened by donald trump's supporters for speaking the truth. with your last name, i know that you are from the eastern european countries. my grandparents were, and my

father, i didn't know until his funeral that he was awarded a bronze star for fighting against fascism. could you please describe the people what it is like to live under a fascist government? second question. can you overturn communist rule by peaceful protest, as was done in poland, and czechoslovakia, with leadership from pope john paul ii? could you please respond? host: a couple things. guest: thank you. thank you to the caller for the question about life in an authoritarian regime. it is true that i grew up for the first new years of my life in the soviet union, in ukraine, and my family immigrated to the united states when i was a child and i grew up in the united states. but that is why i have my last name, obviously.

a couple of words about what i think many americans cannot imagine, what it is like to live in an authoritarian state, where you have no rights. you have no freedoms of speech. you certainly live in constant fear and poverty. discrimination against certain minority groups, that the state not only looks past, but encourages. there were many instances, unfortunately, in my own families past as well, and many others where, in the years previous, other regimes of the soviet union, many people were disappearing, put into these gulags, prison camps in siberia. matt was a very dark past, and certainly, i don't think any russian would want to go back to that. i don't think any american could ever even imagine surviving in such an environment. it was an incredible moment in

1989 and onward when the berlin wall came down peacefully, through peaceful demonstrations, peaceful movements across not just the soviet union, but across the far eastern blocks, poland, what was then czechoslovakia and elsewhere. at the end of the day, all of these people of these countries, the only thing they wanted was liberty and freedom, which is something that we very much take for granted in a free democracy like united dates. certainly, it is possible, what we are seeing today in russia with the peaceful protests going on is an expression of that desire. i think it remains to be seen what that leads to, and i think we should remember that this is also happening in belarus as we speak. months and months of hunger strikes and of hunger strikes ad protests. what is often called the last dictatorship of europe, the dictatorship of belarus's leader.

in russia, this is the -- we have seen, that he will lose power because of a mass democratic movement by his own people. that is exactly why we are seeing mass depression play out on the streets of russia and all the cities across the country. host: our guest has been -- the president and ceo of the center for european policy. thank you for coming back and joining us and sharing your expertise on 1 -- on russia. guest: thank you so much are having me. host: we appreciate everybody who called in this morning. we will be back tomorrow at 7:00 with another edition of " washington journal." ♪