which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]

>> washington journal continues. host: we want to welcome back mona charen, author, syndicated columnist, thanks for being with us. guest: my pleasure. host: i want to begin with this headline from the economist that looks at the president's agenda. after a quick start, joe biden's legislative agenda hitting a brick wall in part because of party factionalism and the filibuster that could imperil his democratic ambitions. your response. is that a fair headline? guest: there have been a few -- of bipartisanship. in the past week, we saw the practically inanimate -- practically unanimous adoption of juneteenth as a holiday. that was unexpected national unity, which was unusual. we have seen a bipartisan group of senators get together to talk

about a compromise on infrastructure. we don't know where that is going to go, but that is a possibility also of bipartisanship. and regarding voting rights, that has been a little bit more difficult. senator joe manchin, the one who has most prominently said he opposes changing filibuster rules -- although it is understood in washington that he actually speaks for a great many democratic senator. he is sort of the front man. anyway, he has said he is against changing the filibuster but he did come out with his own voting rights bill as an alternative to -- it immediately got the attention of stacey abrams, voting activist. unfortunately it was shut down

by mitch mcconnell. host: there is also this headline following the summit that took place in geneva, switzerland. the bar was pretty low for the president meeting with vladimir putin dan asking the question when and how we will know whether or not that summit was a success. what is your timeframe? what will be your measurement in terms of whether or not relations between the u.s. and russia have approved -- have improved? guest: my stance is not so much that we ought to be about improving relations with russia. over the last several decades, each administration seems to have come into office hoping to improve relations with putin only to be disappointed. i think our goal should be clarity, to make very clear to putin where we stand on some of his destructive and undermining

efforts vis-a-vis the west. whether it is about hacking mother voting, interfering in our election, and further about his maligned influence around the world. supporting dictators and extremists. attempting to undermine the whole world really come it's undermine people's confidence in information. he is a multi prong threat. the best that we can do, it seems, is to be very clear about our position and not give him any more attention than necessary. but, just set clear boundaries. i think president biden did that. i was pleased that there was no joint press conference.

though i was a little confused about one aspect, president biden, in one -- in what was otherwise a pitch perfect meeting, he did make a statement that was a little odd. she said we gave putin 16 segments of our u.s. economy where if there is any hacking, that would be a serious problem. 16 realms of agriculture and water. i thought well, what's the message there? if you attack or hack anything other than those 16, it's not a problem for us? i thought that was a strange way to put it. host: our guest is mona charen. we are splitting our phone lines between democrats, republicans and independents. you can also join us on twitter or facebook. policy editor for the relatively

new website the bulwark.com. where does the name come from? what is the mission of this site? guest: the name comes from the idea that that seem to have been -- among republicans and on the right generally and that we wanted to stand and be a bulwark against that decline. that we still stand for the traditional virtues, we believe in civility and persuasion in the political world's, that we are not partisans of one side or another, but rather we uphold the highest traditions of journalism and of the search for truth. host: mona charen also a former

senior fellow at the ethics and policy center, a regular commentator on capital gang, and worked in the reagan white house as speechwriter for former first lady nancy reagan. there is a new pullout conducted by the hill.com that says 30% of self identified republican voters believe donald trump will be reinstated as president later this year. what is your reaction? guest: polls have to be taken with a grain of salt because you don't know how much is signaling. when people -- people, especially republicans, have a great deal of distrust for pollsters and are inclined to mess with them. if they sense that this is a pro-or anti-trump, they want to

signal they are pro-trump. a screw you pollster. there is that possibility, but the other thing is that -- so, we do not know if it is 30%, but there is a significant percentage, no doubt about it, of the republican party that is getting disinformation from the right wing infotainment networks. being fed a lot of propaganda and a lot of lies. so, if your diet consists of only those sites, you might very well believe some crazy stuff. we have seen that in not just this poll, but many polls. the number of republicans who think there might be some truth to the cuban on conspiracy -- q anon conspiracy.

republicans showing they believe former president trump did win the 2020 election, it goes on and on. host: mona charen. (202) 748-8000 free democrats. (202) 748-8000 -- (202) 748-8001 for republicans. you can send a text message to (202) 748-8003. another story getting a lot of attention, the president was asked last week, the headline from the new york times, " targeting biden, catholic bishops advance a plan that would deny the second catholic president communing because of his views on abortion." your comment. guest: i am not a catholic. this is somewhat of an internal catholic matter, but i would say it does reflect the divisions we find in all of american society. regis i -- we just saw a vote in

the baptist convention where the sides were pitted against one another. politics has inserted itself into every nook and cranny of american life. our religious institutions are no exception. i would note that the catholic church also has a strong stance against capital punishment. i have not seen a big push to deny communion to people who are for the death penalty. as an outsider, it is interesting to see that the pope opposes this move. it will be interesting to watch how this goes. from what i understand, the

decision of communion falls to the local bishop. that is in the parish or whatever that biden attends. if the local bishop chooses to withhold communion, i believe the pope can overrule him. the church is very hierarchical, but the divisions within the catholic church, along with many other churches and religious organizations in the u.s., are deep. host: you are a multi platform journalists, including your podcast "egg to differ." guest: it is a weekly pot cast -- podcast, we call it centerleft to center-right. i am host, we have linda chavez on the center-right, me, david linger, william gholston.

every week we have a guest. the guests have been outstanding. they bring tremendous intellectual that halliday -- intellectual vitality. we discuss the issues of the weekend the issues of our time with civility, information, without shouting, without curse words, and it is a great hour. it drops friday's and you can get it on any platform. we have a lot of other podcasts at the bulwark, including charlie -- we also have others that are behind a pay wall. so, if you -- you can join for a very small amount of money and get access to a bunch of other great podcasts. host: george joining us from

florida. guest: beg to differ remains free. host: go ahead george please. caller: i want to say that i missed you. i did not know about the podcast. i always appreciate your opinion. because i value her opinion, in this new cycle for the last six years we had russia investigations, trump clearing out the church area for a photo op, all of these things, now we have fbi agents unindicted co-conspirators. is there any validity to that?

i just turned from a channel, these people are nuts, want to kill people, is there nothing or something to this? guest: you reflect the feelings of a lot of people. i do not know who to trust. i turn on cnn or msnbc and it seems like the trump administration could do nothing right and i turn on fox and it seems the biden administration can do nothing right. that is too mild. the voices tend to catastrophize and make it seem as if people on the others are dangerous, traitorous, threats to the existence of the republic. i sympathize that it is hard to

get a sense of what is real. what i would suggest is staying away from the most partisan voices. looking to people in the center. also looking for people who are willing to criticize their own side. one of the things you never see on fox news is see them say we were wrong. we promoted a story about the young man that he might have been responsible for the attack of the dnc and it turned out to be baseless. they did not apologize. they did not to retract. -- not retract. that is how i judge news organizations. do you admit ever-- error?

if not that is not trustworthy. the idea that the fbi was behind the insurrection, preposterous. there may be people of the fbi is questioning about the events who have been unindicted because they are cooperating. that happens all the time. the more outrageous, crazy and allegation seems the more it should tickle your skepticism. i recommend the bulwark. we pitch down the middle as best

we can and we admit error. that is where i will leave it. host: you mentioned seth ranch. -- rich. the parents of the slain staffer settles with fox news, he was shot and killed in 2016 in what police site was a botched robbery. let's go to lakeview, arizona, good morning. caller: good morning. other than the fact that he was not responsible for hacking the computers, whoever's saw the computers -- whoever saw the computers? they were not surrendered for fbi analysis but the guy is dead. if you say things enough times, even if it is outrageous, like the media did about russia

collusion or trump's ukraine issues which are biden's ukraine issues. we know that biden did with all the money until his son got paid. guest: how do you know that? caller: it is on hunter biden's laptop? guest: how do you know what is on his laptop? caller: because i watch the news. guest: which news? caller: the ones that will tell you about his laptop. guest: can you be specific? caller: like jack dorsey who purposely hid it. guest: i am asking [cross chat] caller: why was he hiding hunter biden's laptop? guest: i am asking for your sources. caller: c-span.

i watch a lot of c-span. c-span had coverage of january 6 that showed the people fighting with the cops were fighting with the cops before donald trump finished his speech. c-span had footage of capitol police leading people through the building like they are on a tour. use our trump supporters walking through the building inside the lines. inside the little ropes. guest: there was no violence by trump supporters at the capital that day? caller: can you tell me who was a trump supporter and who is not? maybe it was antifa? they fought with police all summer long, they tried to burn down federal buildings all summer. host: we will leave it there. guest: sorry about my voice this

money, do not know why i have a frog in my throat. the caller is an illustration of what i was describing, people are in their information silos. they are sure that they have information. this man believes he knows what was on hunter biden's laptop, i do not know how he can be sure. when people get sources of information that confirm biases, it feels good to be angry. and righteously angry at the other side. this is headed to a dark place. i a lot of it is brought, made -- -- rot, made up. it is encouraging an apocalyptic mentality where anything goes because these people are enemies.

we must not be enemies but friends. we have to live together. we have to try to take down the temperature, be more alert to being fed disinformation. be more skeptical about stories. i am worried about what this is doing. host: if you could put a percentage, 16 months before the midterm elections, what are the chances house republicans regain control? guest: 55%, 60%. there is history. the president's party nearly always loses seats in the first midterm. we are so divided in terms of geography and gerrymandering.

the number of seats that are necessary is tiny for the republicans to gain control. it is eminently possible. it looks less likely for the senate. host: from california, susan you are next. good morning. caller: good morning. host: good morning susan. caller: are you there? host: we sure are. go ahead. caller: i am here. okay. hr one, hr four, f1 are scams to nationalize our voting rights. host: we are getting some

feedback, s1 is coming tuesday. that is democratic efforts to federalize state election laws. what is going to happen? guest: i do not know what is going to happen. hr one, s1, bad idea. overreach, written before january 6. does not address the emergency we are in. much more pared down voting rights law such as joe manchin is promoting, allowing early voting, gerrymandering reform, i hope congress finds a compromise. that is not as overreaching and

broad. and off-topic as hr one. there are all kinds of things in that bill, the do not address the emergency we are in. host: among the books by our guest, useful idiots, how liberals got it wrong in the cold war and blame america first, how modern feminism lost touch with science, love and common sense. from louisiana, anthony you are next. caller: i would like to make a comment, i agree with your guest this morning. one color-- caller said something about what happened in the state captiol,-- capitol,

this started before january 6, there was information filtered out, where trump said to come to the state capitol. those people were going into the building during the time period that trump was speaking but if you go back, trump made the statement he was going to meet them there. let's all go down and he made a statement about certain individuals. host: that was the u.s. capitol in washington, d.c. guest: one of the challenges we face as a democracy is alternative facts. the late, great senator patrick

monahan said everybody is entitled to their own opinions not facts. the feeling of entitlement is in the saddle and writing. -- riding. the president called the mob to the capitol, tweeted that it would be wild. there was no reason to call his supporters to washington. no good reason. the election was over. the electoral college voted. it was a ceremonial occasion where the result is certified. with the vice president presiding. the president was responsible for what happened that day, not just that date but similar attacks in other places around the country.

in oregon, michigan. the president incited violence, political violence. he attempted to steal the election and the democratic process -- and the work-- thwart the democratic process. it is frighteningly successful. host: columnist, author and podcast host, long time guest on the washington journal continu. host: joining us from massachusetts is chris matthews, his newest book my life in politics. guest: happy father's day. big day for all of us. host: what did you learn about chris matthews in writing this?

t: