piece, “get ready for a 'woke' olympics,” and other news of the day. and michael bender discusses his new book “frankly, we did win this election: the inside story of how trump lost." "washington journal" is next. >> it could be that bipartisanship was put on hold when they failed to get votes to move the debate on an infrastructure bill backed by 21 republican and democratic senators. with the legislation in limbo and uncertainty over the fate of the biden package, it has democrats and republicans asking, is seeking a --seeking bipartisanship where the goal? good morning and welcome to

washington journal. is seeking bipartisanship a worthy goal? independence and others call (202) 748-8002. you can always send us a text at (202) 748-8003. send us your comments on twitter and instagram. as we get underway, this is the last sunday that we will be sharing airtime with our colleagues and partners over at the bbc parliament channel. they will no longer be carrying c-span programming after today. for many years, we have shared the sunday morning with our viewers and colleges from the u.k. glad to have you with us. a reminder that our viewers in

britain and elsewhere can stream us anytime at c-span.org. let's get started on bipartisanship. is seeking bipartisanship a worthy goal? it is not moving forward on the legislation. the loan island of bipartisanship in a c have division. -- sea of division. negotiators may be invested in seeing it through to the finish, but even if they are successful, it is a one-off exercise at a time when the gulf continues to widen. an infrastructure packet should be the easiest. the need for repair and upgrading roads and bridges and the like is evident and political benefits to politicians are indisputable,

which is by members of both parties have talked about it for years. in today's climate, nothing is easy and the path for an infrastructure bill remains uncertain. as amy walter wrote, if the infrastructure package does reach biden's desk, it is likely to be the last such major initiative. success on the package would not foreshadow a shift back to an earlier era, one which biden is familiar and wishes to re-create , even in small ways. a moment of cross party goodwill . seeking bipartisanship --is it a worthy goal? (202) 748-8000 is the line for republicans. (202) 748-8001 is for democrats.

the bill failed to get the votes it needed to move forward. we might see further action in the coming week in the u.s. senate, after the vote failed to after they failed to get the 60 needed. they said, we have made significant progress and are close to a final agreement. we'll continue to work hard to make sure that we get this right and we are optimistic that we will finalize and be prepared to advance this historic bipartisan proposal to strengthen infrastructure and create good paying jobs in the coming days. we appreciate our colleagues on both sides working to get this done for the american people. president biden marking six months in office with a town hall meeting that was aired on cnn.

he was asked about his pursuit of bipartisanship. >> i am dismayed by how often they are held hostage by the utopian need to gain bipartisan support. it appears that they secure zero republican votes. sometimes the opposition is just wrong and working to get them to agree with you is fruitless. why is the strategy not the right answer? pres. biden: look, i might be the wrong guy to talk to because i spent a lot of time as a senator and vice president. i did not know that you will find any republican i ever worked with who said i'd broke my word or did not do what i said. i was able to get an awful lot

of compromises put together to do a lot of good things and change things. i still believe that is possible, but the well has been poisoned over the last two tier years. even now, there is a lingering effort. a lot of our republican friends say, i know you are right, but if i do this, i will lose my primary. i will be in trouble. i think that is beginning to move. i do not mean overnight. i think people are figuring out that if we want --i always found that you get rewarded for doing what you think, at the time, is the right thing. if people believe it is the right thing to do. i think you see it coming together. the compromises are real.

compromises between my own party and some of those who are more conservative. that is coming together. they said that would never happen. host: that is the president on wednesday. here is the president from last night. he tweeted, my dad used to say, all you want us to have a little breathing room. we can deliver for the american people on infrastructure and an infrastructure deal with good paying union jobs. let's get it done. asking you this morning. is seeking bipartisanship a worthy goal? democrats (202) 748-8000. republicans call (202) 748-8001. independence can call (202) 748-8002.

the bipartisan infrastructure agreement is indicative of the limits of working across party lines to please a wide range of senators with bipartisan voter support. funding was also slashed significantly. what is left are policies that are less ambitious than what they could advance on their own. bipartisan negotiation takes time. the window for advancing legislation is narrowing. with debt ceiling negotiations and the need looming, congress has a limited time left before members begin campaigning in earnest. one more thing before we get to your calls. some pulling that they did late

june and early july about this. voters largely believe that he wants bipartisanship, but they do not agree with the new definition of the term. 43% of those polled says it needs cross power support in order to be considered bipartisan. the 3% of the morning -- joe biden cares about getting support for major legislation more than any other leader in washington. nearly 60% of republicans say no action is better than action led by one party, compared with 37% of democrats saying the same thing. let's hear first from dj on the independent line in washington dc. caller: good morning. i believe bipartisanship is a worthy goal, however the divide in america, in the political

arena is just -- i believe that they are way too far apart. it is a sad thing that the republican party -- it does not and will not come to the reality . they are backing trump. trump is a one of the dictator. i'm sorry to say that, but it is the truth and truth matters in america. we need to abide by the constitution of the united states of america and the rule of the law, but it seems like there is a cancer within the republican party, where they do not want to go with the truth. i do not see how the democratic party could actually compromise

with the republican party anymore. they have truly done things that have never been done in america. i think america is in a sad place right now. host: in annapolis, maryland, also on the independent line. >> i am an independent and i agree with some of what the gentleman just said. the big problem for this country, it has been going on for 20 years or so, but it is crystallized now. there is no cooperation. the country is split 50-50 with polarization. that is exactly the way the senate and split. it is hard to have bipartisanship under those circumstances, but the biggest problem is, what happens to us?

going on 20 years, there has been a dysfunctional congress and now it is crystallized that self-government is no longer possible in america. if you cannot have that, then you cannot get the national business done. if you cannot get the national business done, the country is going to fall apart. you cannot have a country without a national government that works. with a self-government that works. host: is this a problem that has realized itself during the biden administration and trump administration before? caller: the republicans have

been taking over. he represents the big money. they are getting their way. all the productive gains of american capitalism go up, not down. i think that is where we are. biden is trying to even things out and how you do that is complicated. we do not want to take away initiatives, the competitiveness of america and the innovations of america. you have to have a working government, and we do not have a working government. it is called self-government. host: let's hear from the democrat line. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call.

i agree with the previous gentlemen. it has been my belief that we actually have tw donations, trying to share the same real estate, but it is not going to happen. i think that we should split and have a conservative nation and a donation because we are in a state of perpetual gridlock. that is a catastrophe. host: we will get back to your calls momentarily. former president trump speaking in arizona last night. trump returns to arizona to see the governor and predicts ballot review will vindicate him. he delighted his political base in downtown phoenix, predicting

vindication from the ballot review. reliving his favorite moments in the white house. he continued to make false claims about fraud. it did not break any new ground. even so, the nearly 5000 on hand made it clear they are like -- their loyalties have not shifted since he left office. he said, what you are doing is incredible. the 2020 election was a total disgrace. one of the fallouts, falling apart this week with speaker pelosi refusing to seat jim jordan and jim banks. coming up, the first in our series, the house.

oral histories of members of the house who were in the chamber that day and their experiences. and on tuesday, the first meeting of that select committee. live on c-span three. again, that committee with only one republican member, liz cheney, selected by house speaker nancy pelosi in the aftermath of that decision last week to withdraw all the other five, other than liz cheney. this is what kevin mccarthy said to reporters. >> that pelosi would play politics. for more than six months. you have a better example. schumer did not pick.

they already had the report done by t different committees. tw mean questions. why was the capital so ill prepared for that day when they knew on december 14 that they had a problem? why do we do to make sure that never happens again? pelosi has created a sham process. unless speaker pelosi reverses course, we will not participate. host: you can send us a tweet with your thoughts. a couple here saying, remember how bipartisanship led to social security, medicare and the affordable care act? no, you do not. they passed without one republican vote. it is not worth selling our principles.

fbi did not want to get involved in combat in world war ii. like fdr, president biden must be realistic. sometimes, you have to go to war. on the republican line, your thoughts on bipartisanship. caller: there is no way that we can have bipartisanship in washington dc because the democrats are no longer a party. they are in authoritarian faction, interested only in getting their own way. they want to nationalize and federalize our voting, our health care. look around. they want to nationalize and federalize everything. they also want to change all the rules in washington dc to favor them, now that they have a leg

up. they want to get rid of the filibuster and they want to pack the supreme court. they want to make washington dc a state because it is 90% democrat. all the things -- you had a caller -- the democrats accuse the republicans of wanting a dictatorship because that is what they want. look at what we have right now. we have a president who lives on executive orders. he does not live on legislation. they are not interested in passing laws. they are interested in putting their foot on our neck. host: certainly, you are correct that there have been a number of executive orders in the biden administration, but there were many in the trump administration

and obama administration. that has been the case in the last three decades actually. caller: when he kills a multibillion-dollar pipeline in the u.s. --that is not a stalemate of legislation. he okayed the pipeline with russia going to germany. an edict by an authoritarian figure telling us that our oil is dirty and i will not let you have it. no. this is not legislation. when a court rules that dhaka is illegal, he does not care. he will look the other way. that is not legislation. we are under a authoritarian regime right now. do you think these guys care

about you? they do not care. they care about taking that power away from you and putting it in washington dc -- washington dc. host: good morning. caller: good morning. inc. you for your great program. seeking bipartisanship is important, more than ever. i agree with a lot of the earlier collars. there has been division for over 20 years, but never like this. in my opinion, the main problem is donald trump. he has not the president anymore. all these people still think he is and they believe the big lie. until he goes away, we will have

this division happening, and it is getting worse and worse. i do not understand how these people follow him like he is god. donald trump needs to go away. host: falling apart this week, at least on the republican side with speaker pelosi blocking jim jordan and pulling the remaining five, aside from liz cheney, off of the panel. >> last month, we passed our legislation for a select committee. a select committee is bipartisan and it will do the job that it sets out to do, to investigate the causes and that of what

happened january 6. to find out how it was organized , who paid for it, who messaged to get those people here for the assault on the capital. over 100 people were injured. it was a horrible thing. i will never remember --i will never forget the trauma for our staff and the people who work in the capital, those who make our work here possible. you can test to the fact that it was not all hugs and kisses as it has been characterized and mischaracterized. we named our commission, our committee. it is bipartisan. they are to seek the truth. we had there to get the truth,

not to get the --to get trump. as the legislation allows, i do not accept two of the five people appointed. they have made statements and taken actions that i think would impact integrity of the committee. this is deadly serious. this is about our constitution and our country. it is an assault on the capital that is being mischaracterized at the expense of finding the truth for the american people. i am very pleased with the response that we have received across the country on this subject. i am very pleased with the

leadership of bennie thompson, our chairman and the bipartisan nature of those who have experienced patriotism as their calling card. we will proceed and the committee is in the process of hiring staff to that end. it is my responsibility to make sure that we get to the truth, and we will not let their antics stand in the way of that. host: writing about one of the members of the committee on tuesday. 9:30 p.m. eastern. when members of congress had home, some hit tractor pulls but others might stop by mom-and-pop stores.

for some, a recent swing and a speech by the chairman of the joints cheats -- chief of staff. talking about signatories. a reference to being grilled on military readiness. the next round wilkinson a topic more sensitive for the military. a 20 year naval veteran and surface warfare officer, he is joining nancy pelosi's special committee to investigate the mob attack on the capital. seeking bipartisanship. is it a worthy goal?

if you want to send a text, that number is (202) 748-8003. some saying it is a worthy goal. when it comes to social programs, others say it is a worthless endeavor. politics is compromised and compromises bipartisanship. larry says, it is the only way for our government to function properly. in lakeland florida, good morning to check on the republican line. caller: democracy is a messy business.

we air our dirty laundry on msnbc, fox and social media. the reality is, i have been a lifelong republican. i can honestly tell you that i voted for trump both elections and i will vote for him again. the republican party needs to vote for someone not narcissistic and who does not poison the well even further. all of us actually need to spend some time away from fox and msnbc and maybe listen to bbc and listen to more neutral outlets. both parties have poisoned the well. both parties do the same thing when they are in power and not in power. hopefully, things will change

under joe biden. host: you mentioned that he voted for donald trump twice. what made you change your mind in the aftermath to make you say, you would never vote for him again? caller: i feel like when he put the pressure on pence to overturn the electoral college. that whole january six thing was absolutely ridiculous. that was a seminal moment that should wake a lot of people up that the narcissistic nature of donald trump --he cannot accept defeat. i hate to say this, but he is a wannabe dictator. we have to compromise because we look at this country and you look at the blue states and they are absent -- they are in debt up to their eyeballs.

we need each other to survive. host: later in our program we will be talking to michael bender and talking about his new book, frankly, we did when you go the election. that is coming up this morning between 9:00 and 10:00. next we hear from david. >> good morning c-span. i want you to know that i am a 90 seven point five years young world war ii veteran. my generation was called the gender -- greatest generation.

the first three words to the preamble of the constitution --that is what makes us the greatest nation in the world. we need the people. we look out for each other and we do what is best for each other but what is happening today is not bipartisanship. it is happening in our great country today. we have become polarized. we look out for me instead of weed. this all began when president obama was elected to be president of the u.s. after world war ii, we had our differences. democrats and republicans had differences, but they compromised.

the words compromise had disappeared. it is my way or no way. host: we appreciate your call. teresa is on the republican line. caller: i agree with some and i disagree with others. we do need bipartisanship, but the problem is, mitch mcconnell does not want that. he does not want joe biden to have a window. joe biden is actually getting bipartisanship. be not from inside government, but he is getting it from the people. host: thank you, teresa. next, democrat line. caller: good morning.

i believe in bipartisanship and what the lady just said, mitch mcconnell does not want to do anything. the republicans do not want to come to the table for nothing. they do not want to help the people as a whole, but they want to take all the credit when the people vote to do the right thing. doing the right thing is what we need in this country, but the republicans do not want to do anything whatsoever. bipartisanship right now needs to go out the window because all the governors that are republicans and the different states are not waiting for democrats to say their piece. they are just stopping people from voting. they are so afraid of voting. bipartisanship is not worth it. thank you for your time.

host: this coming after a failure on the bipartisan bill. coming together with the white house in early july on the infrastructure package. it failed to get the 60 votes that it needed and after that vote, here is what the majority leaders said on the floor. >> my colleagues should be assured that i had every intention of passing both major infrastructure packages. the framework and a budget resolution with reconciliation instructions, before we leave for the august recess. i laid out that precise schedule and i intend to stick with it. someone who actually served as an economic advisor to senator mccain concluded that both major

proposals are essential to maximize our economic potential. not just one, both. together, they would give a boost, create jobs and reduce income inequality. these are incredibly worthy goals and the senate will continue to work on both forms of instruct -- infrastructure. host: here is the editorial from the wall street journal. most deals in washington include a policy trade. they get what they want in return for conceding policy to the other. including a trade on energy policy. the paul ryan republicans want a signature on the statue hurry -- the subsidies were bad policy,

but at the end of the day -- demand for oil drilling made america the largest oil-producing. the economy was the winner. president clinton agreed to two 20 from 28%. you can oppose such deals as these columns often do, but at least both sides get something. what is the policy trade in this looming infrastructure dealing? democrats will be getting more money in federal spending. part of the opinion page from yesterday, a couple saying, bipartisanship is a worthy goal because there are people on both sides of the aisle whose perspective should be taken into consideration.

i am weary of legislation that is run through in the middle of the night. the infrastructure project will benefit all of the american people, but the republicans will not vote for this because it gives president biden a window. republicans are truly un-american says mike in orlando, florida. independent line, go ahead. caller: i have some points to make here. i am a veteran and i went through a professional military education school. i will never forget, when i was a kid. they taught me. we will not have to lift a finger, but we will bury you. i laughed at that and i said,

that is a stupid, old man. now, what is happening is that russia has successfully elected a lot of people -- not directly but indirectly, they have been working on it, the way that you can get money in their and many different things. they have been doing this for a long time. trump was the final straw. they got trump in there. that was the final piece of the puzzle. now, with trump in their for years, he has screwed up democracy completely. it is almost like that in repute and was in the white house for years. how do you negotiate with vladimir putin?

they have it like the democrats are the communist people. you know, our government has failed us over the years. it has been years that our government has failed us. that is faults on both sides, mainly the republicans, but on both sides, they come out with this. they put us in these different groups. everybody is a liberal and everybody is conservative. it depends on what the issue is. we divided ourselves with the help of russia. we are in a state of emergency. this has got to go out.

we need to be looking out. trump has shown us all of the cracks in our democracy. host: we will hear from steve in san jose, california. caller: i think the issue has boiled down, finally to if we can get bipartisanship on whether or not we want to be a socialist country or not. that is what it really boils down to. thank god that we have about half of america that does not want to be a socialist country because we have the smarts and the intelligence to know that it will lead to our total destruction but unfortunately, the number of people and educated and stupid has been growing, and growing, and growing.

eventually, it will become a socialist country, and that is sad. thankfully, i am so old, that i do not think i will see it because i do not expect to live that long, but remember, america , you will have brought it upon yourself. i hope you enjoy it. host: this is john in cincinnati. is seeking bipartisanship a worthy goal? caller: yes, the republicans never care about bipartisanship when they have the keys to government. they do not care about bipartisanship or whatever. once they get empowered, they are supposed to be taken serious about what they care about being put on the charge kind.

$7.8 trillion. that is not right. for us to have to take them serious now that the democrats are back in, now they want to be taken seriously. so much money out the door over the handling of the pandemic because of that induces -- do ofus in the white house. hiding like they do, except when they are not empowered, then they come out to preach this stuff. the gop mascot is the elephant, but they have an awfully short memory. host: the president's town hall was in cincinnati this past week.

saying joe biden talks bipartisanship but trashes them. he says the news coverage was almost nonexistent. the news media hardly covers him when he does come out. urging everyone to get vaccinated, but that was it. the washington post said almost nothing on his page after the event. even when biden was not dashing the right, he was discounting all criticisms, to to be other areas where his administration is a disaster area. the opinions of dan gator on fox news. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for having me on. i want to make a few points that i feel strongly about.

right now, nobody can deny that we are headed to alliance socialism with the policies that the democrats want to put in place. they can call it something different, but that is what it is. i played a professional sport as a living. when i hear that the rich must pay their fair share, i do not know what fair share is, but let me tell you what i paid. i paid 50% of my encore earnings in federal taxes, and because it did not come through my unearned income, dividends and things like that, my earned income -- into the 90% bracket, so for my

whole career, i paid the government more than i got to keep. is that fair share? do people want to get to the point where we are paying the government more than what we get to keep? that is what the government has done in the past. that is not fair and nobody can call it fair. i paid more than my fair share. the so-called which paid 40 percent of all taxes paid. it keeps this country going. one more point. how can you have bipartisanship like the fellow from california said? how can you have bipartisanship, cooperate and negotiate on the other said of the aisle, when they are socialist and communist, and that is what they want to put in, by taxing what you already have come having

people come by and say, your house is worth whatever, say you have to pay more. it has never worked anywhere in the world. i want people to understand that. let's get this country back, where work, rewards, you sit on your porch and he wish that you had a job. >> the -- host: junk doom raised his concerns about democratic spending plans overall. >> the crisis spending is for just that. a crisis. or at least, it should be. unfortunately, democrats have never met a temporary government dolly that they did not want to keep spending.

as the crisis was waning and our economy was rebounding, democrats doubled down on the crisis spending to pass a massive covid relief bill. hundreds of billions of dollars. the majority of whom were doing fine without it. many were running surpluses. tens of billions more for schools who had barely made a dent in the billions of dollars they had been given. at least one liberal economist warning that it could over stimulate the economy. the democrats did not listen. no surprise that the flood of government dollars is boosting inflation. after flooding the economy with unnecessary money, democrats are preparing to double down on the strategy.

despite passing a largely unnecessary $1.9 trillion bill months ago, democrats want to spend an additional $3.5 trillion. three $.5 trillion. the truth is, that number is likely to be even higher. one estimate suggests that is more likely to be five trillion dollars or five point $5 trillion. that is from independent analysis. president biden's own treasury secretary is to serve on the board. that is an inconceivably large amount of money. to put that money in perspective, it was less than four $.5 trillion. the entire federal budget. casually tossing out a spending

bill that might exceed the entire federal budget in 2019. i can assure americans that, that much money would fuel increased inflation. host: a few more weeks left until the recess. from the washington post with analysis, joe's agenda looks rocky but he writes the hallmark is that given a six day window, it usually looks like choppy waters. things appear a little bit more smooth. joe biden has been notching accomplishments that have solid support from voters. he has careened back and forth.

voting rights legislation designated the top issue remains deadlocked in the sunny with talks on reshaping laws feeding from the front burner along with discussions on the legal status of a program that protects millions of immigrants brought here as children. the coronavirus continued its rampant reemergence by 50 percent from sunday through friday. a cross-section of his allies in congress remain upbeat about where things stand. there is not much bedwetting about the tendency towards panic among democrats. back to your bipartisanship. caller: there will never be bipartisanship. the day barack obama got into

office -- they have been blocking anything that the democrats want to do. all these people hollering about this being a socialist country. joe biden did what we put him in office to do. $11 million, cash money, but people want to complain about helping american citizens. it is crazy. the guy talking about his taxes, you have the wrong guy doing your taxes. i have my own trucking company. host: here is the independent line. caller: we are going to get back

to the bipartisanship. a house divided will not stand. it was meant to be a two of system. i think if people were educated on what we hear in the news about bipartisanship and eliminate the filibuster, i think people would understand what the filibuster is and they would understand that our government has to come with compromise. i will give it back to you. host: c-span interviewed republican and democratic members of the u.s. house for our new series, january 6, views from the house. it debuts tonight at 10:00 eastern with those who were there on january 6. that will air tonight at 10:00 eastern. then, tuesday, we will air the first hearing of the select

committee on the january 6 attack with officers testifying at that first hearing. that is coming up at 9:30 p.m. eastern on c-span three. it is also on c-span.org and the c-span radio app. john in new york, the republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i would just like to point out --how much bipartisanship was there when harry reid was speaker of the house? i think that was a point in time when there was a lot of --friction between the caucus. it was nothing like tip o'neill and ronald reagan. bipartisanship is a good thing, and now it is just a sham.

the tension and the rhetoric between the parties is never-ending. what i would like to do is assign blame. my opinion, a majority of it goes to nancy pelosi. i think she has been one of the most toxic and dangerous people that has ever held that position. right in front of the world -- regardless of what you think of trump, he was the president. right in front of the world she ripped up the state of the union address. i do not know. you cannot have bipartisanship you have the speaker of the house doing that. there are other things. a snap impeachment --how many people went out of business? a lot of these relationships come in terms of bipartisanship, they depend on personality.

she has developed a cult following. i will not say that republicans are any different. the problem is, when you get a speaker, someone in a high position that is authoritarian like she is, she alienates a lot of people. if you want bipartisanship, you have to start thinking that you have to put people in positions that are going to accomplish that. what kind of a sham is this? she gets liz cheney for the sake of a quorum and calls that bipartisanship? maybe she might get kissinger? i am not always in agreement with someone like kevin mccarthy, but i think he is doing the right thing to hold his own committee hearings. you know, this undertaking --

let me say this and i will end it right here. nancy pelosi had the information about that possible riot, and she let it happen. it was a quick impeachment. regardless of what you think of him, he was the president of the u.s. and he was entitled to that. host: independent line. caller: what a great way to follow up. let's get to the bipartisanship. if you go back and look at history and you read the federalist papers, the founding fathers warned us that if we still had a to be of major party system, this is what we are going to get, and this is exactly what we are seeing because both parties want to be

in power, and control, and they want to control all the agendas. until the american people wake up and understand what the founding fathers wrote about being a democrat or republican, this is what we will have for the rest of our life. it is sad because our country can become great. there are great patriots out there. liz cheney is standing up for what she thinks is right. adam kinzinger -- adam kissinger is standing up for what he believes is right. until the voters can look at that and say, we want a third, valid party, controlled by the rnc and the dnc --this is what we will have. i blame the american people and

the american voters for not being more proactive, trying to get third-party people in that will do what we need to have done. host: are you in a third party? do you belong to another party? caller: i vote third-party because i am tired of the gridlock. i am tired of the democrats and republicans. host: eric, hello. caller: good morning, i --good morning, america. i would like to talk to the third wheel in the room. the church is an institution that was supposed to change the hearts of the people from wanting to kill your own brother over political and religious differences. the killer heart of cain who would kill his brother and not

be remorseful about it. all those individuals in the congress that call themselves believers of the spirit of jesus christ, the church, they cannot go in that congress and be bipartisan? there is a problem here. why is the house divided? the devil has been campaigning here from the beginning of time. as long as you keep this house divided, we will not stand. it is the church's responsibility to change the heart of america. it is the only way to change the killer heart of a man from wanting to kill his own brother and not be remorseful about it. host: i appreciate your call this morning. i'm next, we get to talk about the olympics. we will focus on the political

side of the olympics. our next guest is the senior editor. she will talk more about her recent piece and what she calls the book olympics and the debate over while politics can or should be left out of the olympics. michael bender will join us to talk about his new talk about h, frankly we did win this election. the story of how trump lost. ♪ >> weekends bring you the best in american history and nonfiction books on american history tv, on the presidency, six hundred 50 hours of president lyndon johnson's white house phone conversations are available, crated by the johnson presidential library at the university of virginia. find out what it reveals about

his presidency. and on lectures in history, the university of north carolina at chapel hill professor joseph looks at civil military relations during the korean war, including general douglas macarthur's -- watch american history tv every weekend and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online any at c-span.org/history. tonight, c-span premieres january 6, use from the house. 14 members of the house share what they experienced that day, including a colorado democrat. he talks about how he felt as people tried to breach the house chamber. >> you don't realize the magnitude of the situation. there was a moment where i was

going to ask one of the officers for his firearm, because i have used firearms before. i know i am capable of doing what is necessary to protect myself and protect others. but i did not know whether the officers were. my experience in combat is you never know who is willing to pull the trigger but i knew i could. i thought about asking the officer for his firearm but i decided not to. i never thought that my two lives -- i am a different person now than when i was a ranger. i am a father, a member of congress, i thought years ago that i had left that life behind me. i have changed -- that i had changed. i never thought i would be in a position to have to think like that and have to act like that. certainly not as a member of congress in 2021, in the house chamber in the united states

capitol. >> january 6, views from the house starts tonight at 10:00 eastern on c-span, c-span.org or listen on the c-span radio app. >> robert novak's nickname was the prince of darkness. named that by many of his friends and fellow washington-based journalists. in 2007, two years before he died at age 78, his autobiography was published about his 50 years as a reporter, television personality, author and conservative political commentator. he appeared on book notes at the time about his book, the prince of darkness. >> robert novak on this episode of book notes plus. look at it at c-span.org/podcast

or wherever you get your podcasts. >> washington journal continues. host: joining us next is ashe short. she is senior editor with the daily wire, joining us to talk about the olympics and athletic protests both this year and in history. tell us first what is the daily wire? guest: the daily wire is one of america's fastest-growing right-leaning news outlets. it is headed by ben shapiro. we cover news, the same news that the new york times or anyone else covers. we just have it -- we admit our right-leaning bias. host: you are a senior editor so you get your pick of what you want to cover? how does that work? guest: i get to cover what i want. i typically focus on education issues. cancel culture, situations on college campuses, protesting,

lack of civil rights on college campuses, things like that. as an editor, i definitely get to choose what i want. but i also get to read everybody else, so i know what we are covering at any given time. host: you wrote earlier in the month about the olympics which got underway this past week. the headline for one of your pieces was get ready for the "woke" olympics. when you see that term, what does that mean? guest: it typically means left-wing protests. if it were the right, you would say based. you have awoken to a certain reality. the right uses it as a pejorative. your work -- you are woke, which

means your virtue singling -- signaling, rather than protesting. host: the photograph of the u.s. trials, of the sprinter who refused to salute the flag and stepped down from the podium, more broadly, what were you trying to get at? when you say get ready for a "woke" olympics? guest: before the olympics started, we had these issues come up, one with win barry, the hammer thrower, who took the spotlight away from deanna price, who actually won at the olympic trials. when barry -- gwen barry came in a distant third and claimed they played the national anthem on purpose.

she has draped herself in the american flag before. when she says the american flag and the national anthem don't represent me, they used too. it is just suddenly they don't because you can get attention. you can take attention away from the actual winners. you are going to japan to represent america and yet you are disrespecting america. you are saying america does not represent me or these things. i find it funny with these types of protests where you look away from the national anthem or the women's soccer team kneeling and i too like to appear morally superior by taking part in meaningless virtue signaling. that's what this all is. host: a lot of people will come in and say the olympics in the modern era, politically, the first picture they will think about is the two american

athletes, john carlos and tommy smith, from 1968, who won the gold and bronze respectively in the 200 meter sprint, raising their fist in protest amid the unrest in the u.s. in the summer of 1968, as the one iconic moment in american protest in olympic sports that said this is the form in which we can express political views. guest: and i wasn't alive in 1968, i'm not sure if you were. i don't know how it was quite taken back then, but the unrest in america was unmistakable back then. the unrest we have today in america, we have people complaining about things they have to make up. systemic racism, oh, america is so incredibly racist as if there has no been -- has not been progress since the 1960's.

the thing about smith and carlos was that people did not really expect it. that's what made it so powerful. now, it is virtue signaling. they expect athletes to go do this and you roll your eyes, you don't want to watch, you are tired of it. there's nothing new about it. there is nothing behind it. collin cap nick started doing this in what? 2017? it is like what else have you got? i go back to the women's soccer team kneeling and what have you done? you have two black players and pretty much a holy white team so what are you doing besides -- pretty much a white team, so what are you doing besides kneeling? host: the athletes are

responding to what the fans expect of them these days. i'm not talking about 1968, but the expectation from fans to respond to these issues, whether it was black lives matter, lgbtq issues, or social issues in america athletes expect -- or fans expect the athletes to respond in some way. social media is so prevalent. athletes always have that venue. the most prominent venue for them is on the track, on the field, in the swimming pool. guest: i think that if that is their thinking, they are wrong. you can see the ratings that say the fans don't want these things. the nba had their worst ratings in the past two years. suddenly this year, they are not doing the woke stuff and you don't see it on the back of their jerseys, you don't see all of these statements except for when lebron james wants to defend china, then you are not

seeing these things and the ratings are starting to go back up. part of that could be that there are two teams that don't typically end up in the championship now in the championship, but mba ratings are coming back and they are not so woke anymore. the olympics ratings remain to be seen, just started. so far, it is not that great. is it because it is the opening ceremony and people are expecting these things and a lot of the popular sports or at -- are at 2:00 in the morning and people don't want to wake up? i think it shows fans don't want their athletes to be taking part in divisive issues. host: in the professional realm, nba owners and nfl owners, what responsibility do you think they have to say to limit that on the field or to allow that? guest: i don't think they should be allowed to limit it.

free speech, we are allowed to protest and say these things, whether or not they should or people want to hear it, that's a different story. the owners i don't think should -- maybe they should give them a talking to and say this hurts our ratings, people don't like this stuff, and you're not exactly on the right side of history right here, maybe you want to tone it down in order to get people to watch the game. people want to escape from reality. host: it is a business, whether it is tv ratings or t-shirts sold or fans sitting in seats, it is a business decision by owners, isn't it? guest: absolutely. we can get into the business. my personal opinion is that they shouldn't keep the players from doing that because of the free speech issue. but it is a business. can you compel them to without

violating their first amendment rights? guest: we are talking with -- host: we are talking with ashe short. she is talking about protests at the limits. your calls are welcome at (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8002 for independents and others. there was a group of athletes that, last week, asked the ioc to change their policy on protests. they said in their letter that we emphasize that neutrality is never neutral. as a reflection of society at large, sports is not immune to the social ills of white supremacy, sexism, and xenophobia, abel is him, -- ableism, to name a few. -- to eradicate them from global

sport, they must proactively review the policies and procedures that make up their existence and reinforce systemic inequities. staying neutral means staying silent and staying silent means supporting ongoing injustice. guest: how many more buzzwords can they fit into one statement? that's all it is, buzzwords. systemic racism, xenophobia, every ism you can name in their re. they are athletes. you are the best at your sport, you made it. that is why you're there. all of this other stuff is noise at this point. it is turning people off. host: let's get to our calls. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. jim is up first, north dakota,

on our republican line. caller: can you hear me ok? host: we can. caller: i wanted to throw a hypothetical scenario. a person who would be a hero to me, let's say there was a chinese woman gymnast who wins a gold-medal and maybe she turns her back on her flag to protest the treatment of muslims who are being placed in internment camps, what would happen to her when she got home? she would probably end up in a camp or a north korean gymnast who turns her back out of protest over the treatment of millions of her people. or maybe a woman in an arab country, who may be one some --

won some medal and protested the way men treat women. she would come home and be murdered. our women will come home to the suburbs of philadelphia and get a deal worth millions of dollars . even if she desecrates the flag, 45% of the country will think she is a hero. she will not be murdered or thrown into prison i think -- or thrown into prison. host: got your point. guest: i agree. it is so easy in america to make these statements because nothing will happen to you because we don't live in an oppressive country. you are not going to be persecuted. he will be celebrated because these are the popular things to say. the left controls the media. it controls the narrative and

the narrative is that america is terrible. if you lived in a terrible country, you wouldn't be allowed to say those things. host: do they take potential financial benefit into consideration? guest: absolutely. i go back to gwen barry. she has more potential than a whole lot of other athletes who are actually winning their sport. host: this was her tweet last month at those semifinals, at the trials i should say. she said stop playing with me and there is a picture of her off the podium at the awards ceremony. mike is up next on the independent line, somerville, massachusetts. caller: good morning. i want to draw everyone's attention to one thing.

that is that the guest that we are listening to has no primary argument other than assuming the intent of the athletes that are being talked about. that is what everything hinges upon that we are listening to for the last 10 minutes. it is kind of an embarrassing conversation that we are having here that we have to hinge everything upon intent. i would ask the guest to bring it up a notch and get away from that. i don't have time for this. i want to listen to something with a little more substance. i know that this is what people like ben shapiro almost thrives upon, this kind of week

conversation -- weak conversation that doesn't get anyone anywhere and ruffled a lot of feathers. it is subjective and intent based. i can't take it seriously. i really can't. this is one of the lowest quality c-span discussions i have heard. host: ashe short, would you like to comment? guest: thank you, i will change my holes -- whole perspective and stop talking about the issues that i care about and that millions people -- millions of people care about, so thank you for completely changing everything for me. host: on twitter, i don't get it, virtues are no good now? what is on virtuous in the protest -- unvirtuous in the protest of athletes? guest: they are claiming these

things without evidence or proof to back it up. when you are virtue signaling, it is the act of saying i'm not racist and stepping back and doing nothing or actively participating in what you claim is racist. again, all of these quite athletes that love doing this, it's not all white athletes of course, but some are on teams that are predominantly fight and have -- predominantly white and have taken the spot of black athletes. none of this is doing anything. it is dividing people and aggravating people who just want to watch sports to relax and get away from things. host: i want to go back to the first caller we had and the comment about if a chinese athlete or north korean athlete turns their back on the flag,

how is that different from an american protest? guest: like jim said, they are actually protesting something. host: for you, that would be an acceptable use of protest at an olympic form? -- forum? guest: yes. i am not against protest but it would be nice if they protested something that was real or mattered or something they could be persecuted for. when you are a black athlete and you claim it is so oppressive but you have the freedom to go and say that, you're not actually oppressed. host: democrat line, north carolina, go ahead. caller: one of the things that i enjoy about c-span is the fact that we don't have sensationalism, like i have no idea, bill, what your political views or steve's or brian lamb'

s. but, when i listen to what is a lot of what is here today, it is alarming. it is meant to play on a small percentage of things that aren't really as important but highlight those at a game or something to that effect and make it seem like it is a bigger issue. if there is a small uptick in people coming across the border, people like ben shapiro would capitalize on that situation and sensationalize it. i want to ask a question to your guest. is it good for the media to have some type of views that both counter -- that go counter to just giving the facts? when facts are reported, especially about the olympics or anything in general, like january 6, when that happens,

should the media be neutral or should it be -- and if you say the media is not neutral because it is on the left -- that is a different story. what i am asking you is should the news be neutral, so that we don't fall into these same traps? thank you for being here this morning, by the way. guest: it would be nice if the media could be absolutely neutral and give just the facts. as you pointed out, a whole different discussion, that is not the case, so we counter it. giving just the facts, again, the ratings -- i mean -- people aren't really tuning into this kind of woke virtue signaling. the one thing about the small uptick across the border that ben shapiro would capitalize on, we are not having a small uptick, it is a pretty large

uptick across the border. host: let's hear from raleigh, north carolina, this is gilbert on the republican line. caller: good morning and thank you for being on the show. i am a follower of the daily wire and been shapiro. and a reader as well. i need you to clarify your statement that we don't have an issue of protesting, i will extend that to professional sports because you may in hinge -- infringe on the rights of the athletes. i see the nfl, best of all, all these pro sports teams, these players -- basketball, all these pro sports teams, these players are employees. i buy a ticket and i am sitting in the audience and i have a

player who wants to kneel, so they took away my comfort and my peace and my enjoyment by hijacking that process for a ticket that i paid for. you don't have the right as an employee to virtue signal at an employer. you can't do that when you are an employee. i disagree with the pro sports teams ownership who did not want to go there. they chickened out. you had two or three of them that said don't do this. the rest of them act away from the argument. they could have easily told their players do not kneel, you stand for the anthem, if you don't like it, go back into the locker room and then come out. please clarify your stance on the issue of free speech at a game, thanks. guest: absolutely.

from a personal, i lean a bit more libertarian than conservative. i don't like free speech rights to be infringed upon, even by an employer. to your point, the employer's could do that. from my personal point, i don't like that. especially if it was a compelled thing. they have the right to, i just don't necessarily like that kind of convulsion. host: a person from florida says i was a sports junkie but stopped watching all sports because of politics. caller: hi, ashe, i like your name.

i hear you say i personally don't like that, who are you? we have a right to protest when or where we want to. no one confuses anything about protests with political things. i feel in my heart to -- if i feel in my heart to express my feelings, who are you to say no, she shouldn't do that? i'm the athlete, not you. good day. host: we lost that color. guest: i'm not sure what i said that was anything saying you couldn't do that. i said i don't like it and i said personally, who am i? i am a person who was invited on as a guest on to this show. that is who i am. i am also a writer who is allowed to give my opinion as well. i said i don't personally like this but defended everyone's

right to protest. host: ashe short is a senior editor at the daily wire. back to the history of protest at the olympics, we talked about john carlos in 1968, the limits have been a forum for protest. they go back to 1906, the first protest was staged at the 1906 lynn picks in athens. the second place finisher in the long jump, peter o'connor, unfurled a large, green flag with a shamrock and the words ireland forever. ever since the brutal invasion of ireland by oliver cromwell, there has been no concorde

between england overlords and the irish. for o'connor, the olympics were an opportunity to draw attention to this injustice. guest: back then, that was an actual issue that was tangible and something you could point to that actually existed. host: but is it a historical, acceptable form of protest? guest: it might be. it just depends on the main issue that a lot of people have these days, what are you protesting and how are you protesting? and the fact that it seems to be mostly americans who are protesting when we are the freest and least oppressive country in the world. caller: i'd like to know what is your background? what is your experience?

host: before you came to the daily wire, you wrote for the washington examiner, what brought you to the world of journalism? guest: i was hired down in the heritage foundation, i have a policy and campaign background. i have also competed in sports when i was younger. i was an equestrian. host: how much of the olympics do you think you will be watching and will you be watching any particular athletes, either for protests or just interest in their athletic competition? guest: i don't want to watch sports but i know there will probably be protests. you never know. who thought hammer throwing would be a contentious issue? i would love to watch the equestrians but i believe they are on at 4:00 a.m. i will be waking up for that.

i also think that usa gymnastics is awesome. i love simone biles but 2:00 a.m. is early for me. host: here is jenny from the republican line. caller: i love ben shapiro. i think he is terrific. my thing is about the flag. maybe we should boycott and maybe people in this country that turned their back on the flag should not have such a welcome that they have. i just have a problem with it. same thing with football. you don't need to -- the flag is america. and if you have a problem, you need to take a protest somewhere else. not on the sports field, certainly not in the olympics. a lot of people are not watching the limits because just a few are turning their back on the flag. they have ruined it for the rest

of the people. i'm just like many people. i am tired of it. i say people boycott. if they turned their back on the flag, i think they need to turn their back on the people in the limbic. guest: the olympic is a business itself. this kind of stuff angers people and makes them not want to watch. maybe it should be toned down to an extent. these athletes that are participating in the olympics, they want to try and get those medals and then doing the protest against the flag, when you are representing america and saying it is an oppressive country, maybe it would have been better if you had said i'm not going to participate and

represent this oppressive country. what you want to get your medal, so you do you. host: one person says if i disagree it makes no difference, turning away or taking a knee is peaceful protest. athletes aren't breaking into the u.s. capitol, building or burning -- u.s. capitol, burning, looting and stealing things. guest: i would agree this is a more peaceful protest. but you have to think about what people want to see. i understand the argument that this is the point, to make people uncomfortable. you are making people uncomfortable to the point that they don't want to watch, you are losing your message because you will have a smaller audience get it through. the only people that will remain are the people who already agree

with you. host: i want to ask you about a uniform controversy coming up. bikinis, shorts, long sleeves, less female athletes wear what they want. the women's beach handball team has been asked to wear a uniform which is a bikini bottom and they have requested to wear shorts. the ioc governing body of that sport has said no. we have not seen that sport yet in the competition so far. what are your thoughts? guest: i believe they have worn bikini bottoms before. it is kind of odd. i guess the world is all on you, i might want to wear shorts too. i think it is an odd controversy. why? host: why did it make it so far to the lynn picks and nobody addressed it? guest: basically.

if they are more comfortable in shorts, how is that a difficult thing to change? host: we will go to carla in missouri, on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. i think this conversation has gotten too far off field. the olympics, why do people go or why do people watch? they watch to see athletes perform. it is enjoyable. to mix politics into it ruins everything. i quit watching major league baseball back when the players struck for a whole year.

it just ruined baseball for me. i haven't watched since. i think we are jumping on our words to bring all these topics into play. the point is should we express our political views at a sport or a performing event? no. take it somewhere else, go to a protest. leave performance arts out of it. guest: i absolutely agree. i got in trouble for saying my personal opinion earlier but that is my view. i would much rather -- it would be nice if it did not infect those things. espn got too political, the nba, all these other places that got too political, it hurt them.

people just want to watch. i would bring up award shows, oscars, academy awards. all these things. golden globes, viewership just keeps plummeting because people are sick of wealthy celebrities getting up and accepting awards and then claiming that the awards are racist or the academy is racist. they don't give their awards back. but they completely ruin the moment. people want to see the celebrities and see that spectacle. you get up there and you ruin it, people don't want to watch any part of it anymore. at some point, this will break. we have seen it with the nba, pulling back from all the political stuff. i think it will keep -- more and more places will go in that direction. i don't believe the mlb is very political at all anymore, since that strike.

host: you're telling the athletes to find a more appropriate place to express those first amendment rights. guest: i would say places where people are still going to listen to you but are actually going to listen to you and you're not going to divide them or anger them. once you have angered them, you are not going to get them over to your point. host: next call is susan from california, republican line. caller: i think these people are supposed to be representing america, the usa, and not themselves. my daughter and i did not watch the olympics tonight because she said i don't want to see someone disrespecting the u.s. flag, and i don't want to see transgender men compete with regular women. host: the first transgender athlete, speaking of our callers

comment, competing in the limbic. guest: we had someone with bmx who wanted to win an award so they could burn the flag on the podium. and we have the weightlifter, who, until 2013, competed professionally as a man, now getting into his 40's, turns to be a woman. and can now compete again, basically, because his testosterone levels have to be at a certain level, which is many times higher than the natural testosterone levels that women have. very easy to compete when you have all of the benefits of growing up as a man and competing as a man and you turn into a woman to keep competing in your later years. very convenient. host: one more call, washington, d.c., malika on the democrats line. -- malik on the democrats line.

caller: i have listened to this show. this is what you call white privilege one-on-one. it is almost -- i'm not going to say all of them because there are a lot of white brothers and sisters who are protesting and marching with us. there is a certain population of people that seem to want to drown out and talk about how they feel. when people are protesting, they are protesting about a large segment of this american society that has been disadvantaged, and has not been heard. i don't care where they protest. they can protest just like trump supporters ran up in the u.s.

capitol building, in my city, where i was born and raised. they had an insurrection. you are talking about boycotting basketball games and music. people are still paying to see the movies. guest: you are saying the intent of the protesters is good and they have some higher means, this is about my people and the population, when we can see from their statements and actions that it is about themselves. it is not just like athletes. the u.s. women's soccer team, almost entirely white, doing these protests. i believe being able to protest anywhere, people keep calling in , i am saying you probably should find another outlet.

i'm not telling anybody to boycott anything. i am saying what is happening. someone else said just the facts, those are the facts. protests are turning people off. host: ashe short, a senior editor at the daily wire, thank you for being here on the washington journal. guest: thanks for having me. host: we will open up the phone lines for your thoughts on top policy issues and political issues you are following. some of the things we are talking about, including bipartisanship and the rise of the delta variant. (202) 748-8000 is the line for the democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. independents and others, (202) 748-8002. go ahead and start dialing and we will get your calls in just a moment. >> tonight, c-span premieres january 6, views from the house,

14 members of congress share stories of what they saw, heard and experienced that day, including oklahoma republican markwayne mullin. he talked about a police officer who fatally shot a woman in the u.s. capitol. >> i guarantee you he had never had to pull his weapon in a manner like that before. he was the last person in the world who wanted to use force like that. and he wasn't one to do that. i know for a fact because after it happened, he came over and was physically and emotionally distraught and i gave him a hug and said sir, you did what you had to do. unfortunately, the young lady, her family's life has changed and it is unfortunate she lost her life and people lost a loved one. the lieutenant's life changed too because the first time you have to use lethal first -- force doesn't ever leave you. he was doing his job and he got put into a situation --

where he had to do his job. if you give commands and they still don't listen, you don't have a choice. either at that point, you have to discharge your weapon in a manner of self-defense or that weapon will be taken away from you and used on you and put all of our lives in danger too. >> this week, you will hear from jason crow of colorado and tom malinowski of new jersey. views from the house starts tonight at 10:00 eastern on c-span, c-span.org or listen on the c-span radio app. >> washington journal continues. host: it is open forum until 9:00. (202) 748-8000 is the line to call for democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. and for independents and others,

that is (202) 748-8002. some of the latest reporting on the rise in covid cases, this is the wall street journal, florida leads the u.s. in covid-19 cases as hospitalizations surge. florida is recording more covid-19 cases than any other u.s. state. some areas increase at the fastest rate since the start of the pandemic. the wall street journal writes they logged 67,413 cases in the past week according to the cdc. florida have 314 cases per 100,000 people, second only to louisiana. the weekly total of new cases reported by florida jumped more than fourfold between july 1 and july 22, reaching its highest point since mid-january. that is from the wall street journal. your thoughts on stories we have been following. we will go to anthony on the

democrats line in minneapolis. good morning. caller: good morning. i am sad i did not get a chance to talk to ashe. i could have told her there are repercussions. we are living in a country where we have 45 million to 50 million people that are oppressed and you bring this woman on who says nothing is wrong and everything is rosy. why are we so stuck on the flag? it shows where our troops are. but america is not a flag. it is the people trying to stay together and do the right thing for everybody. this is absolutely ridiculous. please, c-span, don't bring people on like that anymore. we get up early to listen and then you bring people on who are straight morand's. -- morons.

host: we bring people with all kinds of opinions on, including people like ashe short, left and right, center, far-left and far-right and give them a forum. give them a chance to speak to you and give you a chance to speak to them. that is what this program is about, as you know. caller: the thing about it is for a person to come on and say there is no such thing as racism in america is ludicrous. host: that is one of you and you get to call in with your view and way in strongly -- weigh in strongly. we had mark talking about the report on the state of black americans. we try to bring a wide range of view and we welcome your criticism. thank you for calling.

luis is next up in chicago -- l ouise is up in chicago. caller: we need to start thinking about what kind of values we have. it has nothing to do with race or political party. if you cannot walk outside without being shot or run over by a car, who wants to live like this? people need to get values, people need to get respect and people need to have some kind of worth as human being, rather than walking around with their pants hanging down, yelling and screaming and shooting, stealing cars. if you want to be an american, you should try to go to school and learn some values. we don't need political parties, we need values. it doesn't matter if you are black, white or whatever? if you don't have any values, you have no worth. who wants to live with people

who have no worth, walking around, disturbing society? if you don't like the way society is, try to create it so you fit in or create something you can live by. people cannot live with people walking around, disturbing and tearing down what they have built. and if they think i am crazy, fine. but i am 78 years old, living in chicago. i would love to be able to go for a walk without being run down, shot, or something negative. a lot of people in this country want to live this way as well. we need the police to help us. host: peter from new york, republican line. caller: i think you have been fair today, showing both sides of the issue. i too am sorry i did not get through to speak to ashe. i agree with her, if you are in

the olympic, you are there to represent the united states. i believe that this particular issue, i was around in 1968 and that was a very controversial situation when they did the black power sign during the awards ceremony. i think we should use the standard where, with the shoe on the other foot, would it be acceptable if they white supremacist did some kind of signal up on the stage? would people find that as an acceptable act? if they find that is not acceptable, the other is not acceptable and that is not the proper venue to be doing that. host: thank you for your comment. former president trump spoke last night. aaron tweeted this, he was watching the speech and said

trump has been speaking more than 90 minutes. he is goading his audience into booing the u.s. women's soccer team. the headline, trump clings to false election claims at arizona rally. he hyped an ongoing partisan audit of the results. we want to remind you that our series, january 6, views from the house, begins tonight at 10:00 eastern. oral histories with members of the house, democrats and republicans, who were in the house that day, beginning tonight at 10:00 eastern on c-span, also on c-span.org. tuesday, we will bring you the first of the hearings of the select committee on the january 6 attack, gets underway at -- that gets underway at 9:00 eastern. elwood, wisconsin, first up,

democrats line, good morning to kirk. caller: thanks for washington journal and thank you for c-span. i wanted to make a quick comment . i like ben shapiro and the daily wire. frankly, now that she's not here to respond, that has to be the worst guest i have ever seen. i hate to be harsh. just not a lot of substance. it seemed like every caller wanted to talk about a different god than the issues. -- guide than the issues. -- that is kind of the point. i think they have earned the right to say or do whatever they

want. host: thanks, kirk. lynchburg, virginia, independent line, good morning. caller: i would like to ask how the government expects us to take their campaign on the vaccination serious when they are letting illegal immigrants across this border by the thousands, who have not been vaccinated and carry a host of diseases that could affect all of us. they ram it down their throats and do not care what the illegal immigrants are bringing to this country and it is ridiculous. when they do something about that, perhaps the people will take it more seriously. host: a broader story on the climate change impact, the impact of climate change on the environment, including the droughts and fires out west.

a moment of truth for climate action, only they could cling to poles. on the other side of the planet, a 61-year-old maker of handcrafted ukuleles died in june as searing temperatures made an oven out of his home. one of at least 800 victims of what one scientist called the most anomalous heat event ever observed on earth. massive floods have day loose -- deluged central europe, and nigeria. more than one million people are close to starvation amid madagascar ours worst -- madagascar's worst

drought in decades. let's hear from tarpon springs, florida. this is roger on the independent line. caller: good morning. my comment is i am disturbed and doubting your neutrality of what c-span is supposed to be about. i agree with the judgment from north carolina, -- the gentleman from north carolina, you had this lady on who was malformed in her thinking. you wanted to have a conversation with her, it was disturbing to see that kind of extremist attitude, not even knowing the facts about the young lady and what her protest was about. the national anthem was not supposed to be played during that period, it was played late

and delayed. it disturbs me how you are leaning toward this. it saddens me but i am doubting your neutrality. thank you for listening to me. thank you, callers. hopefully we can stay independent because this is really bad. host: to georgia, henry is on our republican line. caller: good morning. how are you? host: fine, thank you. caller: i want to make a comment about the lady you had on. she -- i didn't see anything wrong with the lady. a lot of these folks think she was being biased and what have you, but she has the right to her opinion.

everybody has their right to their opinion. i don't agree with the protest at the limits, they are representing our country, not their agenda. if you can't represent the country, stay home. i think that is just wrong. thank you. host: i appreciate that. this is the new york times about troop withdrawal from iraq. on paper, they write that iraq's prime minister is heading to washington to demand president biden withdraw combat troops from iraq, announcing to iraqi media that it would put an end to the present -- presence of combat forces. america is likely to oblige, setting up a deadline to be announced on monday for the withdrawal of u.s. combat forces by the end of the year. in williamsburg, virginia, rob

is up next. caller: going back to the pro sports teams, anybody that thinks an employer doesn't have a right to control the behavior of caller: going back to the pro sports teams. anybody thinks an employer does not have the right to control the behavior of their employees, just try to wear a politically charged t-shirt to work. i do electrical work. am i going to walk into somebody's house with a pro-abortion shirt on? that's not what we aren't in business to do. we are there to fix their wiring. i don't think the customers would like it. i know my boss would fire me almost instantly. or tell me to get the t-shirt off. that's just the point i'm making.

these owners of pro sports teams, they certainly have a right to control the behavior of the players. these guys are on tv. host: what about in the olympic arena? the non-pro sports arena? caller: i think that's disrespectful to our nation and our flag. a course, that's just an opinion. they are not employees of anyone. so i don't really know who has authority there. it's embarrassing though. host: thanks for calling in. appreciate that. there is more ahead here on washington journal. we will be joined by michael bender. he is quite street journal, white house reporter. author of "frankly, we did win this election: the inside story of how trump lost". we will talk with him, hear from you on the washington journal.

>> tonight on q and a. michelle singletary on her book what to do with your money when the crisis hits. >> is not a question of if there's going to be another economic crisis but when. it's not all about covid, but what recession is going to come down the road. it may be long. it may be short. life is going to happen. and i need you to prepare now. i do a lot of financial seminars in my community, and it's so hard to get people to save when they are doing well because they are doing well. they don't think that tomorrow is going to have an issue. i say you need to save, you need

to do that. and they say i'm going to get to it. when the crisis hits, everybody is in ruble mode. f --rugal mod --frugal mode. it's easy to cut when you cannot pay for anything or things are shut down. let's prepare. let's be like that fireman or fire woman who is ready for the next fire. they hope it won't happen, but they are going to be prepare for that. >> finance colonist michelle singletary tonight. you can also listen to q and a on your podcast wherever you get your podcasts. >> tonight, see knight -- c-span premieres gin wearing sixth, views from the house. 14 members of congress share

stories of what they saw, heard and experienced that day. jason crow talks about how he felt as people tried to breach the house chamber. >> if you are not scared, debtors -- there is something wrong with you or you do not understand the magnitude of the situation. there was a moment i was going to ask one of the officers for his firearm because i've used firearms before against people. i know that i am capable of doing what's necessary to protect myself or others. my experience in combat is you never know who is willing to actually pull that trigger and do what is necessary. but i know that i could. i was think about asking the officer for his firearm. i decided not to because i did not want to put the officer and deposition. but i never thought that, i'm a very different person than i was when i was a ranger. i'm a father, i'm a husband. mama rev congress. i thought when i took that

uniform off, that i took that -- i'm a member of congress. i never that i thought when i took that uniform off, i thought i would never have to potentially act like that as a member of congress in 2021. >> this week, you will also hear from markwayne mullin and tom malinowski. january 6 news from the house starts tonight on speed -- on c-span, c-span.org or listen to the radio app. >> washington journal continues. host: our just is michael bender . he is wall street -- our guest is michael bender. he is the author of "frankly, we did win this election: the inside story of how trump lost". welcome to welcome journal. let's start with the title of the book. i wanted to pay -- i wanted to

play a short segment. president is at the white house. let's take a listen at that moment. >> this is a fraud on the american public. this is an embarrassment to our country. we were getting ready to win this election. frankly, we didn't win this election. host: michael bender, an iconic moment. why did you choose that moment? >> it underscored how president trump catapulted his own reality. this is the night of november 3. we did not know he had lost. we did not know biden had one --won rita trump ad-libbing very clearly that he --won.

trump ad-libbing very clearly. his messaging is trying to impose his own reality on the current situation no matter what the facts are. host: the other thing about that moment is i was wondering if i was up for that. if it like for me people in the room were encouraging him, but i had no idea and the people had no idea what he would say next. guest: this is about 2:30 a.m., the night of election. wednesday morning. so if you were asleep it was probably for a good reason. i said this in the book. it was a pretty chaotic scene in the white house. trump did not want to come out and address the nation. several aides had to get him to come out.

there were some folks who told other aides just say you one. -- just say you won. host: before we get too deep into the conversation with collars come i want to point out how you set up the book in terms of the background -- number session with callers come i want to point you -- i want you to point out how you set up the book in terms of the background. a front row seat to history. you had been covering both the campaign and the full extent of the president trump and -- from the full president trump election. how did you gain resources and get people's trust enough to be able to help you out and comment for you even if it's off the

record for this book? guest: i've been a journalist for 2000 years. a big experience -- four 2000 years --for two dozen years. i've covered donald trump for the campaign, all four years of the presidency. people respected my process, my reporting, and my writing. through that, that's where i built the trust for re-create these scenes for people to talk to me. there was a fair amount of people who talk to me in a reputed way. there's not a lot of room in the bubble around president trump to criticize him, not criticize them. but to tell him he's doing something wrong or he needs to

do something different. a lot of folks i talked to spoke to me very bluntly. it appears they had not had the opportunity to do that with their own colleagues or with the president themselves -- or with the president himself. host: you recount in the book one incident where he calls you, you are in isolation with your family home. you get called in for an interview. you had no idea. was that a common occurrence? what was that interview all about? >> he had called me in april to complain about a story in the wall street journal that was three days old. he invited me in to the oval office for an interview. setting up with his press team that the only thing i said was lee's don't call me and tell me i have five minutes to do this. it's the pandemic. -- it's in the middle of the pandemic. up got kids all over the house. we enclosed off the floor. in the middle of june, i get a

call and says can you be here in five minutes. this is moments before the juneteenth rally. i was left in the oval office alone for almost half an hour. there was no real message. they wanted to know what i wanted to talk about. and what was on my mind. president a few moments away from the election. it was stunning to me that there was no particular plan about getting a message out or appoint through me. host: was that before or after had been demoted? guest: this was a few days before the juneteenth rally in tulsa. this is his first and only rally that has empty seats in it. brad the initial campaign manager was demoted. host: how big it was the effect of the loss? how much of that hurt him? guest: i think it hurt them at the end of the day.

brad had never been a part of any political campaign before trump. this was his first political campaign that he's ever -- ever that he's running. it was perfect campaign manager for donald trump. what i write is that brad and trump were aligned on how they viewed pr, promotion and branding and saw that as a way to create its own energy in the political movement. rad is an ever sizing executive -- advertise -- brad is an advertising executive. when trump demotes him, he puts in bill stepien who is an effective political strategist but a different kind. it more of an accountant than professional type person. he builds an advertising agency and puts an accountant and charge of it. he spends less months almost rebuilding the input -- the

entire campaign from the inside out. host: that's also rally did not hurt things. it was a that certainly did not help things. it was a bust, wasn't it? guest: no one wanted to tell trump. usually, on away that's on his way to rallies, it's a race to tell him how any people are inside. how many people are waiting outside. that number tends to grow every time someone tells it to him. in the tolls instance, no one would tell him -- in the tulsa instance, no one would tell him it was a bust. until he was inside the arena, and the green rain -- in the green room. he turns on fox and to seize them talking about the numbers. host: he says -- "frankly, we did win this election: the inside story of how trump lost". we welcome your calls and comments. 202-748-8000 is a line for democrats. 202-748-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8002 for independents

and all others. we had a couple of weeks ago, michael wolf, on. one of the things i noticed in your book that differs is that you spent a lot of time talking about the front row shows, the folks who were loyal at the trump rallies. guest: i appreciate you bringing that up. there is a library, a pantheon of trump books. what i think makes this book unique not only among books that have come out already, but what's coming forward, is that i come at it three ways. the inside the room moments in the oval office, under the hood of the campaign with exclusive campaign memos. also i think is exclusively here is i effectively embed with some of trump's most loyal supporters, the folks that go to

30, 40 trump rallies. what about them as people brings them back over and over again? what it is about trump that attracts them in the first place in order to understand this movement. moving forward because even after january 6, trump is drawing thousands of people to the rallies and know-how -- in ohio last month, the thousands in florida this month. why people keep coming after january 6. host: you are a reporter from washington, you are the president's nemesis, you are in the cage out there in those rallies. how do they gain, how do the front row, to trust you? guest: i showed up. what i would've done mostly in reporting on trump's loyalists

or fans or a lot of my colleagues would do, you want to the front of the line, you do it interview and wait for the most, wildest quote you can get. walk away. we talked a lot about the politics with the front row joe's. but i wanted to stay. i wanted to know what their families were like. wanted to know what their families thought about them leaving for days for rallies. i wanted to know if they had been active before. some of these folks came out were arenas for days at a time. early in the morning. to talk to them as people. at one point, they effectively became a member -- they effectively, i became a member of the front row joe's.

some of these folks were warmhearted kind people at their core. i was honored to be able to tell their stories. host: tell us briefly about one of the front row joe's. >> basically what i found is a lot of the folks who go to these rallies are attracted to trump, but they have tanning on their hands. they are -- but they have time on their hands. they are retired and they form a community. trump made their lives richer and their worlds bigger. these are folks who are effectively misled by the president, including on covid and the protests. randall gets so sick in the summer of 2020. guest: host: from covid? guest: i will give away the

punchline. he is a smoker. he is convinced he has covid. [no audio] guest: drop off other supplies. taking a test. host: and he you that? guest: probably. he did recover from that sickness, but it was one of the stories of just how far, how loyal some folks feel to donald trump. host: michael bender is our guest. he is the author of the new book "frankly, we did win this election: the inside story of how trump lost". we welcome your calls and comments. let's go first to leesburg, virginia had hear from karen. democrats line. caller: hi. good morning. i'm a democrat.

i'm african-american. i know quite a few people whether or not they were going to vote in the election. they didn't want to have anything to do with the. one thing that resonates with them is most people hate a cheater and a liar. don't care where you're from, whether you are in nebraska and a bingo hall or on the job and you know somebody who is a habitual liar. the dagger with trump is the postal service's desk because a lot of people were following this rhetoric and following this madman and they were like we stand on this, but when he leveraged the postal office and we saw pictures of post office boxes on the bed of trucks, that's when people said that's it. we knew that he was doing everything he could. he could not get any visible. you could not hide behind the election. it was as a vet -- a direct,

tangible, physical thing that said i'm going to make it very difficult for you to vote and people were like i'm done. besides that and the coronavirus. if he had changed his position on the coronavirus, but when he started taking post office boxes and cut that budget, it was done. that's when so many people said i'm headed to the polls no matter what. i'm going to stand in line because they took the post office box off the corner. you can't be for someone who is an integrity person and do something so brazen and think that now you got my attention. that was what did it. that's what brought out a lot of people who had never voted. they did not even like biden, but they did not like the way trump handled it. to me, that was the icing on the cake. guest: i think karen raises some good points. one is on the post office, trump

was very open about what he was doing and he did not want to encourage people to vote by mail. he was very concerned about that. to karen's point, and i get into this a little bit in the book, the boomerang effect that this has. a lot of people in the middle of 2020 when some of these rules started changing and when the election mechanics started changing toward mail-in voting or absent people voting. what people were worried about were errors in the process. if you, this is basic marketing. if you aren't always someone that buys your shirt and pants and a store, you do not want to try to get that person to try to start buying something online because there's a chance their patterns rake. there was a fear that people were going to -- patterns break. there was a fear that people were not going to follow the rules, -- follow the rules.

we have numbers in the book that first time absentee voters, the error rate was way down from what it normally is. when they start to implement this type of election. host: post-campaign, they could have emphasized mail in ballots and done way better. guest: 100%. in the trump campaign, white house there was essentially one person who was worried about fraud and vote by mail and that was donald trump. multiple people, senior people around trump asked him time and again hit the brakes on this type of rhetoric, that it was going to hurt their people, the republicans. proof of that is places like florida, republicans have been

competitive and successful for a long time. arizona, republicans are responsible for putting in absentee voting and voting by mail. host: i want to ask you about charlottesville. particularly the comments, "very fine people." the departure of davis portman -- david schwartz and his chief economic advisor gary cohen. you write that he unloaded on the president. he told trump that his lack of clarity had been harmful for the country and that he put an incredible amount of pressure people waiting for -- working for the white house. no one backed going up. -- no one backed cohen up. following a few moments behind,

mike pence climbed the flight of stairs. i'm proud of you, mike pence told him. >> -- host: was that typical behavior of the vice president? guest: i can only report find one instance when he pushed back on donald trump and that's when the president accused him of trying to hire one of his own age when it turned out that aid -- that they had discussed that and that jared kushner asked mike pence to make that higher. that's important as we get to january 6. trump repeatedly asks spence -- mike pence to overturn the election. mike pence and his team thought that they had been very clear that he did not have that authority. my reporting as that maybe it wasn't so clear, that when he

told them no it was nested in a bunch of maybes. one line i have is that he tells drop i don't think i have the authority to do this, but whatever your legal team comes up with i will take a look at. the president hears the second part. when i interviewed trump after the presidency, he told me that mike pence had never told him no. that may or may not be right, but that is certainly what trump cammarata -- came away with. host: you interviewed the president. izzy commonly -- did he commonly assume that people are ok with people talking to reporters since he is ok with talking to reporters? guest: no. he wants to be the leaker in chief. he wants to be able to sway some

of these scenes and shape them. what i found was that almost every question i asked him, no matter what the question was, was brought back to election fraud in 2020, missing ballots in georgia, detroit, conspiracies in arizona. host: you may not want to end this, but over the course of your reporting on the president, during his presidency, was he the source of some leaks? guest: there were a lot of leaks coming out of that white house at all levels i think. host: let's hear from nancy, independent line. go ahead. caller: good morning. this is a very serious statement and question. we all know and heard that then president of the united states trump on tape asking the georgia secretary of state find me 11,000 votes.

now the gop successfully passes state laws to be able to do this in the future, change votes. very upfront mr. bender. how close is america to being a banana republic? guest: i think there's, you are right to be concerned about that phone call with the georgia secretary of state. i think there are, there is measures underway. discussions for protections. those are going to be difficult to approve. congress -- there goes a large number of the base that thinks trump did win the election. to think that trump is onto

something by using election security as a motivator for the base. this will be something to watch in the next couple of years heading into the midterms. host: we go to be republican line. plymouth, north carolina. go ahead. caller: good morning. how are you? host: fine thanks. you are on the air. caller: c-span, it's been a long morning. i watched several segments. i think my comment, and i want to cap try to keep it short, i think we are getting too wrapped around an american today into american politics. we go all the way from bipartisanship all the way up to the conversation about who won the election. at this point, i won't even argue that point because i think it's a dead horse and i think that's exactly part of the issue. my issue is democrat,

republican, libertarian. it doesn't matter. bipartisanship. it doesn't matter. we in america, nowadays, get too wrapped up in personality versus policy. van jones interviewed some people during the presidential lead up to the 2016 election with the family out in the midwest somewhere who did not particularly like trump but they liked the policies. the economic, the racial things. a big farmer who was about to vote under. -- about two go under. -- about to go under. van jones said i don't understand how you could do this. it was the policies. as a conservative thinker, yes, i believe more in smaller

government. but on the flipside, i know that people, especially people of color, don't trust their local people that they look toward the federal government to make states do it they should. it boils down to discussion in congress, the house, the senate about what's right and wrong. for the national welfare. earlier, a veteran of world war ii. it's interesting, bipartisanship issue and trump issue has gone so far right or left that it's hard to know what's right or wrong. host: we will let you go there. guest: at the his point is no t versus policy question.

-- his point is personality versus policy question. that overshadowed a lot of policies that a lot of questions about his personality. -- that overshadowed a lot of questions about his personality. president trump came into the office as a change agent. just like president obama. a lot of the front row joseph were obama -- right front rowjoes were obama supporters. in the end, it becomes personality for president trump. that was one of the striking things as i've was really -- as i was reporting in this book. people around the president in the campaign thought he had been desk thought he had become a

dangerous and the last six months -- thought he had become dangerous in the last six months he was in office. almost any measure necessary to keep, to stay in the west wing. he wanted to shoot americans. he told his officials that people protesting the george floyd death, should be shot in the leg, shot in the foot. host: you were watching the george floyd video on air force one with the president. guest: this is a good example of personality versus policy question. it does take trump a day or two before he watches the floyd

video. he never actually thought that she never actually watches the hoping. he is deeply affected -- he never asked to watches the whole thing. he is deeply affected. president trump is a very visceral person. he learns and absorbs things through watching them. more than reading. remember when he attacked syria is first year in office -- his first year in office after he saw children affected by chemical weapons. this is a never reported seen in the book. he views the protest in a personal way. these people are protesting a murder. people protesting years of inherent racism and civil rights abuses. trump internalizes that as personal. he had pushed through some

justice reform and funding for funding for -- and funding for hbcus. the way he vocalizes this to his staff's i did all these things and black people still hate me and they are never going to vote for me. he turns on a dime and doubles down on the law and order image and wants to disperse the crowds. wants to use uniformed, active-duty military to quiet the protests. host: who are the aides encouraging that? guest: there's a few of them. one of them in my book is stephen miller. these are big meetings in the oval office. 10, 12, 15 people in these meetings. stephen miller is describing cities burning, american cities are burning. mark, the top general in the

military, has the data. he sees this percentage of cities have protests. a tiny fraction of the people are protesting. these aren't cities burning down. these are some singular images on television that the president and some of his aides are reacting to. he has to swivel in his seat and turned back to stephen miller and shut the f up. in the oval office. he has a point to a portrait of abraham lincoln. he said that man had an insurrection. what we have is a protest. host: caller in new jersey. independent line. caller: real quick. this is coming from a person who voted for ross perot. i still resort back to my vote

for ross perot because everything he said has come true. two part question. who gave the order, and i want to know the person is, who gave the order to the entire media complex to ignore the will of the people by completely halting and stopping the election results of our president by refusing to report who one the election? it -- who wone --who won the election? fox news reported way ahead of biden winning arizona. they obviously knew they one --wonm --won arizona. who gave that order? that's what i would like to know. guest: there was no order for the media to report this one way or the other.

[no audio] guest: news organizations, fox news technology to protect winners and get it right. the entire rotations of news organizations on these decisions not only to be first but to be correct. without getting too far deep in the weeds here, the projections, trends, how many ballots our last that are left, a lot has been written on this. these news organizations go out of their way to explain their methods and procedures for making these calls. host: a question for you on twitter. going back to your description of being called into the white house for an interview with the president. they say "you are a general desk journalist.

i couldn't think of a bigger component to give a person makes a living covering today's political scene. were you more worried about being or being in the middle of a frenzied rally? guest: there were moments and rallies --in rallies where i made sure when i got into rallies to note the exits, the way out in case something happened. it's not the first time i felt like that covering a political event. host: did you ever see a colleague get roughed up or have there'd desk have their equipment damaged? guest: shouting nose to nose, finger-pointing. a friend did get roughed up, but nothing eyewitness with my own two eyes. it was in 2000 that it was in chicago and the 2016 campaign -- it was in chicago during the

2016 campaign. this is why i attained front row ordinary joe status. as we were going through some of the rallies, i would ask them what were some of their favorite moments. they would say oh yeah i look at that one. i quickly realized i had been to at least 50, 60 rallies. host: i've heard the trump supporters pay to attend those rallies and that trump pays them to attend. have you seen evidence of that? guest: no. the first rally when he announced in new york, the famous golden escalator moment. we had a reporter on the scene who said that some tourists have been brought in from outside to help fill up the atrium on that day. to this day, i have yet to meet anyone out in the rallies who has ever been to the new york event.

these are real things. these are real events. these are real people showing up to support donald trump. host: michael bender talking about his new book. let's hear from thomas in ohio, republican line. guest: good morning. caller:caller: -- good morning. i was just wondering if you could enlighten us as to how much the media paid -- the media played in this election. they are very biased. a lot of unknown authors coming forward. i was wondering what your thoughts were. guest: hey, thomas. hello everybody in strongsville. the media always has a role one way or another in these

elections. this is the platform, how we hear the stories and how we think about these races. but i think it's more of a political mirror -- but i think it's more of a mirror than an influencer. people get their information from so many sources. when people ask me about enemy of the people and how much it played a role in defeating trump , president trump went out of the way -- went out of his way to speak to the media at the white house at events. i brought multiple authors down to mar-a-lago. he sees a very important role for the media whether it fox news, wall street journal, wall street times -- new york times. host: let's go to richmond, virginia.

the democrats line. caller: good morning. i voted absentee and it was tricky because of the post office and covid. what i did was i requested an absentee bout -- ballots and hand delivered it to a dropbox. i did want to complement -- i didn't want to comment. thank goodness we do not have another four years of 45. thank goodness for the free press and journalism. thank you. host: i want to ask you. you're asking about the final weeks. this is about election night just before the election night rally. you write that the constant use of the white house for blatantly clinical purposes also made her uncomfortable. she had tried to stop the campaign from using it for the convention. her office had slow walk several requests from the campaign ahead of the rnc. she delivered -- she would

deliver her speech from the rose garden and the president would accept his party's nomination on the south lawn. it surprise you that the first lady took such a contrary view to what the president wanted to do in that case? guest: no, in the sense that melania trump is a german phobic --germophobe like her husband. it did not surprise me that she is very concerned about covid and taking precautions. it did surprise me how much of a pack in fourth there had been ahead of that election night party. she had made repeated requests, excuse me, the chief of the white house staff made requests to you her to use the white house. the first lady's office is to decently desk traditionally in charge of -- traditionally in charge of things at the white

house. it takes president trump a few days before election night the phone his wife from air force one and pleaded with her to use the white house because they could not go anywhere else. host: because of d.c. laws, they could not use the hotel right? guest: right. she throws her hands up and says do what you want. you are going to anyway. this is important in the sense of how many people around trump tried to act as guardrails for him. tried to sway his direct desk his decisions one way or another and end up being -- his decisions one way or another and end up being speed bumps. host: is that true for jared kushner and ivanka russian mark guest: -- ivanka? guest: so would you want about them and their policies, both of

them are pretty effective allegedly -- effective relatively at keeping the president focused and keeping grifters away. trying to keep trump surrounded by experts and people with his best interests at heart. again, by the end, when it really matters, at the end of the term and up to january 6 jared had effectively washed his hands of it. he was working on his portfolio with middle east peace plans. he sees the direction this is going. the people in georgia, the runoff. they are pleading with jared because he is someone who has shown effectiveness at directing the president. pleading with him for help. he tells them no i can't. rudy giuliani is involved at this point and there is nothing

i could do. some of the georgia republicans were stunned. they had never heard anything like that from him before. host: let's hear from tony in tampa on the independent line. caller: i just wanted to say i thought the media attacked his character, but as far as, especially the conservative media. they never really reported or held him accountable. he had $25 billion in the first budget to build a wall. he passed on it. he actually built 15 miles of new wall. on obamacare, he protected it. he saved catered -- he safeguarded it instead of getting rid of it. rand paul told him get rid of it and we will work later on to get it replaced. he takes the tax off of it. it became three times more popular and three times as many people signed up for it than

obama's desk than obama had. his far as jared -- then obama had. they ruined the crime bill, this empowerment zone. all of these other policies that he did not campaign on it all. as far as about to ruin the economy. mnuchin and he promised gdp every month. he got 3% gdp one month after he gave tax cuts. nothing was based on that text -- on that market. he printed 6 trillion bucks. some guys who had the greatest economy, how much there was that how come there was so much welfare? his last year as a president. host: a couple of issues there. guest: i think tony raises some good and interesting points. i think one of the three lines

of this book is how those served the president was by all the infighting underneath him. the presidents type priority from day one was reelection. they filed paperwork that day in order to start the wheels on the reelection campaign. i could not sit here and tell you one of the person around him for four years who shared that as their top priority. host: in other words, an ongoing campaign. get reelected. guest: if you start out a little differently with different policies or there are some decisions. the wall. no one took that in terms of major top campaign promises. no one owned that to make sure

it was done in the way he wanted. you see that all the way through into the final days of the race where his top aides have a come to jesus moment at a meeting and make sure they are all in the room for some of these decisions. that they are all invited to the same meetings. these are sort of things that are happening. i'm convinced that he is not well served by his staff around him, but he is the president and the buck stops with him. the response ability lays with him to make sure. host: particularly how contentious they get. they are described, the chairs in front of the president desk. quite a scene. guest: i asked him about some of this infighting and what he is doing about it. he kind of threw up his hands and said.

the quote to me was they are all fighting over who loves me the most. host: question for you from, for president trump's future. trump suggested declaring himself president for life. do you think he was testing the waters to see if you could get enough support to do that? guest: yes. i think he is definitely thinking about running for president again. 2022 is going to be informative on that decision. he has made some two dozen endorsements from the u.s. senate to staten island borough president. some of these races he has endorsed our republican primaries. that's not an easy thing to pull off even for a former president as popular as he is within the party. the results of that will determine which way he goes.

i think the thing this book shows, outlines in some new ways, the president as -- this president inside the oval and as a candidates who heading into 2022 republicans have a choice whether or not. whatever decision that is, this book shows they cannot go into the decision with anything other than their eyes wide open. host:. mike in dallas. republican line. caller: good morning. i would like to ask just a couple of questions. you said that you went to a bunch of trump rallies and met a bunch of trump supporters and did they know you were from the washington post? host: he is from the wall street journal. guest: yes sir. i wear my press badge at all

events where i am working. i always identify myself as a wall street journal reporter and talk to people specifically for the book after the election. caller: then they knew you weren't a conservative reporter. you say you were never attacked, but get in this book you consider trump supporters brownshirts. you call them the snot --sn ot-zis. guest: i don't call anyone not seize or brownshirts. he had been --nazis or brownshirts. he had been given the nod and wink.

mark milley is questioning whether some of the hires that the president is bringing into the administration may have ties to neo-nazi is him. -- neo-nazism. host: one of the front row joe's is this woman from michigan. you get to know her well at rallies. she comes to the capital for january 6. you write a quote from her. she says if mike pence would have come out of that building, i guarantee you he would have died. if it wasn't by gunfire he would have been pummeled. they were going to kill him industry. the dust -- does that surprise you? guest: yes it shocked me. she was at the rally january 6 and was in the march up to the capital. host: did she get inside the capital? guest: she did not. her telling of it, she was with

several people, friends. it was so crowded that she only got to what was the west front of the capital and they did not want to lose each other so they sort of stopped and took in the scene and took in the moment. what she was describing to me was the march effectively down pennsylvania avenue from the mall to the capital. during that point, people realized that mike pence had put out a statement and for the first time on the record said he was not going to overturn the results. this was news to her and the trump supporters because trump had been telling everybody and have been telling them for weeks that mike pence might do this. host: on that speech at the rally before, on january 6 correct? guest: correct. in the days ahead of time that mike pence was not going to do that. mike pence's office did not

going west did not go on the record with that. -- not go on the record with that. trump fans are getting their information from him to where they felt surprised that mike pence would do this. sondra describes the moment as a surge of injury -- a surge of energy. these get pence chance start. host: what is the relationship between the former president and the president -- and mike pence. guest: they are speaking to each other. there are multiple phone calls back and forth. i haven't spoken to mike pence about these calls. i have spoken to president trump about it and what strikes me is if you are donald trump and you believe mike pence has committed

treason and was so disloyal to overturn an election, wouldn't you want some sort of apology or sort desk or some sort of resolution before you start these russians again -- before you start these conversations again question mark host: joel --? host: joel -- caller: i have a few questions for you. first of all, i'm not a trump fan. i know him personally. what he did to my family and people in atlantic city. he is a liar and cheat. i have no liking for trump. in the election itself, there are questions that have to be answered. when you hear is a big live.

it's not a big live -- when you hear it is a big lie. it's not a big lie. my mother in the 70's was a republican inspector where she had passed. she went to neighborhoods that were worse than vietnam. she had to to inspect the election county. in philadelphia, there was an incident when a guy with an orange sign trying to get in the building where the county was and a guy came out, i big african-american guy and pushed him away and said you are not getting in here. then a woman comes out and says you are not getting out here. he says i will call the police. they went in and he could that's and they locked the door. he cannot go into the building. guest: in response to that? host: --host: any response to

that? guest: all of them have concluded there is no widespread fraud. i agree there are individuals, specific questions, alleging security can always be improved, vote by mail and processes debates but there is no election fraud. to claim that trump won the election 2020 is a big lie. host: the president is speaking about it. trump returns to arizona and predicts ballot review will validate him. guest: my interviews of him were a couple of months before the rallies started up again and he was more in a transition moment between post-presidency and not really quite ready to get back on the campaign trail yet.

i was in cleveland, the first one since generate six. half of that rally was claims of election fraud. trump talked for four years about his election night when into thousand 16 and lost in 2000 -- election night win -- win in 2016 and lost in 2020. caller: although trump lost, republicans did well. trump is an abrasive guy and that hurt him. i worked with a bunch of people who think that trump won the election and i talked to them about what makes you think that. a lot of times it gets back to computer issues, which i'm getting near 70 years old.

computers kind of scare me. they talk about how easily it would be for a computer to steal 20,000 votes from one guy and give them to another guy and wipe out this and that. how can you make a person like me confidence these computer atrocities don't exist? host: i guess it's a question for 2020 with the president backing so many nominees and yet talking about the election system. it does that serve him well? guest: there are some republicans who think that whatever they can use at this point to motivate the base is a positive. including things like election security or the fact that trump won. host: yours is one of seral

books coming out about the election. did you expect so much competition when you are writing this? guest: not when i first started, but after the election it was a little harrowing. this is my first book. i knew that. host: were you planning to write on the election before the end results? guest: yes, i went into 2020. i knew i had to let the reporting to the work for me and i don't have a tv show or a huge social media presence. i had to let the reporting to the work in order to compete with these other journalists and others. host: are host: that will do it e

program. we want to say a farewell to our colleagues and friends across the atlantic. this is the last morning that bbc parliament will be carrying our program. cutbacks happened at the bbc and they will no longer carry c-span programming. our programming streams live all of the world at c-span.org. we thank the parliament channel for their years of partnership with this network and we hope our viewers in the u.k. and elsewhere will continue to extremists at c-span.org. we are back at 7:00 tomorrow morning. have a great weekend.